Author Topic: The Box Camera Thread (Read 21213 times)

cs1 · « **on:** January 17, 2018, 07:25:21 PM »

I've searched the forum but haven't found any dedicated box camera thread. The Brownie Day thread and the one about new box cameras being kickstarted left me with the urge to discuss boxes.

I'm familiar with a number of Agfa boxes, however, I'd like to try boxes by other manufacturers. I've stumbled upon the Altissa Periskop box which caught my eye for three reasons: (1) it's a gorgeous looking camera and (2) it's not 6x9 but 6x6 (I don't have a box with that format yet) and (3) it's supposed to have a very unusual lens design with aperture and shutter located between two lens elements. My question to start off this thread is: has one of you seen this box in real live before or does one of you even own one and can share her or his thoughts about / experiences with it?

Feel free to chip in any other box related questions / suggestions / remarks that spring to your mind.

Francois · « **Reply #1 on:** January 17, 2018, 08:57:14 PM »

I must say that it's really nice looking.
Hard to resist such a stunner

Altissa Box by Alfred, on Flickr

mikec · « **Reply #2 on:** January 17, 2018, 09:07:10 PM »

Sandeha generously started a thread about my box camera book a couple years ago. There are chapters on four of my favorite box cameras with a bit of history and pictures from each camera. There is a preview with all pages at the BLURB site.

Pete_R · « **Reply #3 on:** January 17, 2018, 09:45:46 PM »

I was looking for a list of boxes that includes their format and film type but couldn't find anything. Anyone aware of one? A list of those that use 120 film would be a start.

Francois · « **Reply #4 on:** January 17, 2018, 10:28:52 PM »

Well... maybe we can start a list here (http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=9474.new#new)

I'll go through my collection and list the ones I have there.

Bryan · « **Reply #5 on:** January 17, 2018, 10:52:42 PM »

This is a pretty good list of Kodak Box cameras:

http://www.brownie.camera/

Francois · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2018, 11:12:05 PM »

Wow! This guy really has boxes of boxes!

cs1 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 18, 2018, 03:26:33 PM »

Quote from: Francois on January 17, 2018, 08:57:14 PM

I must say that it's really nice looking.

I agree, it's stunning.

I'm hoping to find a cheap one but prices on a well known auction site are quite steep for a reasonably well preserved copy.

Francois · « **Reply #8 on:** January 18, 2018, 03:29:19 PM »

And Bakelite is one of those things that need to be in really good shape or else it just looks shoddy.

cs1 · « **Reply #9 on:** January 18, 2018, 03:32:56 PM »

Quote from: mikec on January 17, 2018, 09:07:10 PM

Sandeha generously started a thread about my box camera book a couple years ago. There are chapters on four of my favorite box cameras with a bit of history and pictures from each camera. There is a preview with all pages at the BLURB site.

Thanks for the hint. I looked at the preview of your box camera book. It looks impressive.

I'm wondering: how common are Agfa boxes in the US? I suppose they must be quite rare over there? I saw in your book that you have an Agfa Clack. I have a copy, too, and I got it for maybe 5 € (it was definitely < 10 €) which was a no-brainer.

cs1 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 18, 2018, 03:43:06 PM »

Quote from: Francois on January 18, 2018, 03:29:19 PM

And Bakelite is one of those things that need to be in really good shape or else it just looks shoddy.

I'm not entirely sure but I don't think it's made with bakelite. I think it's tin covered with a (very likely fake plastic) leatherette.

EarlJam · « **Reply #11 on:** January 18, 2018, 07:11:50 PM »

My dad (for reasons unknown) had a dozen or so Spartus Press-Flash cameras. These shot 6x9 portrait aspect on 120, were manufactured from the late 1930s up to 1950, and used Edison screw-base flash bulbs. What's odd is that I can't recall ever having seen a period photo of press photographers using one of these; cameras are almost always Speed or Crown Graphics.

cs1 · « **Reply #12 on:** January 18, 2018, 07:15:52 PM »

Those are very pretty cameras. Very art deco. Looks like they have eye level viewfinders. I guess you've tried one of these before. How do you like them?

EarlJam · « **Reply #13 on:** January 18, 2018, 07:50:36 PM »

Quote from: cs1 on January 18, 2018, 07:15:52 PM

Those are very pretty cameras. Very art deco. Looks like they have eye level viewfinders. I guess you've tried one of these before. How do you like them?

Sadly, no. My dad was a consummate and somewhat unrepentant accumulator of esoterica, to the extent that it took me three solid years of weekends and vacation time to clear his house, after he passed. There were 100s of cameras, including a half dozen tri-color still cameras and a Technicolor System III two-color motion picture camera; more than 1500 books on art and photography; and dozens of pieces of flat artwork. Add to that a garage full of WW 2-surplus photo chemicals (literally, enough to support a commercial lab for months if not longer), long-expired print paper; two 35mm motion picture projectors, one silent and one sound; etc. In short, it was an overwhelming mass of stuff to sort through.

I consider myself fortunate in at least knowing what most of it was. I kept a few items, mostly things I remember from my childhood; sold those items that appeared to be of interest to collectors and users of older equipment; and gave the rest to charity. At the time, though, I didn't know what I didn't know for much of it. For example, had I known of Filmwasters or APUG then, I would have been much more informed with many of the items.

mikec · « **Reply #14 on:** January 18, 2018, 09:03:28 PM »

cs1 said:
"...I'm wondering: how common are Agfa boxes in the US? I suppose they must be quite rare over there? I saw in your book that you have an Agfa Clack. I have a copy, too, and I got it for maybe 5 € (it was definitely < 10 €) which was a no-brainer."

Agfa/Ansco had a substantial presence in the U.S. prior to WWII. The government took over the company during the war and ran it for about 15 years. I don't know how many Agfa cameras have made it to the U.S. since then, but probably quite a few via ebay. I have an Agfa Synchro Box as well as the Clack which I found at a flea market for $5. That was good luck as the Clack was something of a fad item for a time a few years back and they typically brought up to $40 on ebay. The Clack was marketed directly in the U.S. for a time as the Weekender, but they seem less common here than the ones with the Clack name. Some Clacks have a yellow filter as one of the aperture settings. Mine has sunny and cloudy settings and another with a supplementary close-up lens for 3-10 feet.

Francois · « **Reply #15 on:** January 18, 2018, 09:22:55 PM »

So far, I've seen and own quite a few Ansco cameras. They're not quite as common as Kodak but still not too hard to find in Canada.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #16 on:** January 18, 2018, 09:38:50 PM »

oh, I was just clicking through the german box registry over at camera-wiki a few days ago.

ofcourse, here's something more comprehensive: http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Category:Box
and a page just generally about the history and evolution of box cameras http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Box_camera

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #17 on:** January 19, 2018, 11:38:51 AM »

Box cameras.....they're the type of camera that I should love, but for whatever reason, they just haven't grabbed me as much as they should. I have a broken Coronet 'Captain' displayed on a shelf (who could resist that name!!) and I actually own my mother's Box Brownie from the 1940's - when we came across it, the darn thing still had some film in it. Photos of my grandmother, taken by my mother in the late 1940's. I was really excited to develop the roll, but in the end they were a disappointment. Amongst other things my mum had shot straight towards a window which my gran was standing in front of. Silhouette city

cs1 · « **Reply #18 on:** January 19, 2018, 05:04:56 PM »

Quote from: mikec on January 18, 2018, 09:03:28 PM

Some Clacks have a yellow filter as one of the aperture settings. Mine has sunny and cloudy settings and another with a supplementary close-up lens for 3-10 feet.

Thanks for the writeup on Agfa/Ansco! I seem to have another Clack variant with a closeup lens, a normal aperture and a yellow filter for sunny environments. It's nice to see what sort of features they packed into such a simple camera.

Ed, I love the story about your grandmother's camera. It's lovely to own cameras with a history.

I fell victim to "box fever" due to acute box discussion events on a certain forum.

I just bought a Zeiss Ikon Box-Tengor (56/2) on the far too expensive auction site that you resort to when the flea market season hasn't started yet. The box seems to be in great shape. Can't wait to try it (it hasn't arrived yet). See what "box fever" does to you: I romanticise about the simplicity of box cameras in the other thread and can't resist to buy one of the most sophisticated boxes I know of. Oh well...

Francois · « **Reply #19 on:** January 19, 2018, 09:07:07 PM »

Even the most sophisticated box is still pretty simple when you think about it.

cs1 · « **Reply #20 on:** January 19, 2018, 10:40:00 PM »

Thanks for backing me up, François! You're absolutely, right.

Bryan · « **Reply #21 on:** January 22, 2018, 10:49:03 PM »

Another great list of Kodak Box Cameras:

http://kodak.3106.net/index.php?p=203

cs1 · « **Reply #22 on:** January 24, 2018, 06:03:57 PM »

That's quite an impressive list, Bryan.

I'm currently gathering material for a project that I hope to be starting soon. I'm going to try to convert my Agfa Synchro Box from 6x9 to 6x4.5. I know we're filmwasters but 6x9 sometimes wastes too much film in my eyes so I'm curious how this will turn out. The plan is to cut a mask from metal sheet (basically two strips, one at the top and one at the bottom) to reduce the height of 9 to 4.5 and to spray the mask with black paint and to glue it into the film holder of the Synchro Box. The tricky part will be to find the exact position for the little window for the exposure numbers for 6x4.5. It will involve drilling two holes (one in the box and one in the spring loaded back that keeps the film flat). That's probably going to be the hard part. I've bought a spare Synchro Box for little money to harvest parts from it. If all works well, I'll use the inner part with the film holder from the spare box to make a pinhole insert which I can use with my Frankensynchrobox. I'm looking forward to this project.

John Robison · « **Reply #23 on:** January 25, 2018, 12:26:15 AM »

Quote from: cs1 on January 24, 2018, 06:03:57 PM

That's quite an impressive list, Bryan.

I'm currently gathering material for a project that I hope to be starting soon. I'm going to try to convert my Agfa Synchro Box from 6x9 to 6x4.5. I know we're filmwasters but 6x9 sometimes wastes too much film in my eyes so I'm curious how this will turn out. The plan is to cut a mask from metal sheet (basically two strips, one at the top and one at the bottom) to reduce the height of 9 to 4.5 and to spray the mask with black paint and to glue it into the film holder of the Synchro Box. The tricky part will be to find the exact position for the little window for the exposure numbers for 6x4.5. It will involve drilling two holes (one in the box and one in the spring loaded back that keeps the film flat). That's probably going to be the hard part. I've bought a spare Synchro Box for little money to harvest parts from it. If all works well, I'll use the inner part with the film holder from the spare box to make a pinhole insert which I can use with my Frankensynchrobox. I'm looking forward to this project.

Well, it will have a angle of view about equal to a 55mm lens on a 35mm camera. That is if the lens on the Agfa is 95mm. If it is longer, 100mm or 105mm then even more narrow angle of view. That's with a 42X56mm size negative. The standard 6X9 negative is 56X84mm.
Kodak, for their Tourist 6x9 folders had a multi-format replacement back with masks and a adjustable red window. I had the kit for years but never used it, finally sold it a photo show. Interesting idea though.

EarlJam · « **Reply #24 on:** January 25, 2018, 03:45:18 AM »

Quote from: John Robison on January 25, 2018, 12:26:15 AM

Quote from: cs1 on January 24, 2018, 06:03:57 PM
That's quite an impressive list, Bryan.

I'm currently gathering material for a project that I hope to be starting soon. I'm going to try to convert my Agfa Synchro Box from 6x9 to 6x4.5. I know we're filmwasters but 6x9 sometimes wastes too much film in my eyes so I'm curious how this will turn out. The plan is to cut a mask from metal sheet (basically two strips, one at the top and one at the bottom) to reduce the height of 9 to 4.5 and to spray the mask with black paint and to glue it into the film holder of the Synchro Box. The tricky part will be to find the exact position for the little window for the exposure numbers for 6x4.5. It will involve drilling two holes (one in the box and one in the spring loaded back that keeps the film flat). That's probably going to be the hard part. I've bought a spare Synchro Box for little money to harvest parts from it. If all works well, I'll use the inner part with the film holder from the spare box to make a pinhole insert which I can use with my Frankensynchrobox. I'm looking forward to this project.

Well, it will have a angle of view about equal to a 55mm lens on a 35mm camera. That is if the lens on the Agfa is 95mm. If it is longer, 100mm or 105mm then even more narrow angle of view. That's with a 42X56mm size negative. The standard 6X9 negative is 56X84mm.
Kodak, for their Tourist 6x9 folders had a multi-format replacement back with masks and a adjustable red window. I had the kit for years but never used it, finally sold it a photo show. Interesting idea though.

If memory serves, the Zeiss Super Ikonta C shipped with a 6 x 4.5 cm mask. There are two red windows on the back for viewing frame number, one for 6x9 and the other for use with 6 x 4.5. See
https://www.cameraquest.com/zikontc.htm for pictures; might give you some ideas for your modifications.

cs1 · « **Reply #25 on:** January 25, 2018, 05:01:53 PM »

John, Earl: Thanks for both your feedback. I'm primarily curious if I manage to do this from a craftsman point of view. I have little to no experience with working with metal sheets. But it definitely looks feasible. My spare Box should be arriving tomorrow so I definitely know what I'll be doing this weekend.

The idea with a removeable mask is pretty nice. I just need to find a way to insert it into the filmholder properly. For anyone who's interested, there's a site in Spanish with a number of picture of the Agfa Synchro Box including one of the filmholder's back. Unfortunately I don't understand Spanish so I can only guess what the text might be saying. http://www.camarassinfronteras.com/synchro/synchro.html

Francois · « **Reply #26 on:** January 25, 2018, 08:46:39 PM »

Try this one instead
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.camarassinfronteras.com%2Fsynchro%2Fsynchro.html&edit-text=&act=url

EarlJam · « **Reply #27 on:** January 25, 2018, 11:01:44 PM »

Quote from: cs1 on January 25, 2018, 05:01:53 PM

John, Earl: Thanks for both your feedback. I'm primarily curious if I manage to do this from a craftsman point of view. I have little to no experience with working with metal sheets. But it definitely looks feasible. My spare Box should be arriving tomorrow so I definitely know what I'll be doing this weekend.

The idea with a removeable mask is pretty nice. I just need to find a way to insert it into the filmholder properly. For anyone who's interested, there's a site in Spanish with a number of picture of the Agfa Synchro Box including one of the filmholder's back. Unfortunately I don't understand Spanish so I can only guess what the text might be saying. http://www.camarassinfronteras.com/synchro/synchro.html

You're welcome. Sounds like a fun project. Here's a view of the back of the Ikonta. Per the manual, for 6 x 4.5, you start with the frame number in the right-hand window (# 24 in the graphic), make the exposure, and then advance the film to place the same frame number in the left window (# 25). My guess is that the windows are about 5 cm part, give or take, to account for spacing between frames.

jharr · « **Reply #28 on:** January 26, 2018, 08:39:03 PM »

I just measured the window distance on my Voigtländer Bessa 6x9 which also has a 645 mask. They are precisely 4.8 cm apart.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #29 on:** January 26, 2018, 09:26:36 PM »

Hey guys, I'll translate the Spanish text from the website in a little bit

cs1 · « **Reply #30 on:** January 26, 2018, 11:30:44 PM »

Quote from: jharr on January 26, 2018, 08:39:03 PM

I just measured the window distance on my Voigtländer Bessa 6x9 which also has a 645 mask. They are precisely 4.8 cm apart.

That's good to know! My spare box should arrive tomorrow. I need to extract its little red plastic window to implant it into my other box for the 645 window. When it arrives I'll try to figure out how to go ahead with the modification. I've already changed my strategy from making an in-situ mask to making a removable mask. I also need to find a drill that has the exact size of the window so that I won't have to do a lot of filing. Exciting times are ahead.

02Pilot · « **Reply #31 on:** January 27, 2018, 01:50:29 AM »

Quote from: cs1 on January 26, 2018, 11:30:44 PM

Quote from: jharr on January 26, 2018, 08:39:03 PM
I just measured the window distance on my Voigtländer Bessa 6x9 which also has a 645 mask. They are precisely 4.8 cm apart.
That's good to know! My spare box should arrive tomorrow. I need to extract its little red plastic window to implant it into my other box for the 645 window. When it arrives I'll try to figure out how to go ahead with the modification. I've already changed my strategy from making an in-situ mask to making a removable mask. I also need to find a drill that has the exact size of the window so that I won't have to do a lot of filing. Exciting times are ahead.

Find a step drill bit with small increments between steps. Not only are they self-centering, but they will also put a nice chamfer on the hole. Small pilot hole, then step bit.

cs1 · « **Reply #32 on:** January 30, 2018, 05:26:21 PM »

As I mentioned in the "I just picked up..." thread, I seem to have some trouble with my Zeiss Ikon Box-Tengor 56/2. It looks like I can't get it to focus properly. Even when taking photos without the closeup lenses the image is soft and infinity focus isn't there. It gets worse when using the closeup lenses. The 1-2m lens seems to focus much closer than 1m, same goes for the 2-8m lens. The closeup lenses aren't 100% clean, but the front lens is really clean and I can't see any reason why it wouldn't focus to infinity properly. There's nothing loose, the case is not bent and looks intact. I'm a little baffled.

Antony, since you're the only other person I know who owns a Box-Tengor 56/2, I'd like to ask you for a favour.

Would you mind removing the front of your Box-Tengor 56/2 and taking one closeup photo of the front of the box, one of the inside of the front where the front lens sits and one from the inside of the box behind the front where the shutter mechanism is? Removing the front is very easy: there're two screws (one on the left and one on the right hand side, you can easily remove them. The distance selector and the aperture selector are a little flexible. You can put them both in the middle position, simultaneously press them towards the lens and simply slide off the front cover. When putting the cover back, you can put one of the selectors (I use the distance selector) through the slit, put a flathead screwdriver through the other selector's slit and carefully lever the selector through the slit. It's not difficult at all, you just need to make sure not to scratch anything. Furthermore I have a question regarding the shutter mechanism: mine is quite a lot of work to operate at least compared to my Agfa Synchro Box. Is it the same on your box?

I found one more thing which might interest other Box-Tengor owners: if you have opened your box, have a look at the mechanism that lets you put the box in "bulb" mode ("T"). The lever stops the circular shutter to revolve all the way and keeps it open. This, however, puts some strain on the metal pin of the "bulb" slider (it basically works against the power of your thumb on the trigger). In my box, this pin was bent quite a bit so that in "T" mode the revolving shutter moved a little bit into the aperture's opening when holding the shutter open. You can clearly see if you have this problem without opening the box by putting it on "T", by holding the shutter open, and by looking through the front lens. It's easily fixed by slightly (at I really mean slightly!) bending the pin back (away from the aperture). But be sure to test the shutter several times afterwards (in "T" and "M") because it will revolve too far if you bend the pin back too far.

AJShepherd · « **Reply #33 on:** January 30, 2018, 10:16:49 PM »

OK, I've done some pictures and here's a zip file with jpgs and dngs, let me know if you want more.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/j5ahla3owt1vq7m/tengor.zip?dl=0

The shutter on mine does feel 'heavy' - like it's on a strong return spring or something.

cs1 · « **Reply #34 on:** January 31, 2018, 06:44:50 PM »

Thanks, Antony, the photos are very helpful. Your box looks almost exactly like mine. There're no differences that seem to be significant. I've put a ground glass on the film plane today and looked at the projected image of my Tengor when holding the shutter open on "T". The image looks perfectly sharp. I have no idea what's going wrong with the focus when using film. I also looked at the back, the pressure plate looks fine so there's no reason to believe that the film isn't flat. I'm out of ideas. I'm probably going to give it a last try on a tripod and jot down every setting while shooting to find out what's going on. It really sucks, this box looks absolutely gorgeous and has no damages that I can see. There's the odd shot that's perfectly sharp but most shots are blurry.

02Pilot · « **Reply #35 on:** January 31, 2018, 08:45:25 PM »

Can you post some samples of the sharp and unsharp photos? It might be helpful to get more eyes on them to see just how they are unsharp, which might lead to the why.

cs1 · « **Reply #36 on:** January 31, 2018, 08:59:36 PM »

Yes, here're two examples. The first one with the pipe shows a reasonably sharp image which leads me to think that there's the potential for sharp images in that box. The second one at the river, however, is one really strange example. It was shot without any closeup lenses dialled in so I'd expected it to be sharp in the background and not in the left hand foreground. But what I got was a sharp left hand side in the foreground, extending into the background quite far, however, the right hand side is not sharp in the same distance. The more I think about it, the more I believe that the film really isn't properly pressed onto the film plane. All unsharp shots seemed to have front focus which - by my understanding - means that the film is probably too far from the lens. I had the box on a tripod for both shots and used a cable release.

Francois · « **Reply #37 on:** January 31, 2018, 10:45:51 PM »

Or maybe the lens has either a slight defect or is simply not parallel to the film plane?

cs1 · « **Reply #38 on:** February 01, 2018, 05:11:06 AM »

I don't think that it's the lens. Other shots show completely other sorts of out-of-focus patterns. I think that it's something with the film not being flat on the film plane. I'll check the closing mechanism of the box today.

02Pilot · « **Reply #39 on:** February 01, 2018, 01:30:51 PM »

Concur this is most likely a film placement issue. Have a look at the film guides on either side of the gate and all along the path to make sure the film is being positively controlled the whole way. Also, check that the ratchet on the winder is holding properly, otherwise the film could lose tension and shift.

Note that I'm not familiar with the Box Tengor specifically, but the above should still be relevant. If you have a photo of the innards it might help narrow things down further.

cs1 · « **Reply #40 on:** February 01, 2018, 04:09:34 PM »

Here're a number of photos of the innards. Please excuse the mobile phone photo quality.

cs1 · « **Reply #41 on:** February 01, 2018, 04:10:05 PM »

And here's one of the box' back.

02Pilot · « **Reply #42 on:** February 01, 2018, 05:52:55 PM »

Really not much to go wrong there (you might want to check those rusty rollers for rough spots to ensure you don't end up scratching the film). Did you check that the ratchet in the wind mechanism is holding properly?

cs1 · « **Reply #43 on:** February 01, 2018, 06:52:03 PM »

I rubbed the rollers with a cloth until they felt very smooth (they still look rusty but the rust doesn't come off). I'm thinking about using a Dremel-like tool with some polishing paste to get rid of the rust. Haven't come around to doing it yet.

Non-native speaker question: by "ratchet in the wind mechanism is holding" you mean "does the winding knob and the part that protrudes into the inner camera fit properly into the film spool and turn the spool properly"? Yes, the knob is firmly attached to the little "T" piece that goes into the spool and it seems to transport reliably, I just checked it. It also looks like the exposures are equally distanced on the exposed film so I believe that the advancing mechanism is fine. The only thing I haven't checkt again is whether the spring that holds the fresh film firmly (the spool that's opposite of the spool with the winding knob) is doing its job properly. That's what I'm going to check out tomorrow.

I'll shoot one more film tomorrow and I'll really make sure that everything is properly set up. I'll use a tripod and try as many settings as possible from the same perspective. If that doesn't show any results that tell me more about the root cause, I think I'll give up. If any of you box enthusiasts happens to be in my area in Germany, I'll invite you to my house, we'll have a beer and you can try to fix this diva Tengor of mine.

02Pilot · « **Reply #44 on:** February 01, 2018, 06:55:13 PM »

Sorry. What I meant to ask was whether the knob could be turned in the wrong direction. If it can, tension will not be maintained on the film.

For the rollers, superfine steel wool with some naptha or other solvent will get them as clean and smooth as they're going to be.

cs1 · « **Reply #45 on:** February 01, 2018, 07:01:36 PM »

Ah! Thanks for the clarification. No, the knob only turns in the right direction. If I try to gently turn it in the wrong direction it immediately stops. There's no perceivable tolerance, it's immediately stopped.

Thanks for the advice regarding the cleaning of the rollers.

Francois · « **Reply #46 on:** February 01, 2018, 08:39:36 PM »

Test it with just the backing paper of the previous film... You might find something there.

John Robison · « **Reply #47 on:** February 02, 2018, 02:00:43 AM »

If you do your own darkroom work then you can cut a piece of photo paper to size to test if the out of focus problem is the lens or the film position. Cheaper than running $5 roll of film for each test.

Francois · « **Reply #48 on:** February 02, 2018, 03:10:06 PM »

Or maybe there is a way to auto collimate the lens with the back on.....
I'm trying to figure out a way to bring light inside the camera through the lens....

Maybe using a box with a 45 degree mirror that would shine light from the side while letting you look through the lens with a telephoto....

cs1 · « **Reply #49 on:** February 02, 2018, 05:45:43 PM »

Unfortunately I don't make my own prints (lack of space and equipment) so I had to revert to using a film today. However, I have high hopes. I found that the spring at the end where you put in the new film was quite bent away from the spool so I bent it back and it might just have helped to keep the film stretched tight over the rollers.. After all the forensic work on finding the cause for the unsharpness (thanks for all of your help!) this was the only option that I had left. I've already developed the film, waiting for it to dry. I'll keep you posted. If that indeed was the problem, I might even have just fixed my Zeiss Ikon Nettar 515/2 which had almost the same problem.

Looking at the ground glass with my headstrap magnifying glass led me to believe that the whole thing was not an issue with a general lens displacement. There were a number of shots that actually came out with correct sharpness. This inconsistency would be very unlikely if the lens was permanently skewed. However, I think that I really need to try your auto collimate setup, François, because I'd really like to find out whether I can make it work or not.