Old stuff still good

So anyway, I just happen to be browsing on eBay the other day, in the
"Vintage/Collectibles" section, and there's a 1936 vintage Zeiss Ikoflex II
TLR (the one with teh focus lever, no double exposure protection, seperate
shutter cocking and film wind) coming up in half an hour, and it's not
expensive, yet. It's being sold by an antiques dealer, not a camera
collector, and is described as "in working condition". No more, no less.
Lens is an uncoated f/3.5 Tessar (can see from the pics). May or may not
have fungus. Shutter is a Compur Rapid. Doubt the T and B are working, and
the slow speeds are probably a bit flakey - anything would be after 68
years.

So I think it's probably worth a punt, even if only to get the poor thing to
a decent price. It's currently at 40 UK pounds (about $70 US). I stick in a
proxy bid of about 52, fully expecting to be sniped.

Anyway, turns out I was the alst bidder. I got it for 41 pounds. Be nice if
it works - probably a bit of a junker, but salvagable.

Anyway, it arrived on Saturday - cosemtically it's superb. The leather case
polishes up like new, and the camera itself looks varely 70 months old, let
alone 70 years. Better still, there's no lens fungus, it's clean and
unscratched, and the shutter seems to be accurate, with T and B working.
Nice. Impressively good focus screen as well - almost as good as my Yashica
Mat 124G, a camera produced four decades later.

So I stick a roll of Provia 100F in, expecting that 70 year old lens to be
reasonable, but not Earth-shattering. After all, how good can 70 year old,
uncoated optics be, Zeiss or not?

To cut a long story short, it's *spectacular*. I mean, it's really, really
good. Appears to utterly **** on the Yashinon lens in my 124G, which has
thus far given me very nice pics, thank you very much. I'm utterly over the
Moon, as this camera cost me next to nothing, and on an initial evaluation,
appears to best be described as "amazingly good". There seems to be next to
nothing about these on the web - I guess the collectors all go for the
Rolleiflexes and ignore the Ikoflexes, but I bought this thing to take
pictures on, and it looks like I got myself a real bargin.

Here's one of the pics from the first roll, shot yesterday. Provia 100F,
handheld, 1/100 secs, f/11, downsized to 9 megapixels for bandwidth reasons.
The scan really doesn't do the slide justice. There's a bit of chromatic
abberation, but nothing major.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/narcissus/ElyCannon.jpg

Warning: 3 megabyte download.

Anyway, anyone else still shooting with one of these grand old ladies and
likes it? I think it could rapidly become my favourite camera.

Chris Brown wrote:


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/narcissus/ElyCannon.jpg

Warning: 3 megabyte download.

Anyway, anyone else still shooting with one of these grand old ladies and
likes it? I think it could rapidly become my favourite camera.

Nice!

Now I've got to find a place that will reliably return my 620 take-up
spools, so I can produce something similar with my Kodak Reflex II.
It's a little newer than the Ikoflex, with a coated lens, but still
pretty manual -- manual shutter cock (though it has an accurate frame
counter which you can, if you choose, not set and wind the old fashioned
way, with the red window), front element gear coupled helical focus, and
the first Fresnel bright finder ever sold. I had one of these 30+ years
ago, let it go when the shutter got slow (no idea, then, that it could
actually have been repaired, probably wouldn't have cost $20 back in
1974); bought another and cleaned the shutter myself a few months ago
and it's every bit as good with B&W as the first one was. I just keep
remembering the incredible roll of Ektachrome I got from it...



--
The challenge to the photographer is to command the medium, to use
whatever current equipment and technology furthers his creative
objectives, without sacrificing the ability to make his own decisions.
-- Ansel Adams

Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer http://silent1.home.netcom.com

Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.

Wasn't it Donald Qualls who said...
I've got to find a place that will reliably return my 620 take-up
spools,

What I advise people to do is to spray your empty spools with
orange marking paint so that the lab will not only remember to
hold your spools for you, but they'll be easy to find in the
trash bin if they forget, and you have to tell them to look in
the pile and retrieve them. :-)


--
Joe Pucillo
Baltimore, Maryland USA

To reply by email, please remove the .xx

Wasn't it Donald Qualls who said...
I've got to find a place that will reliably return my 620 take-up
spools,

What I advise people to do is to spray your empty spools with
orange marking paint so that the lab will not only remember to
hold your spools for you, but they'll be easy to find in the
trash bin if they forget, and you have to tell them to look in
the pile and retrieve them. :-)


--
Joe Pucillo
Baltimore, Maryland USA

To reply by email, please remove the .xx

To cut a long story short, it's *spectacular*. I mean, it's really, really
good. Appears to utterly **** on the Yashinon lens in my 124G

Those Tessars are indeed generally better than the Yashinons. It is the
same design, but Yashica's QC wasn't that good. Tessars are better
between f/8 ans f/11 (really very good at those apertures), a bit softer
at full aperture. But the f/3.5 is one of the best (the f/2.8 was softer
at all apertures).

If you can find one, try to use a lens hood, it will help a lot with the
uncoated lens.


Anyway, anyone else still shooting with one of these grand old ladies and
likes it? I think it could rapidly become my favourite camera.

Well, yes! Those 70-years-old cameras were just great. I used a 1935
Super Ikonta some times ago, it gave me superb 6x9 negatives.
Rangefinder, fits in a (large) pocket, an excellent camera!

http://www.lumieresenboite.com/colle...r_Ikonta_530/2

In 35mm I use a 1954 Robot Star, a really great little thing, and I'm
waiting for a Leica IIIc which is being CLA'd:

http://www.lumieresenboite.com/colle...ing_Robot_Star
http://www.lumieresenboite.com/colle...2&c=Leica_IIIc


Here's one of the pics from the first roll, shot yesterday.

Well, it *is* excellent!

Enjoy your camera!

--
Vincent Becker
Photographie et appareils anciens - Photography and classic cameras
http://www.lumieresenboite.com
Contact direct : http://www.lumieresenboite.com/contact.php

Anybody got directions for a DIY rangefinder cleaning for the Zeiss 533/16?
Mine is yellowed, dark.

Anybody got directions for a DIY rangefinder cleaning for the Zeiss 533/16?
Mine is yellowed, dark.

Chris Brown wrote in message ...
So anyway, I just happen to be browsing on eBay the other day, in the
"Vintage/Collectibles" section, and there's a 1936 vintage Zeiss Ikoflex II
TLR (the one with teh focus lever, no double exposure protection, seperate
shutter cocking and film wind) coming up in half an hour, and it's not
expensive, yet. It's being sold by an antiques dealer, not a camera
collector, and is described as "in working condition". No more, no less.
Lens is an uncoated f/3.5 Tessar (can see from the pics). May or may not
have fungus. Shutter is a Compur Rapid. Doubt the T and B are working, and
the slow speeds are probably a bit flakey - anything would be after 68
years.

So I think it's probably worth a punt, even if only to get the poor thing to
a decent price. It's currently at 40 UK pounds (about $70 US). I stick in a
proxy bid of about 52, fully expecting to be sniped.

Anyway, turns out I was the alst bidder. I got it for 41 pounds. Be nice if
it works - probably a bit of a junker, but salvagable.

Anyway, it arrived on Saturday - cosemtically it's superb. The leather case
polishes up like new, and the camera itself looks varely 70 months old, let
alone 70 years. Better still, there's no lens fungus, it's clean and
unscratched, and the shutter seems to be accurate, with T and B working.
Nice. Impressively good focus screen as well - almost as good as my Yashica
Mat 124G, a camera produced four decades later.

So I stick a roll of Provia 100F in, expecting that 70 year old lens to be
reasonable, but not Earth-shattering. After all, how good can 70 year old,
uncoated optics be, Zeiss or not?

To cut a long story short, it's *spectacular*. I mean, it's really, really
good. Appears to utterly **** on the Yashinon lens in my 124G, which has
thus far given me very nice pics, thank you very much. I'm utterly over the
Moon, as this camera cost me next to nothing, and on an initial evaluation,
appears to best be described as "amazingly good". There seems to be next to
nothing about these on the web - I guess the collectors all go for the
Rolleiflexes and ignore the Ikoflexes, but I bought this thing to take
pictures on, and it looks like I got myself a real bargin.

Here's one of the pics from the first roll, shot yesterday. Provia 100F,
handheld, 1/100 secs, f/11, downsized to 9 megapixels for bandwidth reasons.
The scan really doesn't do the slide justice. There's a bit of chromatic
abberation, but nothing major.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/narcissus/ElyCannon.jpg

Warning: 3 megabyte download.

Anyway, anyone else still shooting with one of these grand old ladies and
likes it? I think it could rapidly become my favourite camera.

I could see the colour separation on the guy in the bottom left hand
corner but the lens has still done an excellent job. At f11 you are
diffraction limited as to resolution (1500/11 lp/mm) but it was still
plenty enough at the size you have webbed. I like old cameras too. To
me, they are somerthing special. I have quite a collection.

Chris Brown wrote in message ...
So anyway, I just happen to be browsing on eBay the other day, in the
"Vintage/Collectibles" section, and there's a 1936 vintage Zeiss Ikoflex II
TLR (the one with teh focus lever, no double exposure protection, seperate
shutter cocking and film wind) coming up in half an hour, and it's not
expensive, yet. It's being sold by an antiques dealer, not a camera
collector, and is described as "in working condition". No more, no less.
Lens is an uncoated f/3.5 Tessar (can see from the pics). May or may not
have fungus. Shutter is a Compur Rapid. Doubt the T and B are working, and
the slow speeds are probably a bit flakey - anything would be after 68
years.

So I think it's probably worth a punt, even if only to get the poor thing to
a decent price. It's currently at 40 UK pounds (about $70 US). I stick in a
proxy bid of about 52, fully expecting to be sniped.

Anyway, turns out I was the alst bidder. I got it for 41 pounds. Be nice if
it works - probably a bit of a junker, but salvagable.

Anyway, it arrived on Saturday - cosemtically it's superb. The leather case
polishes up like new, and the camera itself looks varely 70 months old, let
alone 70 years. Better still, there's no lens fungus, it's clean and
unscratched, and the shutter seems to be accurate, with T and B working.
Nice. Impressively good focus screen as well - almost as good as my Yashica
Mat 124G, a camera produced four decades later.

So I stick a roll of Provia 100F in, expecting that 70 year old lens to be
reasonable, but not Earth-shattering. After all, how good can 70 year old,
uncoated optics be, Zeiss or not?

To cut a long story short, it's *spectacular*. I mean, it's really, really
good. Appears to utterly **** on the Yashinon lens in my 124G, which has
thus far given me very nice pics, thank you very much. I'm utterly over the
Moon, as this camera cost me next to nothing, and on an initial evaluation,
appears to best be described as "amazingly good". There seems to be next to
nothing about these on the web - I guess the collectors all go for the
Rolleiflexes and ignore the Ikoflexes, but I bought this thing to take
pictures on, and it looks like I got myself a real bargin.

Here's one of the pics from the first roll, shot yesterday. Provia 100F,
handheld, 1/100 secs, f/11, downsized to 9 megapixels for bandwidth reasons.
The scan really doesn't do the slide justice. There's a bit of chromatic
abberation, but nothing major.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/narcissus/ElyCannon.jpg

Warning: 3 megabyte download.

Anyway, anyone else still shooting with one of these grand old ladies and
likes it? I think it could rapidly become my favourite camera.

I could see the colour separation on the guy in the bottom left hand
corner but the lens has still done an excellent job. At f11 you are
diffraction limited as to resolution (1500/11 lp/mm) but it was still
plenty enough at the size you have webbed. I like old cameras too. To
me, they are somerthing special. I have quite a collection.

In article ,
RolandRB wrote:

I could see the colour separation on the guy in the bottom left hand
corner but the lens has still done an excellent job.

Yeah, he's where the CA is most obvious. The 49 megapixel version shows a
little bit on the masts on the tower as well, but it's not too
objectionable. TBH, I've seen similar levels of CA from not-inexpensive
1990s 35mm optics!

At f11 you are
diffraction limited as to resolution (1500/11 lp/mm) but it was still
plenty enough at the size you have webbed.

Went for f/11 to be sure of getting both the gun and the cathedral in focus.
I guess the sweet-spot for this Tessar would probably be around f/8, or so...

Last night, I made a 12 inch square inkject print (Epson 1290), and it looks
pretty good. I reckon it could do a decent print a fair bit bigger, but
that's as large as my printer can handle.

I like old cameras too. To
me, they are somerthing special. I have quite a collection.

I seem to be developing a bad habit of accumulating them. :-)