Topic: I just picked up...

[Francois]

Also sold as a Canon Dial 35 iirc.

Yep, it's the same thing but with American branding.
I must admit that to this day, I still consider it one of the most interesting and beautiful cameras ever made.
The industrial design aspect is just fascinating and the arrangement of the parts just good to the eye.
Who needs good ergonomics when it looks this good 😁

[Indofunk]

That looks really cool!

[Phil Snaps]

I picked up an Agfa Isolette II. I didn't know if it was in good condition, only that the shutter worked. I thought I could always use the shutter for one of my frankencamera projects. But it looks pretty good, door is smooth, the bellow has repairs, so I will shoot a test roll someday!

[Francois]

Don't you just hate it when you buy something for hacking and it turns out it's actually too good to do so?

[Bryan]

I picked up an Agfa Isolette II. I didn't know if it was in good condition, only that the shutter worked. I thought I could always use the shutter for one of my frankencamera projects. But it looks pretty good, door is smooth, the bellow has repairs, so I will shoot a test roll someday!

What, the grease isn’t solidified!  That’s a rare find. 

[Phil Snaps]

Don't you just hate it when you buy something for hacking and it turns out it's actually too good to do so?

Well it was a good surprise, but I hate to dismantle a working camera so I'll have to find a shutter somewhere else 

What, the grease isn’t solidified!  That’s a rare find.

I has probably been CLA'ed at some point.

[Francois]

Yesterday I got my hands on a nice Canon EX.
I always wanted to get a camera that uses the FD mount and I thought I had found the holy grail... but there was something weird about it. I couldn't figure out how to remove the lens.
It turns out that this is not an FD mount camera! It's an EX mount camera... which makes this all even more puzzling.
The EX mount was a failed design by Canon that was produced for just one year. And lets just say that when they came out with this, they probably were hitting the sake pretty hard.
The camera has a fixed focusing mount with a fixed rear lens element. The lenses are just the front optics set on an m39 screw mount... but not Leica compatible.
It's got a movable prong that can lock on the focus in order to get automatic flash.
And the lens has no aperture setting! Instead, there is a dial around the rewind knob that moves a needle in the viewfinder to set the aperture (f/1.8 to f/16).
The camera is entirely mechanical (1/8 to 1/500).

Mine came with the 35mm, 50mm and 125mm lenses. They also made the 95mm which is missing.
Not too shabby for a whole 10$ at a charity shop.

[Indofunk]

That's crazy! So basically you're stuck with this exact kit, unless by some miracle another EX lens pops up somewhere 😁

[Francois]

That's pretty much it.
At first I thought it came with a bunch of lens adapters. But it turns out it wasn't the case.
I'll definitely have to do a bit more research on this thing as it is really a fascinating piece of kit, albeit not a convenient one.

I did look at the models they made and it is essentially a Canon FP with a fixed lens... or at least it looks like that. It is the the successor to the Canon EX EE.

I wonder if there isn't a way I can use this to add some home-made lenses?

[Bryan]

That’s similar to the way the lenses work on the Retina IIIc, but with a leaf shutter that makes sense to leave the rear element attached.  With a focal plane shutter it doesn’t make sense. 

[Francois]

As far as I'm concerned, nothing on this thing makes sense.
Putting the aperture on the rewind button? That was definitely a new one for me!

[Kai-san]

Last week I picked up two heavy chunks of metal and glass, better known as lenses. They are both M42 mount, and the Isco-Göttingen Edixa-Westagon 2.0/50 is the odd one out here. They were made from 1954 to 1970. and this one is probably from the fifties. No auto aperture but with a spring loaded lever that opens the aperture when activated. Isco-Göttingen started making Schneider lenses in the thirties and is today part of Schneider Kreuznach.
Sears on the other hand never made any lenses, the Sears 1.4/55 pictured here is said to have been made by Tomioka, but nobody can prove it
I'm posting two shots from the Westagon in the weekend thread, the Sears will have to wait till next week.

[Francois]

The funny thing about those store brand lenses is that you never really know what you'll get. They can either be rubbish or incredible pearls.
I have grown to love shopping for them as they are usually cheap and a true bag of surprises.

So far, my favorites so far are those from the "Image" brand that was sold through the Astral Photo and Miracle Mart chains in Canada. They are often a bit weird but usually quite interesting.

[Kai-san]

This Sears lens was also issued under other brand names as Mamiya, Ricoh, Cosina, Chinon etc. I think the only thing we can assume with some certainty is that it is Japanese made.

[Francois]

Most probably as there wasn't many countries producing 3rd party lenses at that time.
I have a Deitz Premium sitting on my desk that I need to fix. Under the nameplate is a Soligor CD lens...

[Kai-san]

.....another Isco-Göttingen lens, the Westar 4.5/100mm in M42 mount. The only problem with these lenses from the fifties and older is odd filter sizes. Info from internet says 40mm for this lens, but I tried a 40.5 and it's a bit too small. So I've ordered two step-up rings, 41.0 and 41,5mm. Fingers crossed!

[Francois]

Could it be that it wasn't made for screw-on filters but for using System type press on adapters with a drop-in threadless filter instead?
I know I have an old Wollensak lens that uses just that. I eventually made my own threaded adapter using a System adapter, step-down filter ring and UV filter to the final size.
Here's the instructable I made a very long time ago
https://www.instructables.com/Filters-for-lenses-without-threads/

[Bryan]

I've been able to make those Kodak slip on adapters work with a lot of odd sizes.  A little self adhesive felt can make up for a loose fitting one. 

[Kai-san]

Could it be that it wasn't made for screw-on filters but for using System type press on adapters with a drop-in threadless filter instead?
I know I have an old Wollensak lens that uses just that. I eventually made my own threaded adapter using a System adapter, step-down filter ring and UV filter to the final size.
Here's the instructable I made a very long time ago
https://www.instructables.com/Filters-for-lenses-without-threads/

It definetively has filter threads, so I expect one of those step-up rings to do the job.

[Francois]

It definetively has filter threads, so I expect one of those step-up rings to do the job.

That's where I've been had with the Wollensak. It has threads, but they are not standard (I believe they are imperial and not metric like all filters).

[Kai-san]

It definetively has filter threads, so I expect one of those step-up rings to do the job.

That's where I've been had with the Wollensak. It has threads, but they are not standard (I believe they are imperial and not metric like all filters).

Reminds me of a Leica filter I once bought. It was metric, but the thread pitch was non-standard. I believe it's in a drawer somewhere......

[Francois]

It definetively has filter threads, so I expect one of those step-up rings to do the job.

That's where I've been had with the Wollensak. It has threads, but they are not standard (I believe they are imperial and not metric like all filters).

Reminds me of a Leica filter I once bought. It was metric, but the thread pitch was non-standard. I believe it's in a drawer somewhere......

Leica did produce a lot of non-standard stuff.

[Kai-san]

Could it be that it wasn't made for screw-on filters but for using System type press on adapters with a drop-in threadless filter instead?

It turned out to be 41mm thread, and with the step-up ring in place I can use 49mm filters and hood.

I've been looking for a Helios-103 lens for my 1939 Contax II, but the cheapest ones on ebay would have set me back around 65-70 USD. And frankly i'm not sure I would get a good quality lens from some of those sellers. But last week I found a nice one locally for 60 USD, and it came with a Kiev-4M as rear lens cap. The Kiev-4M seems to be working fine except the selenium meter, which is not a surprise. I've already shot a roll with this combination, when I process it tomorrow I will see if everything is ok. I just hope that the Helios-103 doesn't have the same optical defect as the rest of the Helios family, aka swirley bokeh.

[Pete_R]

I just hope that the Helios-103 doesn't have the same optical defect as the rest of the Helios family, aka swirley bokeh.

I think it does. Maybe not the strongest but definitely some swirl to it. But I wouldn't call it a defect, more of a feature.

[Francois]

It turned out to be 41mm thread, and with the step-up ring in place I can use 49mm filters and hood..

41mm? That's definitely not a common size.

[Kai-san]

I just hope that the Helios-103 doesn't have the same optical defect as the rest of the Helios family, aka swirley bokeh.

I think it does. Maybe not the strongest but definitely some swirl to it. But I wouldn't call it a defect, more of a feature.

Well, I'm not into taking pictures of lens artifacts. I try to avoid anything that can disturb or detract from the main motif, be it swirls, bubbles or comas. If any of those appear in my shots I consider it a failure.

[Kai-san]

It turned out to be 41mm thread, and with the step-up ring in place I can use 49mm filters and hood..

41mm? That's definitely not a common size.

When it comes to old lenses there is hardly a filter size that hasn't been used. Often you have to measure and do an educated guess, and to be sure you buy a couple of different sizes of step-up rings or filters. After some years of this I have a fair amount of step-up rings.

[Francois]

When it comes to old lenses there is hardly a filter size that hasn't been used. Often you have to measure and do an educated guess, and to be sure you buy a couple of different sizes of step-up rings or filters. After some years of this I have a fair amount of step-up rings.

And sometimes you can't even find a step-up ring that fits.
I still have a few lenses with threads that are a true mystery.

[Kai-san]

I usually do not buy cameras in lots, but this was such an eclectic collection that I spent a small fortune of 30 USD. From left to right:
Belca Beltica I with a Meyer-Gôrlitz Trioplan 2.9/50mm
Leidolf Lordox 24x36 with a Lordon 2.8/50mm
Graflex Century 35A with a Kowa Prominar 3.5/45mm (a rebadged Kowa 35N)
Topcon Uni with a UV Topcor 2.0/53mm
The Belca does not stop winding on next frame, probably a simple mechanical fix. The Lordox works except the very slow speeds, the Graflex needs a shutter service. The Topcon has issues with the shutter, light meter works but does dot register change of shutter speed. I will keep the first three ones and get them fixed. The Topcon will have to go, but I could get an adapter for the lens and sell the body for a tenner.

[ManuelL]

That is a nice collection of unusual cameras. Hope you get them all working again. I was previously tempted to pick up a Lordox. These lenses can render some beautiful images.

Few weeks ago I got a Svedovsky 8x10, which I had ordered earlier this year. I have to sell a bunch of other cameras to ballance my budget, but it is a beautiful camera. It is not light, but feels very stable and handles nicely. I took it for the first outing today. Unfortunately with lots of wind and some snowy rain.

[Francois]

Rain and bellows definitely don't mix well...

I bust admit that it's really a beautiful camera. And it probably smells awesome with all that wood.

[astrobeck]

My latest fling...ha!
I bought it for the lens. The body only works on X and bulb, and yes I tried fresh batteries, so it's basically a  fancy "almost" point and shoot, so I'll go with that.

You all know I have a weak spot for K-mount and couldn't resist the price of $25. It''ll be good for a knocking about camera.

[Cadha13]

I was gifted a Canon AT-1 with an unknown zoom lens a Canon 200mm f4 prime. It had its original manual and a Cokin 2in filter set.   

The zoom lens has an aperture issue, and I bought a 50mm f1.8 and a 28mm f2.8. The light seals were gone like someone removed them before I got to it. Took care of that and loaded some old Ilford PanF+ I had laying around in my bulk film holder. I stand developed in Rodinal and scanned with my Epson V500.

[Francois]

Wow, it does seem to work quite fine.

[Kai-san]

Picked up a Chinon CE II Memotron with a Chinon MC 1.7/55 and a Rokina 3.3/200. The Rokina is one of those Japanese OEM lenses that was issued under a lot of other brand names. I usually don't care about lenses above 135mm, but this one is a macro lens. I will at least do a test before it goes on sale. The camera just needed a new battery, tightening of a couple of screws and a good cleanup. I paid 75 USD incl. shipping for the lot which is cheap here.

[Francois]

It's funny because I've recently grown a certain love for the aesthetics given by some cheap third party lenses.
Some of them are really lovely (Like my Auto-Image 35-210mm Macro).

[Kai-san]

Some of them are so obscure that it's hard to find any info, a search for this one gave me one hit that was somewhat useful. This lens is a strange creature, it's got two focusing rings; one normal and one for macro. Never seen that before.

[astrobeck]

oooh, nice Chinon! I'm a fan of those too. I have a couple and they are like boat anchors in weight.
they all work too, which is cool.

[Kai-san]

Yeah, I like solid cameras. I've got a Chinon CE-3 with power winder, that's a real heavyweight! Unfortunately it has started taking pictures all by itself, so I will have to get it repaired. But the Chinons are really nice cameras.

[Francois]

I've never seen a double focusing ring lens. Though the Auto-Image I was talking about has something similar, it's just not marked as a focus ring.
I also have a Tou/Five Star 75-200mm which is a bit annoying as it has depth of field markings, but they are rendered essentially useless as they are not really well marked showing only f/16 and f/32... But overall it's quite decent.

[Pete_R]

it has depth of field markings, but they are rendered essentially useless as they are not really well marked

DoF scales on lenses are just useless, period. Far too many assumptions made in their calculation.

[Kai-san]

it has depth of field markings, but they are rendered essentially useless as they are not really well marked

DoF scales on lenses are just useless, period. Far too many assumptions made in their calculation.

A DoF scale is a tool, whether it is accurate is another issue. On rangefinder and scale focus cameras it's the only tool available. For SLRs the alternative is stopping down the lens, but when you stop down to 1:8 or smaller and in addition have a dark viewfinder, how accurate is that? A DoF scale is a rough guideline and if you are aware of that it's far better than nothing.

[Francois]

What I find funny about it is that they went to the trouble of calculating everything, engraving the barrel and painting it just to make something that isn't very useful in the end.

[Pete_R]

What I find funny about it is that they went to the trouble of calculating everything, engraving the barrel and painting it just to make something that isn't very useful in the end.

There's an excellent paper published by Zeiss that describes the complexities of Dof (and also bokeh) which, if nothing else, just goes to show how complex a subject it is and how it can't be represented by a few lines on a lens.

https://lenspire.zeiss.com/photo/app/uploads/2022/02/technical-article-depth-of-field-and-bokeh.pdf

And for a different way of thinking about Dof here's another paper that's worth reading.

http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/TIAOOFe.pdf

[Francois]

Interesting.
It basically boils down to what I've been saying for a very long time: sharpness is an overrated concept 😁

I always find it funny when I see such explanations because I've recently been working on a little programming side project to make a photography assistant for my Android phone, and it includes a depth of field calculator 😊

[Kai-san]

... a heavy duty film cutter for 35mm and 120 film. MacoDirect offered this with 25% discount so I went for it. I'm not so keen on the name they've given it ( The Film Killer), but it's a very good machine. Probably the first film cutter that I've seen with a promotion video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLTaLjoqBl8&t=7s

[Francois]

I've seen that thing. It looks like it's superlatively well designed.
I've been looking for a film cutter for a long time (I hate when the ends of my films are cut crooked or too close to the 35mm frames), but the price has definitely been putting me off.

[Kai-san]

At it again. I have taken a liking to small scale focus cameras, some of them have very decent lenses. So I stumbled across a seller who had two Voigtländer Vito BL cameras, one with Color-Skopar 2.8/50 and the other with Color-Scopar 3.5/50. They had been sitting in a drawer for at least 30 years, none of them tested. I took a chance and bought both, hoping that at least one of them would work. The 2.8 camera is fully working, shutter sounds quite accurate all over the range and even the light meter seems accurate. Has to be tested with film though. The 3.5 camera is also working, but the shutter speeds 1s, 1/2s and 1/4s all sounds like 1/30s. The B setting is OK, the light meter is about one half step out of kilter. Both came with beautiful leather cases, original lens hoods and one original UV filter + one third party yellow filter. I got the lot for 80 USD which is quite good given the price level here.

[Francois]

A few years ago, I CLA'd one. It's a pretty easy job to do on these, but you will have to re-collimate the lenses.
Just make sure you don't back-out completely the three very tiny grub screws that hold the lens to the focus grip. They are a real pain to put back in their proper hole!

I think I have an instruction set somewhere if you need it.

[Kai-san]

I found the instruction manual online, but thanks for the offer! They are very easy to load when you understand how it's done. And it's easy to see if you've done it correctly, just check that the film indicator spins around when you advance the film. Not many of these compact cameras have that feature.