What's your latest new old camera ? (Part 2)

[RLangham]

Styling, not mechanics... I knew the Leica crowd would spit their grey poupon on the screen when they read that...

Ah, well, I'm hardly Leica crowd and I hate mustard that's not bright yellow, but... yeah I can kinda see Leica M-series styling.

I've only met one Aires and it was completely broken, shutter blades mangled. Still sitting at Leaman's Antiques in Hattiesburg if he hasn't chucked it in the pail yet.

 

[Kino]

I have 3; two I had to tear down and clean before they would function, but no worse than any typical 1950's leaf shutter camera and the Coral lenses are pretty good performers.

They can be had on that big auction site, but if you're not prepared to fix it yourself or have someone CLA it, it probably best to avoid it.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

It's a 11X14 Deardorff commercial camera, this one has a rotating 8x10 back, 75 inches of bellows extension, weighs 60 lbs, the stand weighs 350 lbs .
I love being crazy! .
View attachment 242117 View attachment 242117

What a magnificent camera! Nice buy.
1. Is that your garage, man cave, or shed? Looks like you have plenty of room.
2. Is the stand counter-weighted with weights that run in the tubes (like old US double hung sash windows)?

 

[mshchem]

What a magnificent camera! Nice buy.
1. Is that your garage, man cave, or shed? Looks like you have plenty of room.
2. Is the stand counter-weighted with weights that run in the tubes (like old US double hung sash windows)?

There's 2 huge lead weights inside the tubes, about 45-50 lbs each. The fellow (s) that had it during the last 70-80 years cut the posts down just enough that it will fit in a room with an 8 foot ceiling. The table was on upside down, a casting had a tab broken, I have a wonderful machinist in his early 70's who has fabricated a couple parts. The whole thing is now in my studio, which is rather civilized. My darkroom is my real cave . I'm trying to get everything back together, the camera weighs 60 pounds. I only paid 400 bucks delivered. But since I bought a 360 and 450 mm Nikon lenses, I mean what else could I do .

 

[PhoBoKho]

I finally saw one of those in the plastic at a camera show a few weeks ago. For years (decades?) I've been reading that they're not "real Nikons" since they're made by Cosina. But I couldn't find anything wrong with it. It's spec'd about like a Nikon from 1980, but that's all most of us need.

Re. re-entering film photography, I found that my photography started getting markedly better when I came back to film. Something about knowing that each shot costs money makes us consider composition more carefully.

Nice pick-up.

Thank you! Specs-wise, I think it mostly ticks off what I need. I'm going to be shooting slower anyways and a working TTL meter and full manual controls should be fine. I should be able to figure things out from there.

Re: Photography getting better. I hope so. Or maybe it's a case of my photography having progressed far enough over the years with digital that I won't be wasting film by taking pointless shots. I have had a bad habit of taking too many shots lately. But at least I can picture in my mind better what the shot could end up looking like before pressing the shutter. And, furthermore, I hope that I'm able to sense beforehand that a shot is simply not going to work out and not bother.

 

[07oniessen]

I've never used film before despite being interested, but recently 2 old cameras have come into my possession so I'm taking the plunge.

Firstly a Kodak No.3 Autographic model G that belonged/s to my grandfather. I'm going to make up some film adapters and try and get it going.

I also just bought an Icarex 35CS for £10, all I've seen is one cr*p photo of it so have no idea of its condition...any idea what one of them is worth? I'm much hoping it was a bit of a find for that price...

Cheers

 

[MattiS]

A Pentax Espio (in some parts of the world IqZoom) was my first camera, so I could not resist...

 

[Kino]

I've never used film before despite being interested, but recently 2 old cameras have come into my possession so I'm taking the plunge.

Firstly a Kodak No.3 Autographic model G that belonged/s to my grandfather. I'm going to make up some film adapters and try and get it going.

I also just bought an Icarex 35CS for £10, all I've seen is one cr*p photo of it so have no idea of its condition...any idea what one of them is worth? I'm much hoping it was a bit of a find for that price...

Cheers

Welcome to Photrio!

The Kodak No.3 Autographic is not really all that valuable; ironically, the stylus/scribe that should be mounted on the back near the autograph writing door is typically more valuable that the rest of the camera!

However, that doesn't mean it does not take great photos if properly used! Be sure to carefully clean the lens before using and blow out the interior to remove the dust and debris. The bellows on your camera look like they might be degraded quite a bit, so take it into a dark room, open the back and shine a flashlight (or torch) into the back of the camera and look for light leaks.

Pinholes can sometimes be repaired with black poster paint dabbed onto the spot; others use the liquid rubber designed to dip tool handles and make grips. Either way, let it dry completely before attempting to use and gently fold/unfold the camera at all times; it is over 100 years old and needs to be treated with some respect.

If there are quite a few, you can either try to loosely wrap a light-blocking material around the bellows while shooting or just keep it for a decoration to remember your Grandfather.

Here is an article on the No.1, which has photos of the stylus which went with that camera: https://sites.google.com/site/fromthefocalplanetoinfinity/kodakno1autographicjunior

You will need to be sure to NOT open that door when you shoot, and perhaps cover it with a bit of black plastic, when you shoot the adapted 120 film! Be careful with adhesive tape and the leather of your camera; it tends to pull the finish off, so don't apply the tape directly to the leather or you'll peel the finish off!

Now the Icarex 35CS is a fairly well desired camera and examples on US ebay are fetching around $160-200 USD in good shape. Take care when first handling it; chances are it's gummed-up from sitting for decades and DO NOT FORCE ANYTHING!

Here is a copy of the manual you can download from Butkus: https://www.butkus.org/chinon/zeiss_ikon/zeiss_ikon_icarex/zeiss_ikon_icarex.htm

READ IT before you start playing about with the camera or you could really wreck it!

If you have a few dollars to donate to his efforts, please do so when you can; he provides a valuable service run on donations...

Good luck with your first film ventures and report back in the appropriate forum with your results!

 

[07oniessen]

Thanks Kino for youre info, it's very helpful. I'll be sure to report back once I've got them going! Cheers

 

[TrekOut]

My latest new-old cams are the Fujica ST801, Minolta XD11, the Konica Autoreflex TC and Pentax P5. Still in the process of replacing the light seals for the Konica AR TC (with the awesome 40mm/F1.8); have completed the other three. Yes, they are all working.

 

[4season]

JDM Pentax MZ-3 is also my latest repair. Replaced broken pinion gear per this handy how-to guide. Tempted to get a Pentax-FA 43/1.9 lens to go with it.

 

[Europan]

Just purchased a Bell & Howell Filmo 70-AC from early 1932. It’s a thrill each time I encounter something old from the 20th century. Imagine, a camera that’s 88 years and can be used as if nothing happened. But a lot has happened. We have colour negatives, new Ektachrome, and more. That camera won’t long for Kodachrome because KM didn’t exist then.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Just purchased a Bell & Howell Filmo 70-AC from early 1932. <snip> That camera won’t long for Kodachrome because KM didn’t exist then.

It very likely did get some KM at some point, since the camera was surely still in service when KM came out (1938?), and Kodachrome was the Big Thing long before Simon and Garfunkel sang about it.

 

[YellowPangolin]

My latest one is the Pentax Spotmatic by Honeywell.

 

[Europan]

It very likely did get some KM at some point, since the camera was surely still in service when KM came out (1938?)

Kodachrome came out as 16mm and as Double-Eight film in June 1936, Type A(rtificial Light) in November that year. Yeah, Kodachrome was big, immense, great.

 

[Horatio]

Nikkormat FTn.

 

[Drew B.]

Bought at auction a Bronica ETRS w/two lenses. Didn't realize how much smaller it is to my C2....So which one do I keep?

 

[RLangham]

Nikkormat FTn.

Like it so far?

 

[Bud Hamblen]

Got a 1938 Kodak Retina I (Nr 141) in very nice shape. It has a roll of film in it now.

 

[Drew B.]

Also picked up a Walz Envoy M-35 rangefinder. From the 50's?

 

[Horatio]

Like it so far?

Hell yes! I had one about 30 years ago. I'd forgotten how solid the thing is! I'm waiting for a 35-105 zoom for it. Will shoot a test roll next week. Too many other projects going this weekend.

 

[RLangham]

Hell yes! I had one about 30 years ago. I'd forgotten how solid the thing is! I'm waiting for a 35-105 zoom for it. Will shoot a test roll next week. Too many other projects going this weekend.

I've often wondered how the FTn system handles zoom lenses, since it's pretty insistent on knowing the maximum aperture of the lens, unlike, say, a contemporary Minolta, where the camera only cares about the difference between the set aperture and wide open. I suppose it wouldn't really matter, right? Since the camera's meter would see the reduced aperture and just figure it out from there? I don't actually understand why the FTn has to know what the actual maximum aperture is.

As for me, I get a ton of use out of mine with only a normal lens (1959-1960 Nikkor-S 5cm f/2). Have you noticed that at the extreme ends of either the shutter-speed scale, or the aperture scale, the metering is off? The two rheostat rings can each get dirty, and you could (as on mine) end up with significant underexposure if you follow the meter in low-light situations, or some other error. I hope yours is clean!

(Wait, did they make 35-105's back in the AI era? The biggest wide-to-tele zooms I ever see from that time are 35-70mm (I have this for Minolta) or 28mm-70mm (I have one for Canon), but of course, what I've seen doesn't mean much.)

 

[RLangham]

And while I'm here, my Zenit C came today, fully two days early than the most liberal shipping estimate. It came in perfect shape with a shutter that, as far as I can tell, must have been CLA'd in Ukraine sometime before the seller acquired it. It's already turning out to be a delight to use. I found it a little more difficult to trim the leader than I thought it would be, but it shouldn't trouble me again now that I know how to do it.

It's tiny, Barnack Leica-sized but for the reflex housing, and the lens (I-50) is so compact that, altogether, it feels almost like an SLR for a smaller kind of film. I was afraid the lens would be harder to use, since it doesn't have a preset ring--you have to hold the focus ring in place so you don't shift it, and turn the clickless aperture ring to the aperture you want-- no way to do it by feel except by memorizing the positions, unlike with a Helios or something. I was sure it would be a pain, but after only a few minutes of practice, I find I can reliably stop it down from wide open to any of the five other stops by feel and somewhat by sight through the finder. It doesn't quite hit infinity wide open, but I feel like it's the simplest lens in the world to disassemble and recalibrate. I'll start a thread on this later...

And I don't miss not having a focus aid on the screen or any of the other amenities of a modern SLR. Having a locking shutter release for time exposures will no doubt come in handy eventually.

Literally the only thing I don't like is that the shutter does that "zipping" sound that some of the old focal plane shutters would. Oddly, my FED never does that.

 

[Horatio]

I've often wondered how the FTn system handles zoom lenses, since it's pretty insistent on knowing the maximum aperture of the lens, unlike, say, a contemporary Minolta, where the camera only cares about the difference between the set aperture and wide open. I suppose it wouldn't really matter, right? Since the camera's meter would see the reduced aperture and just figure it out from there? I don't actually understand why the FTn has to know what the actual maximum aperture is.

As for me, I get a ton of use out of mine with only a normal lens (1959-1960 Nikkor-S 5cm f/2). Have you noticed that at the extreme ends of either the shutter-speed scale, or the aperture scale, the metering is off? The two rheostat rings can each get dirty, and you could (as on mine) end up with significant underexposure if you follow the meter in low-light situations, or some other error. I hope yours is clean!

(Wait, did they make 35-105's back in the AI era? The biggest wide-to-tele zooms I ever see from that time are 35-70mm (I have this for Minolta) or 28mm-70mm (I have one for Canon), but of course, what I've seen doesn't mean much.)

This lens is AI-S, with the rabbit ears. Not sure if it will work correctly with the meter or not. I'll let you know. My first Nikkormat only had a 50mm prime lens. I may test the shutter this weekend. It should be relatively easy with the mirror lock-up feature. I use audio recordings to check speeds. The slower speeds are easier to "time." If I can't estimate the faster speeds then an exposure test should suffice. That's how I verified my Bronica SQ lenses' shutters were pretty accurate.

 

[Horatio]

I also finished assembling this beauty today.