Question about a new Petri 7s

[warden]

My girlfriend just inherited this camera from her dad, who we think purchased it during his service in Vietnam. The camera is in excellent condition aside from a dent from a fall when the strap failed. I don't think he used this camera much. She was convinced it wouldn't work at all, and I was convinced it would work just fine. I'm glad that I was right, so now she can use it.

The camera is fun! The selenium meter still works properly, and can be read from the top of the camera before you frame the image, or directly from the (very dim) viewfinder display. The shutter is in the lens, and does not disturb the camera at all when fired. Handholding at low speeds would be easy with this thing.

The lens performance is good-to-average I would say, but it flares, so keeping the sun behind you is a good idea. The lens has no fungus but it's also not clean, so I need to look in to cleaning it.

But here's the thing, it's nearly impossible to focus this camera due to an almost imperceptible viewfinder patch. I can do it with effort, but man you have to be so careful to focus it properly. I'm tempted to show her how to zone focus and be done with it, but now I'm wondering if there are any tips or tricks to make the rangefinder patch more obvious for her? Let me know if you have any suggestions. Thanks!

 

[Don_ih]

Put a coloured gel over the rangefinder window. That will colour the patch and make it easier to line it up.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I have a Petri 7s with the same problem -- very faint RF patch. I solved it by using a Sharpie marker to put a dot on the main viewfinder objective (toward the subject) exactly coincident with the RF patch. This makes the moving RF image visible, and you just match it at the edges of the spot instead of watching for one image on top of the other to align. if you get the spot in the wrong place, the Sharpie dye will come off the viewfinder glass with 91% isopropyl alcohol or a number of other solvents (isopropyl is probably the least prone to damage something else, but still keep it where you want it).

Now you can set up a search on eBay for the accessory lens set for that camera -- I have one, tele and wide adapters that screw into the filter ring. Originally, the set came with an auxiliary viewfinder that mounts to the accessory shoe.

 

[AgX]

Funny, just before entering Apug, I played a bit with my mint sample...

I had not seen any Petri rangefinder camera of this series before when I cam across my sample at a store. I was intrigued by its look and bought it immediately, together with a Racer which intrigued me too.
What I really find sad is the limited range of its meter. Stated as +7 to +17.So it is an outdoors camera. Great are its long shutter times.
At my sample too the rangefinder patch is hardly visible, it is both dim and not very contrasty colourwise. It is at the verge of being usable.

 

[warden]

Put a coloured gel over the rangefinder window. That will colour the patch and make it easier to line it up.

Thanks!

 

[warden]

Now you can set up a search on eBay for the accessory lens set for that camera -- I have one, tele and wide adapters that screw into the filter ring. Originally, the set came with an auxiliary viewfinder that mounts to the accessory shoe.

I wish I could, but when the camera fell it landed right on the threaded filter ring, deforming it. :-( You'll see the deformation at the bottom of the lens on the pic of the camera.

 

[warden]

At my sample too the rangefinder patch is hardly visible, it is both dim and not very contrasty colourwise. It is at the verge of being usable.

I'm thinking about picking up another copy of this camera to disassemble and practice on; the viewfinder is quite dusty and hazy on the inside of the camera, and I'm sure that's not helping matters. But I don't want to risk disassembling this one until I'm 100% sure of my skills.

 

[AgX]

No haze at mine, but maybe reduced mirror reflectivity. Am not in the mood for disassembling either, too mamy "projects" on the list already.

 

[Paul Howell]

Petri made pretty poor SLR, their rangefinders on the other hand could be quite nice and have held up better than the SLRs. Although not a rangefinder the Color CC a zone compact zone focus model similar to the Rollie 35 is even better made than the 7, I have. Petri lens are sharp with good contrast.

 

[albada]

Put a coloured gel over the rangefinder window. That will colour the patch and make it easier to line it up.

A similar idea is to put a piece of unexposed-but-developed black-and-white film over the viewfinder window (not the rangefinder window). The purpose is to dim the VF image some so it won't overpower the faint RF image. Color film would work too if you don't mind an orange viewfinder. You can also use window film, which comes in large rolls for dimming windows of buildings. That works well.

Mark Overton

 

[Don_ih]

I wish I could, but when the camera fell it landed right on the threaded filter ring, deforming it. :-( You'll see the deformation at the bottom of the lens on the pic of the camera.

If you have a jigsaw and a clamp, you can fix the filter ring. You trace the correct arc of the ring (about 1/3 way around the lens) onto the edge of a piece of wood (1/2" to 3/4" thick) with grain running perpendicular to the arc. You cut the arc out. You cut off the leftover bit. You use those and a clamp on the bent part of the ring. It might get it straight enough to use and won't chew up the threads.

 

[Helge]

The early Petri SLR where groundbreaking and are well made. And Petri Color 35 is of course a stone cold classic.
But after about 70 they turned into a kind of second tier Yashica or Chinon.

Clean the finder. At least find out how to take the top off and have a look at how complex it is to clean all optical surfaces.
If you are really serious about the camera (that camera) get the lens clamp. You will want filters at some point soon.

 

[John Will]

If you have a jigsaw and a clamp, you can fix the filter ring. You trace the correct arc of the ring (about 1/3 way around the lens) onto the edge of a piece of wood (1/2" to 3/4" thick) with grain running perpendicular to the arc. You cut the arc out. You cut off the leftover bit. You use those and a clamp on the bent part of the ring. It might get it straight enough to use and won't chew up the threads.

Or you can use a lens vice tool.

 

[Chan Tran]

The Petri 7s was the one I used when I was a kid. My dad bought it in 1963. I now have 2 7s but they both suffer from the faded rangefinder patch. Like other said, darken the center to the viewfinder helps. But when it was new the rangefinder patch is very easy to see.

 

[warden]

If you have a jigsaw and a clamp.....

Or you can use a lens vice tool.

Thanks guys. I have the jigsaw and clamp so I'll try that way first. It would be great to get a protective filter and those accessories on the lens.

 

[FriedLouisStudio]

I spied a good-looking Petri 7s at a local flea market a couple of years ago.

Everything, including the rangefinder, seemed to work correctly - and it had an original lens cap on, probably for decades, so the Selenium in the meter hadn't degraded. So I grabbed it for $20. I ran a roll of Tri-X through, trusting the meter and rangefinder, and got nice results... for a camera that cost only $60 when new in 1963.



I'm thrilled that it works, but it's mainly going to sit prominently in my camera collection display. The 7s isn't exactly a refined, enjoyable shooter, and anyway, I'm way more of an SLR guy. But it's always nice to score a working 60-year-old camera for $20!

PS - I had a black Petri Color 35 as my personal camera (vs. the Nikons and Nikkormats from my parents' studio that I could use whenever) from 1969 to 1983. It was so compact that I often carried it in a belt case, and it was an outstanding shooter that made hundreds of great images. Now, that's a Petri model that's really worth looking for.

 

[Donald Qualls]

it's always nice to score a working 60-year-old camera for $20!

Mine does itself a credit every time I use it. The f/1.9 lens is quite good -- and in mine, also, the meter and RF are right on.

 

[FriedLouisStudio]

Nice. Mine's got the f/2.8 lens. This model probably retailed for $15 less than your version.

 

[Donald Qualls]

This model probably retailed for $15 less than your version.

So mine was about the price of a low-end used car in the early 1960s. I also have both tele- and wide angle converters that go on the filter ring, in their own zippered leather case. I got the whole kit as a gift from Pablo, @titrisol here; it had a "clunk" under the bottom plate and wouldn't set the shutter when advanced, as I recall. I found and fixed the linkage issue, and have loved every roll I've put through it (though I'll admit I haven't used it much since I got a smaller/lighter Canonet QL17 GIII with about equal lens quality and f/1.7 instead of f/1.9). The Petri 7s has the advantage, however, of not depending on a battery for any function, assuming the selenium cell is still good.

 

[mshchem]

I used my Dad's Petri Color 35 when I was in Jr High school. One of the best cameras I've used. I loved that camera.

 

[FriedLouisStudio]

Donald, I'm sure the light meter in your Canonet is more useful than the one in the 7s. Selenium meters are great, but they just aren't sensitive enough for indoor lighting conditions. Hence the mass changeover to using CdS meters during the 1960s by virtually every camera company.

In my own case, the Minox B I had in the late 60s convinced me that Selenium meters were of limited value apart from bright exteriors. When I got my latter-day Minox camera in 1995, I specifically chose to get the older IIIs model because it didn't have the meter and was an inch smaller. Besides the fact that I first learned to estimate exposure and focal distance pretty well back when I was 11 on a Kodak Pony 828, the Minox had the advantage of its fixed f/3.5 aperture, so the shutter speed was the only exposure variable.



Anyway, I never regretted getting the IIIs vs. a B, it was a pleasure to carry, and I mostly did very well with the exposures. When in doubt, I'd bracket: since I was loading my own film (TMX) for only about a dollar per Minox roll, why not? (A few years later I got another Minox B and used it for color print film - and since getting that processed wasn't dirt cheap like my own b/w, I was glad to have the meter.)

Getting back to the Petri 7s, it's certainly a capable little camera. The main reason that I'm not shooting it occasionally is that I'm basically not a rangefinder camera guy. I've used vastly more SLRs and direct-view/scale-focus cameras, and I simply never got all that comfortable with the rangefinder approach. That's my own limitation, not the hardware!

And mschchem, despite having access to more serious and legendary cameras, I dearly loved my Petri Color 35. What a little jewel!

Here's my awesome Petri shot of what's considered by many to be "the best" concert played by the Grateful Dead, Cornell University 5/8/77. (An outstanding show, but not "the best".) In those general admission days - before the Dead scene got huge in the 80s - you would work your way right up to the stage. This is Tri-X, wide open at 1/15 - I waited for slow-song vocals to avoid motion blur. (You know, back when the decisive moment was important because you weren't shooting a gazillion digital images to ensure coverage.)

 

[Chan Tran]

The Petri 7s was the first camera I ever used at age 10. It belonged to my father who bought it in 63. I don't have that camera any more. I have bought a few used one but although all are working fine and suprisingly the selenium meters are quite accurate. But the rangefinder patch is faded badly so it's near impossible to use it. When the camera was new as I recalled the patch could be seen very clearly.
Yes I love it.

 

[guangong]

As I recall, back then, mid 1950s, Petri cameras did not have a very good reputation even when they were new. That doesn’t mean that they don’t have an interest to many collectors today. When I was much younger and didn’t know much about cameras I was considering buying a Petri. I was advised to saved up a little more cash and buy a more reliable camera. I took the advice.

 

[warden]

The Petri 7s was the first camera I ever used at age 10. It belonged to my father who bought it in 63. I don't have that camera any more. I have bought a few used one but although all are working fine and suprisingly the selenium meters are quite accurate. But the rangefinder patch is faded badly so it's near impossible to use it. When the camera was new as I recalled the patch could be seen very clearly.
Yes I love it.

The faded rangefinder patch has meant that my girlfriend has needed to learn how to estimate distance and focus using the scale only, which she is surprisingly good at. I’ll stand next to her and have her guess at focus distance of an object and then check with the rangefinder on my camera. For daytime photography at f11 or so that’s good enough and her pictures are focused properly, but fixing the rangefinder is still on my to-do list.

 

[titrisol]

The Petri 7s was the first camera I ever used at age 10. It belonged to my father who bought it in 63. I don't have that camera any more. I have bought a few used one but although all are working fine and suprisingly the selenium meters are quite accurate. But the rangefinder patch is faded badly so it's near impossible to use it. When the camera was new as I recalled the patch could be seen very clearly.
Yes I love it.

Even after applying a small diamond of electrical tape in the main finder?
I used that trick in the P7s that went to Donald and made a whole world of difference