p51
One Too Many
- Messages
- 1,119
- Location
- Well behind the front lines!
Here's my 'new' toy, a prewar 4X5 Anniversary model Speed Graphic:
-
The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
The Vintage Camera Club Thread
- Thread starter Two Gun Bob
- Start date
1930artdeco
Practically Family
- Messages
- 673
- Location
- oakland
I REALLY like that camera with the flash no less. But that plane I am in love with....
Mike
Mike
Lee - Let's see some photos of WWII stuff using that Speed Graphic.
Have you checked the serial number to find out date of manufacture? If not, check inside upper-right (facing the camera) of the camera body and see what it says. It's dark in there, so use a flashlight or good light.
I have a pretty good reference list if you get the number.
Have you checked the serial number to find out date of manufacture? If not, check inside upper-right (facing the camera) of the camera body and see what it says. It's dark in there, so use a flashlight or good light.
I have a pretty good reference list if you get the number.
Retro Spectator
Practically Family
- Messages
- 824
- Location
- Connecticut
Do vintage cameras take photos which appear vintage? I know, it's a stupid question.
The "vintage look" is dependent on a number of things. What the camera will actually produce varies depending on the lens type and quality of the optics, among other things. The lens will (partially) determine the level of contrast and sharpness of the image. Variations on that will give a photo an appearance often defined as "vintage". Film type also figures into it, as does processing of the film, itself subject to a host of variables.
Some Leica lenses, particularly the oldest 50mm Summars, are prone to what photographers call the "Leica look". It relates to the coating, or lack thereof, on those old lenses. Sharpness, lens flare, the nature of the out of focus areas, all of that and more affect the end product and how we see it.
Some Leica lenses, particularly the oldest 50mm Summars, are prone to what photographers call the "Leica look". It relates to the coating, or lack thereof, on those old lenses. Sharpness, lens flare, the nature of the out of focus areas, all of that and more affect the end product and how we see it.
Featured products
-
Gustin Vintage Heavyweight Sweatshirt - Natural Rainbow Nep - $119 Rugged 14oz cotton that gets better with every wear. -
Grant Stone Diesel Boot Dark Olive Chromexcel - #395 Goodyear welted, Horween Chromexcel, classic good looks. -
Himel Bros. - The Ross Mk. 1 Leather Jacket Classic D-pocket motorcycle/aviator style jacket.
1930artdeco
Practically Family
- Messages
- 673
- Location
- oakland
The film made today-I think they still make film right? Is better in a lot of ways than the film made in the 30-50's. But in other ways it is isn't. Look at original color film from the 30's and you will really vibrant colors and great shades of B&W in the B&W films. Today's films don't seem to have that. A lot of times it is the formula and the physical characteristics of the film and paper being used.
Mike
Mike
From the late-30's through much more recent times a lot of the color images that still look great were taken on Kodachrome. That was the best-ever color film ( a lot of people think) both for color and sharpness. It was structurally and chemically different from the other color films, both then and now. I use the term "now" loosely since Kodachrome has been discontinued.
It took a centrally-located small-scale factory to process it - not a drugstore 1-hr operation.
We lost a means of preserving history when Kodachrome went away. None of the other processes have or had the image longevity of Kodachrome.
Some old cameras can take superb images that are as good as you could want, if they were originally well-built and well-maintained. Some, as mentioned with the old Leica Summars, are or can be almost worthless for picture taking today. (The two of those I have are so hazy that they can't be used at all.)
Film type and quality has a big effect also. The "worst" film you can buy today is better than the best from the old days. However, a lot of the old cameras had very large negatives (B&W). A large negative can make up for a lot of shortcomings in the film quality.
Back when I was teaching technical-photography as an engineering elective I would show the class a photo made using a 1908 Kodak and ask them what sort of camera they thought made it. They would always guess "Nikon" since the image was so sharp and clear. I would then show them the old bellows folding-Kodak and point out that it made a negative approx. 3 1/2 x 5 inches. (By modern terms it would have effectively a multi-jillion pixels.)
We'd go on from there to discuss all the multiple factors that went into determining the final image quality.
You could write a book on all this, and people have...
Another factor is who is doing the work. If you develop and print your own photos you will likely get better results than from the high-school-kid at Walgreens operating the film-processing machine while texting their BFF.
It took a centrally-located small-scale factory to process it - not a drugstore 1-hr operation.
We lost a means of preserving history when Kodachrome went away. None of the other processes have or had the image longevity of Kodachrome.
Some old cameras can take superb images that are as good as you could want, if they were originally well-built and well-maintained. Some, as mentioned with the old Leica Summars, are or can be almost worthless for picture taking today. (The two of those I have are so hazy that they can't be used at all.)
Film type and quality has a big effect also. The "worst" film you can buy today is better than the best from the old days. However, a lot of the old cameras had very large negatives (B&W). A large negative can make up for a lot of shortcomings in the film quality.
Back when I was teaching technical-photography as an engineering elective I would show the class a photo made using a 1908 Kodak and ask them what sort of camera they thought made it. They would always guess "Nikon" since the image was so sharp and clear. I would then show them the old bellows folding-Kodak and point out that it made a negative approx. 3 1/2 x 5 inches. (By modern terms it would have effectively a multi-jillion pixels.)
We'd go on from there to discuss all the multiple factors that went into determining the final image quality.
You could write a book on all this, and people have...
Another factor is who is doing the work. If you develop and print your own photos you will likely get better results than from the high-school-kid at Walgreens operating the film-processing machine while texting their BFF.
Blue Moon Camera in Portland Oregon is gearing up to produce Minox film. They gave me a pre-production cartridge to try out when I picked up several rolls of Minox film I drppoed off for processing.
Google Blue Moon Camera and Machine.
PS love your Speed Graphic P51. I also love all the other WWII paraphernalia in your photos.
I have a later model Speed Graphic that has a 120 roll film back in it. Never used it though.
Last edited:
Luftwaffles
One of the Regulars
- Messages
- 226
- Location
- South Carolina, US
Got two Brownie Bull's Eye cameras in working condition for $16.
esteban68
Call Me a Cab
- Messages
- 2,107
- Location
- Chesterfield, Derbyshire, England
Here's an old Photina twin lense reflex from the mid 50's I am told, It belonged to a relation who took it all over the world on a cruise in the later 50's and it has had little use since, condition is great apart from a bit of stitching needing re-doing on the case, it all appears to work ok.
esteban68
Call Me a Cab
- Messages
- 2,107
- Location
- Chesterfield, Derbyshire, England
and a few more,
lenses are scratch free but do appear a little speckled, could it be the coating lifting, were they even coated?
It all seems clean inside and seals look in fine order.
and what's this, is it for a flash attachment?
is film still readily available and more to the point can you still get it developed in the UK?
lenses are scratch free but do appear a little speckled, could it be the coating lifting, were they even coated?
It all seems clean inside and seals look in fine order.
and what's this, is it for a flash attachment?
is film still readily available and more to the point can you still get it developed in the UK?
That looks to be a flash-cord connector/socket.
As for film, it probably uses 120 roll film. Here in the US it's available at large professional camera stores but not at Walmart or drug stores. It's readily available on-line.
Here you have to find a specialty-photo lab to develop it or (best idea) shoot black and white and develop it yourself.
Both of those statements are likely true for the UK, also.
As for film, it probably uses 120 roll film. Here in the US it's available at large professional camera stores but not at Walmart or drug stores. It's readily available on-line.
Here you have to find a specialty-photo lab to develop it or (best idea) shoot black and white and develop it yourself.
Both of those statements are likely true for the UK, also.
LadyBaltimore
Familiar Face
- Messages
- 60
- Location
- Baltimore
What a beauty, esteban68! I really would like to get into shooting 120 film, I know some great photographs that shoot on a Rolleiflex.
I have a 1950s Polaroid Land Camera, some much later model of a Polaroid camera I can't remember (but the kind I grew up with in the 1990s) and then I have three 35mm film cameras that I mostly shoot on, particularly the Pentax Spotmatic and Canon AE-1. I took the Spotmatic with me all across Asia one summer, it survived a lot, a fall down a ghat in Varanasi, India and a being sprinkled with some holy (super polluted) waters of the Ganges and doused with a hose by a well meaning sadu, and then being submerged in a bag of rice (and yes, the family at the little guest house gave me that, "Americans are crazy!" look when I requested rice for my uh…camera). Then the lens mysteriously fell off at the Monkey Temple in Kathmandu and I still had countries to go, so I kept shoving it back on precariously, the rest of the trip. I don't actually have a photo of my camera, but here's a couple of photos I shot with it, I'm a sucker for the look and feel of film, really can't be replicated with digital:
People thought I was crazy relying on film to capture my memories, but I have no regrets.
I have a 1950s Polaroid Land Camera, some much later model of a Polaroid camera I can't remember (but the kind I grew up with in the 1990s) and then I have three 35mm film cameras that I mostly shoot on, particularly the Pentax Spotmatic and Canon AE-1. I took the Spotmatic with me all across Asia one summer, it survived a lot, a fall down a ghat in Varanasi, India and a being sprinkled with some holy (super polluted) waters of the Ganges and doused with a hose by a well meaning sadu, and then being submerged in a bag of rice (and yes, the family at the little guest house gave me that, "Americans are crazy!" look when I requested rice for my uh…camera). Then the lens mysteriously fell off at the Monkey Temple in Kathmandu and I still had countries to go, so I kept shoving it back on precariously, the rest of the trip. I don't actually have a photo of my camera, but here's a couple of photos I shot with it, I'm a sucker for the look and feel of film, really can't be replicated with digital:
People thought I was crazy relying on film to capture my memories, but I have no regrets.
Mr. Godfrey
Practically Family
- Messages
- 632
I saw some 35mm film in Poundland a few weeks ago while I was after some Halloween stuff, not sure if they has 120.
You could ask these chaps
http://http://www.35mmfilmdeveloping.co.uk
- Messages
- 15,080
- Location
- Buffalo, NY
Kodak Petite c.1930
There was an estate sale of a photographer's collection of vintage cameras in a suite near my office today... I was lucky to get out with only two. :eeek:
There was an estate sale of a photographer's collection of vintage cameras in a suite near my office today... I was lucky to get out with only two. :eeek:
- Messages
- 15,080
- Location
- Buffalo, NY
Tougodo Hit miniature camera c.1950
Very nice cameras. I don't know if I could have resisted temptation to get more.
What others did they have?
Check here for a great Kodak sales pitch for those.:
http://kodak.digitalfx.tv/
What others did they have?
Check here for a great Kodak sales pitch for those.:
http://kodak.digitalfx.tv/
- Messages
- 15,080
- Location
- Buffalo, NY
Cool link... thank you for sharing.
This photographer must have purchased every camera he came across - there were hundreds, perhaps over a thousand. The elite products were missing but there were a handful of Zeiss and Rollei cameras represented, and about every kind of mid century Kodak and 1960s Japanese SLR. A smaller number of Asian rangefinders.
The glut was terrifying to anyone with a collecting/hoarding gene. I actually went on the first day and walked away with nothing. Went back the second day and bargained a little with the 30% off prices. Today is the final day at 50% off. I might have to go back and have another look at one of the early Russian Leica copies... oy.
This photographer must have purchased every camera he came across - there were hundreds, perhaps over a thousand. The elite products were missing but there were a handful of Zeiss and Rollei cameras represented, and about every kind of mid century Kodak and 1960s Japanese SLR. A smaller number of Asian rangefinders.
The glut was terrifying to anyone with a collecting/hoarding gene. I actually went on the first day and walked away with nothing. Went back the second day and bargained a little with the 30% off prices. Today is the final day at 50% off. I might have to go back and have another look at one of the early Russian Leica copies... oy.
- Messages
- 15,080
- Location
- Buffalo, NY
Similar threads
