The Ultimate Portable LF cameras . . . . . . .

Ian, what a lovely little camera.

FWIW, there's a 6x9 on ebay (U.S) right now; http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=220251806936

Actually it's a 9x12 There are 2 or 3 6.5x9's in Germany as well

Unfortunately Ebay's worldwide search isn't very good at checking every flavour of Ebay. It's useful to know your Ebay Log-on details are exactly the same whether you use Ebay.com, .co.uk, .de .fr .it etc, also your watched items show up on any Ebay site.

Here's some images to indicatethe camera's size. The first shows a 5x4 Crown Graphic, Ikonta 521 (6x4.5) and the 9x12 Patent Etui.





As you can see it is very significantly smaller than a Crown Graphic.

And here's the back for Curt, sorry I didn't bring any holders to Turkey as my luggage was already over-weight



Lastly plate holders that fit, I posted them in an (there was a url link here which no longer exists).



Ian

Ian, thanks for the comparison - that really is a small camera. Wow. Indeed looks like an ideal travel camera!

Antje

Ian Grant said:

So far I've only ever come across one Patent Etui not fitted with a Tessar or the cheaper Meyer Trioplan on a few 6.5x9's. Can you scan the catalogue page showing the different lenses available.

One major problem with the 9x12 Etui is the overall size of the lens is critical or the case won't close

Curt, I'll take some photo's of the back later today.

Ian

Click to expand...

you will have to take my word for it Ian. That is unless it only counts if you have seen it

As I am not keen to bend the pages on a scanner, not to mention these were difficult to get, expensive and unfortunately delicate; I have already had one page fall out.


With these Patent Etui there is a 6.5x9 model with built in rangefinder as well which you may find interesting (still looks quite streamlined), not sure at the moment if it was available in 9x12 as well.

Also another that appears to be a specific model Patent Etui for export.

In addition it appears there were single and double extention models but i will have to double check my translating to comfirm, but it seems to read that and the pricing reflects differances .

Cheers
A

Thank you Ian, it looks like it takes dedicated holders that slip in and they look very thin, someone really had the think cap on when they designed this camera. I wish some of the old designers of yesterday were here now to design some great cameras. I hadn't heard of the Etui before you posted yours, have a great time with it.

Curt

Curt said:

someone really had the think cap on when they designed this camera.

Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking. I am constantly amazed at the at the design of older complex equipment such as the workings of a Compur shutter or indeed, the folding mechanism of this camera and the fact that they were designed using a drawing board and the designers skill, not a CAD system with the benefit of 3D modeling and fast prototyping.



Steve.

Anastigmatic said:

In addition it appears there were single and double extention models but i will have to double check my translating to comfirm, but it seems to read that and the pricing reflects differances .
A

Click to expand...

Mine focuses to about 25cm which is nearly 1:1 with the 135mm Tessar, that's quite close .

What book/catalogue are the cameras & lenses shown in ? I'd love to see the one with a range-finder.

Ian

Anastigmatic said:

As I am not keen to bend the pages on a scanner, not to mention these were difficult to get, expensive and unfortunately delicate; I have already had one page fall out.

Click to expand...

I would love to see the catalog pages too. You can take digital pictures of each page without bending your pages. Email them to me and I can edit them for posting.

Anastigmatic said:

With these Patent Etui there is a 6.5x9 model with built in rangefinder

Click to expand...

A rangefinder on a Patent Etui? I have never heard of such a thing. Please show a picture. That has got to be rare.

All the adverts I've seen for the Patent Etui's only ever list lenses from two manufacturers, Zeiss & Meyer and thats the Tessar's or the cheaper Trioplans. also a choice of 3 shutters Compur, Ibsor or Vario.

I rather suspect that an advert showing Etui's with a rangefinder etc is showing what's possible, maybe prototypes rather than actual production, much the same as the successor companies 1968 adverts for the Pentacon Super system, which never really saw the light of day.

Ian

Dear Ian

I'd rather hoped I was contributing and helping with information regarding the Etui however you seem rather reluctant to acknowledge any information that you are unaware of on these camera unless you have seen it for yourself. As a result this has become unenjoyable for me and feels rather like pulling teeth.

As with most things in life it’s always best to assume there is something new to learn and that we have not yet seen it all. I certainly don’t presume to know all there is about these and other plate camera (after collecting for a long time and I have an extensive collection) but it is usually most enjoyable to learn and discover more.

Much of this information I mentioned (at least parts of it) is common knowledge if you can get hold of any of the well known collector camera encyclopaedia type books, other parts are not so easy to come by (old ads and catologs) and if you rely on the www then information is more limited. I really don’t feel inclined to have to scan all my books and catalogues as that soon becomes a full time job with little thanks that has caused my old catalogues damage in the past. I feel if I am sharing the information then that should be adequate, I am sure you would not feel inclined to scan a document to prove every simple comment you share.

At least on the shutter (since your post #10) you now acknowledge that it was also available with Ibsor shutter so perhaps there is hope.

As an overview; these were available in two sizes (as you mentioned) 9x12& 6.5x9

Available in 5 different colours, available in single or double extension,

There are also variation differences depending on the year of the camera, mainly to do with the lens board shape

It was available in all the lenses I mentioned in an earlier post, as well as some older style aplanats ect, in addition to the triotar, radionar and eurynar. Perhaps the one you were hoping to fit is the f3.5 (?) which takes the larger shutter and will not fit the lens board area which is on the small side on the Euti.

As I mentioned before the lenses available varies depending on the year and no doubt the distributing outlet. If you are like me and been collecting these over a very long period then no doubt you will find as I have. That I can go for years without seeing a particular lens on a particular camera only to find that same combination several times in a row at another given time.

The 6.5x9 E (range-finder model) does not appear to be a prototype in any way, quite the contrary! (Again just because you haven’t seen it yet its best not to jump to conclusions), several sources show it was sold in c1934 and on the second hand market in recent years has been sold for around $200, all indications to me is it may be somewhat scarce but not unobtainable with patience (that is if a 6.5x9 plate camera is sort)

Cheers
Andy

As an aside note, if anyone was interested in these camera, I would not panic and bid with undue care on these. Not inculding the coloured models (which come up from time to time) they are quite common and easily obtained at good prices, no doubt sold in good numbers!

The advantages as I see them are; is that yes it is a nice light LF compact camera, and basically, that can be repeated many times as its the main feature. It has almost a modern/ergonomic look as far as this type of camera is concerned. Solid reasonably built depending on what you compare it to=better than some basic plate camera of various makers (which can be very poor). I see it as an advantage that it is available with a wide variety of lenses as it makes things more interesting (ive seen them in various offerings, and i beleive they are original!). It would be a rare camera of this period to be only available with a Tessar (limited, restrictive, not competative and boring!)

Disadvantages as i see them without too much thought are; not available with some of 'the' best lenses of the time because of the limitations with front standard size; it cant take the larger shutter neccessary to house the faster lenses, build quality is arguable compared to the finer cameras of the period. no sports finder (not that modern people using these would take the option of quick shots)

Has curved ergonomic profile that looks good closed , and is around 5-10mm thinner on the biggest dimension in the center than some other makers (though they can use the larger shutter and faster lenses available in some models). its size/or shape can on one hand be considered an advantage (and would have been when film was available in film packs--no longer available) but with the need to carry metal film holders its advantage and profile is somewhat dimished in real life terms (to nill? in the eye of the user i guess!) as a compact camera to use in modern practical daily use, over other plate camera of this type; not all but some/many that are only slightly thicker overall. Does it really matter is the question for a serious user!

Just for the record, my 6,5x9 has a 10,5cm Isconar.

Andy, I don't doubt what you're saying (in your previous posts). Rather that the vast majority of Patent Etui's that come up for sale are fitted with Tessar's or the Meyer Trioplan, and Compur or Vario shutters. My guess is that the number fitted with Ibsor shutters would have been quite small, I've not come across one yet, but then the very similar Prontor Press shutter isn't that common on more modern LF lenses either.

It's Frank who suggested you take a quick photo of the pages showing the camera with a range-finder, (as you don't want to scan it), you have to forgive us for any scepticism but it would be nice to see an example. One problem with "well known collector camera encyclopaedia type books" is that they often show the rarities that collectors like to acquire, and for most of us the only time we'd see those models is in those books

Perhaps you could tell us what books to look in for ourselves.

Yes, Patent Etui's do appear to have been quite common cameras, and they were manufactured for at least 18 years. I saw a production figure somewhere of approximately 100 camera's a day for the KW factory around 1934, that's roughly 25,000 cameras a year presumably not all Etui's by then. That seems feasible as in comparison Compur were manufacturing around 500,000 shutters & Zeiss over 100,00 lenses a year.

In your list of advantages/disadvantages I think you've missed one important point, the camera's lighter weight is an advantage for portability but will be slightly dis-advantageous when using the camera hand-held, the lack of mass will make it harder to hold steady at slow shutter speeds. It's a great pity film packs are no longer available, but half a dozen loaded 9x12 holders isn't that heavy and would slip easily into a coat pocket.

BTW both my Patent Etui's have sports finders, I guess I've looked at well over 250 Etui, on Ebay & elsewhere and almost all the 9x12's have had sports finders, but not all the 6.5x9's, perhaps a third don't have one.

I don't know what the true definition of Double & Triple extension bellows is, I assume it's 2 & 3 times the focal length of a standard lens for the format, or the fixed lens fitted. That's the case with my triple extension 10x8 camera 12" lens, 37½" bellows extension. On that basis an Etui with a 135mm Tessar would have Double extension, but the same camera & bellows wouldn't be double extension if the 150mm Tessar was fitted.

Ian

Etui

Ian Grant said:

Andy, I don't doubt what you're saying (in your previous posts). Rather that the vast majority of Patent Etui's that come up for sale are fitted with Tessar's or the Meyer Trioplan, and Compur or Vario shutters. My guess is that the number fitted with Ibsor shutters would have been quite small, I've not come across one yet, but then the very similar Prontor Press shutter isn't that common on more modern LF lenses either.

Click to expand...

no doubt you are correct with more Etui sold with tessar, after all if thats what most commonly seen for sale nowadays, it stands to reason there must of been more sold with that configuration...a very popular lens!! Ibsor shutters are likely more common than you realise or have seen i think...a little search atm will reveal what i am sure you have already seen with helio,,,

Ian Grant said:

you have to forgive us for any scepticism but it would be nice to see an example. One problem with "well known collector camera encyclopaedia type books" is that they often show the rarities that collectors like to acquire, and for most of us the only time we'd see those models is in those books

Click to expand...

Is it just scepticism? Keep your eyes open and it/they will come up

respectfully Ian, any long term collector of various camera can indentify the short falls in various camera encyclopaedia, if you are familiar with these (and you indicate you are) then i do not understand why you asking for the titles!! a simple amozon search will get you on thr right track? Yes these are scarce but if they were common my next door neighbour would know about them as well as you

I would not have passed the information if i thought it was sceptical, you dont know me at this point so i will excuse that. However, rest assured that i do not feel comfortable passing information unless i have several sources of information and confident (you may understand that is difficult though dealing with antique cameras! swings and roundabouts! i never believe much until i have researched it). My nature is to understate things rather than overstate, if not, i would say so if there is a chance its unreliable.

Ian Grant said:

Perhaps you could tell us what books to look in for ourselves.

Click to expand...

you have over 4000 posts! and have written marvellous posts on plate camera related articles. are you not familiar with the first step, Mckeowns? even that book will give you some extra detail on this camera than what you have said.

Ian Grant said:

Yes, Patent Etui's do appear to have been quite common cameras, and they were manufactured for at least 18 years. I saw a production figure somewhere of approximately 100 camera's a day for the KW factory around 1934, that's roughly 25,000 cameras a year presumably not all Etui's by then. That seems feasible as in comparison Compur were manufacturing around 500,000 shutters & Zeiss over 100,00 lenses a year.

Click to expand...

I am familiar with the estimate of the shutter production as well, it is well documented. the gem is that you have production figures for the KW werkes. So you must have some books,catologs, documents or..is it on the www somewhere ? lovely bit of information

Ian Grant said:

In your list of advantages/disadvantages I think you've missed one important point, the camera's lighter weight is an advantage for portability but will be slightly dis-advantageous when using the camera hand-held, the lack of mass will make it harder to hold steady at slow shutter speeds. It's a great pity film packs are no longer available, but half a dozen loaded 9x12 holders isn't that heavy and would slip easily into a coat pocket.

Click to expand...

A fair point; i was thinking on the fly and with this camera my prejudice was to its advantages but you make a very fair point. In most instances as photographers we prefer heavier cameras (me at least).

my point on camera weight and film packs is somewhat redundant, although perhaps interesting. the metal film pack casing (9x12) weigh around 120g depending on the maker, the film packs (fully loaded with 12 shots) weigh only around 110g, so obviously total around 230g for 12 shots. Then an extra 110g for an extra 12 shots. =total 24 shots for 330g, not bad eh!!!and so on for extra 12 shots

however one of things we have to put up with (i dont mind) to use these old gems is the extra weight of film holders (which dimishishes the advantage of skimping weight on the camera by a mere 1 or two hundred grams! if that makes sence to you).So if we carry 24 shots around with us now it pretty much equels 2.4Kg (@90-110g depending on the maker of the film holder+sheath+film). 6 shots sounds fine, but if your keen or use the camera to its full potential than most people would use more than 6 shots. two or so Kg in your spare pocket is not as appealing---i dont mind, heck i get someone else to carry em half the time,,,but thats another story

Ian Grant said:

BTW both my Patent Etui's have sports finders, I guess I've looked at well over 250 Etui, on Ebay & elsewhere and almost all the 9x12's have had sports finders, but not all the 6.5x9's, perhaps a third don't have one.

Click to expand...

fair enough, many i have seen havnt had them but i appreciate the difference, many of my illustrations show it as well (not all)

Ian Grant said:

I don't know what the true definition of Double & Triple extension bellows is, I assume it's 2 & 3 times the focal length of a standard lens for the format, or the fixed lens fitted. That's the case with my triple extension 10x8 camera 12" lens, 37½" bellows extension. On that basis an Etui with a 135mm Tessar would have Double extension, but the same camera & bellows wouldn't be double extension if the 150mm Tessar was fitted.

Click to expand...

i find this a very interesting question. because it has/ or used to always puzzle me as well. however basically (not counting the math which i am not sure always adds up) it seems to be that many makers (varies) considered a camera that extended only a few inches (1-2 or so) a single extension camera (no extension was not mentioned as extending). a camera that extended its full length of bed (not accurate i know) was considered a double extension and obviously a camera that had another table to extend was a triple extension (i have a few of those as we are discussing here (not counting old wooden field camera) but they are less common). i don’t doubt i have something to learn on this but my 'basic' rules have gotten me by. there may well be a precise math equation that works.

[/QUOTE]

Frank R said:

Sorry, but this won't work on these old plate cameras.

BTW: Most of them only had front rise and shift but no other movements. If you are happy with that, you can still buy a 9x12 for a reasonable amount. Just make sure you buy one with filmholders. There were few standards back then and many were different. They really are small compared to even a Gowland or a Speed Graphic.

Click to expand...

Yes, but there is another solution... there are gg spring backs designed to take modern 3.25x4.25 graphics holders that slide onto the backs of many of these 9x12 platefilm cameras. I have one for my Zeiss Trona (1927). It allows me to use a number of B&W emulsions with an incredibly sharp 135 Tessar.

Keep your eyes peeled on EBay, maybe make a search for "Springback". These were popular in the 1950s. I keep looking for a 2x3 springback for my 6x9 Trona.

tim in san jose

Andy, one problem of being an ex-pat and living abroad is weight on air flights, and so I weighed what I was carrying here to Turkey carefully 2 weeks ago, I reckoned 3 sets of 3 film holders & cases weighed 1.3 kgs, I had to leave them in the UK, along with the film & dev tank, and my Jobo in Turkey is fixed reels for 5x4 anyway, so all I have is the Kamera !!!

I've seen McKeowans, but I'm a user rather than a collector so it doesn't really interest me that much, but perhaps I should buy an older copy. My education and training is to always find the primary, original sources, these seem to be harder to find with companies like KW, unless you live in Germany of course.

You made a comment about build quality & 9x12 cameras, and many I've seen and the 4 others (non Etui's) I own have a far higher build quality compared to the Etui but they are also grossly over engineered in comparison. The Etui's are excellent.

I suspect that the 135mm Tessar / Dial-set Compur on my Etui is significantly better than the 135mm Tessar / Rim-set Compur I've been using on my Crown Graphic, I posted a separate thread about Tessars yesterday, both are in excellent condition but the Tessars in Dial-set Compurs always seen to have more smnap, contrastbcall itbwhat you will.

Ian

Ian, reference books such as Mckeowns can be usefull for the either a ,user’ or ,collector’.

In today’s age of the net and forums they are not as necessary to own because communication amongst others, that already have the information is easier to obtain from those that share, providing you are willing to accept the information freely given.

Source information is choice I agree, however from my experience obtaining this is more difficult (near impossible at times), expensive overall (particularly as your tastes in camera evolve or change; I unfortunately or fortunately as the case may be can attest to that as I have many original brochure and information) and I would suggest places you/me/others in the more collector category. Many of the authors of the reference books have simply done the collecting of ads and info and compiled it for our convenience. Not always complete or the best, but to the ,user’ of vintage camera they may well be the most viable resource rather than seeking out and buying rare brochure or adverts---a practice (obtaining brochure-for free) many of us, if we are old enough would do when weighing up the differences between new model cameras to purchase…not so long ago either!

I can’t say I care much for the common internet distinction between ‘users’ or ‘collectors’ among the photographic internet community. It rather reeks of similarities in terms of class distinction, which if one is labeled a collector by unwitted peers then that person’s value as a ‘user’ or photographer is somehow devalued …when in reality the opposite may well be true. I don’t mind saying I am both, because although I can not pretend to use all the camera I have; Some camera I like to use regularly, others not so regularly and still others I don’t use at all and simply purchased them to compare build quality and features, and a broader knowledge ect. Seeing how they didn’t cost much to me its better than the brochure at times….if you have 5-7 camera of this type already then I would suggest even though you are unwilling to admit, then you are a collector as well, as its likely you have your favourite cameras to use and a few don’t get used for whatever reason.

However that can be a semantic or philosophical discussion.

Back to the Etui; my thoughts are that yes there are much better built camera of this type but my feeling is perhaps this company was going for light weight as a feature which compromises the sturdiness of any camera. Having said that however, KW received acknowledgment from the press and industry for its strut design in relation to its weight for this camera.

This is only speculation on my part but I think that the Bentizin plan-primar is a direct off-shoot (inspired) from the Etui design, same kind of thickness but much sturdier built (heavier too) but unfortunately only available in 6.5x9. the Balda Nizza 9x12 (steal or aluminum) and Venus in 6.5x9 is also comparable in thickness to the Euti. Also my thoughts are that KW was inspired by the early Contessa designs from as early as 1910 and perhaps some Ernemann designs I have seen. Particularly the contessa designs have many similarities with strut design, lightweight and thickness. Some of the 6x9 size only weigh around 175g-300g depending on model and vary in thickness from 1.5cm-2cm, the 9x12 not much thicker which may well make them the thinnest and lightest folding plate camera

John Noble's story is a little more eventful than has been discussed. Here is his obit:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/26/world/europe/26noble.html

I remember reading also something about John Noble a few years ago, and it was indeed an interesting and eventful story. How very different things might have been if the Nobles had continued to Run KW after WWII instead of being imprisoned.

Andy, I'll clarify the term user for a camera, it was a term I came across long before the internet existed. A user camera is mechanically sound but often with minor dings or dents and one a Collector would usually not be interested in. It was a Leica dealer who introduced me to the term, and I bought a superb M3 from him about 22 years ago with 2 or 3 slight dings.

Of course any collectible camera can be used, but with far more care than would be needed with a user camera.

So when I say I'm a user rather than a collector I'm talking about cameras that aren't pristine that may pick up a few more battle scars in use.

Ian

I appreciate your clarification Ian.

The term user is a term used to describe either a camera or a person. When the term user is applied to a camera, it is as you say a description of the cameras condition relative to a more pristine camera (collector quality, which can of course can still be used).

However, when the term user or collector is applied describing, or relating to a person, as you did in post # 41 with the words ‘I’m’.

I've seen McKeowans, but I'm a user rather than a collector

Click to expand...

Then the term user or collector is describing a person (in this case you described yourself), then you are making a distinction between people; one is strictly a user of camera that a person has, as opposed to a collector that does not use the camera. In this latter instance depending on its context I often find it a rather pedantic, judgmental comment that assumes a great deal. Not that there is anything wrong with a persons endevours at either end of the pendulum.

Anyway thanks for your clarification. To reword, I assume you mean that you prefer to purchase a camera in user condition rather than collector condition. Either way, reference books such as mentioned before can still be quite handy as a buyer guide (that’s part of its design) and have a more accurate grading system of condition, which gives suggestions to a relative price as well.

Hunt's Photo in Melrose, MA does stock E100G in 9x12cm, even though Kodak doesn't want to sell that size in the US. I bought 5 slightly expired 10-sheet boxes from them for a song on eBay. It's not on their website, or really properly in their computer, so you'll have to call them.