UR-PLOOT ?

[Pecole]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

An interesting piece in the Fontenelle collection was this prototype of the PLOOT reflex housing. Its story is worth telling. After 1945, Belgian troops were incorporated in the British occupation zone of Germany. A Belgian lieutenant, who had graduated as mechanical engineer, was detached a few months to supervise activities at the Leitz factory in Wetzlar. He became friend with a design engineer, and was fascinated by the precision of machining experimental pieces. When he left, he was offered one of those niece pieces he had admired on the racks of the experimental shop : a brass prototype of what had become the PLOOT. When the owner of this treasure died, his son, who knew the story but was absolutely not interested in Leitz-Leica, offered it to a friend who - fortunately - knew me and my Fontenelle collection.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Pecole]

I forgot to add the drawing coming with the (bad, sorry) pictures. Here is it.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Guest Ron (Netherlands)]

An interesting piece in the Fontenelle collection was this prototype of the PLOOT reflex housing. Its story is worth telling. After 1945, Belgian troops were incorporated in the British occupation zone of Germany. A Belgian lieutenant, who had graduated as mechanical engineer, was detached a few months to supervise activities at the Leitz factory in Wetzlar. He became friend with a design engineer, and was fascinated by the precision of machining experimental pieces. When he left, he was offered one of those niece pieces he had admired on the racks of the experimental shop : a brass prototype of what had become the PLOOT. When the owner of this treasure died, his son, who knew the story but was absolutely not interested in Leitz-Leica, offered it to a friend who - fortunately - knew me and my Fontenelle collection.

 

 

These kind of stories - telling that people were given parts of the Leitz collection by engineers at the Leitz factory - always raises questionmarks, especially if one tries to image how the situation in Germany was in 1945/1946; it seems more likely that such (valuable) parts of factories and blueprints were seized by the allies back then.

 

Thanks for sharing these pictures. I just wonder, if it is indeed in your collection, why then these photo's which seem to come from an - old?- book or other publication?

[luigi bertolotti]

These kind of stories - telling that people were given parts of the Leitz collection by engineers at the Leitz factory - always raises questionmarks, especially if one tries to image how the situation in Germany was in 1945/1946; it seems more likely that such (valuable) parts of factories and blueprints were seized by the allies back then....

 

Right consideration, there are many reports about this issue: being a lover of classic BMW motorcycles, I have read similar stories about parts and drawings of the famous BMW boxer engine (also the famous "RS Kompressor" which won the last prewar Tourist Trophy), which went in the hands of English troops; the documentation and toolings about casting technology of Volkswagenwerk "to-become-Beetle" engine was completely "taken away" by US Army engineers. Right of winners....

[jaapv]

Most likely they were traded for chocolate, nylons or cigarettes.

[Pecole]

These kind of stories - telling that people were given parts of the Leitz collection by engineers at the Leitz factory - always raises questionmarks, especially if one tries to image how the situation in Germany was in 1945/1946; it seems more likely that such (valuable) parts of factories and blueprints were seized by the allies back then.

 

Thanks for sharing these pictures. I just wonder, if it is indeed in your collection, why then these photo's which seem to come from an - old?- book or other publication?

 

Hi, Ron. Hoe is het met U ?

In fact, I sold my collection in 1993 when I retired to Portugal, and some boxes of pictures have been lost in the move. The ones of the "UR-PLOOT" have been saved from a damaged film strip, hence the "quality". About the origin of the piece, I can confirm the "gift" and friendly relations of the original owner with the German engineer, since I've seen a set of pictures of the latter with his Belgian counterpart, taken in the early 1970s on the occasion of a "reencounter" in Antwerp where they hold together the "piece".

[luigi bertolotti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Most likely they were traded for chocolate, nylons or cigarettes.

 

By sure... probably the only times in which a black Summarex (typical "wartime" lens) could be "acquired" for the equivalent of a decent meal...

[Guest Ron (Netherlands)]

Hi, Ron. Hoe is het met U ?

In fact, I sold my collection in 1993 when I retired to Portugal, and some boxes of pictures have been lost in the move. The ones of the "UR-PLOOT" have been saved from a damaged film strip, hence the "quality". About the origin of the piece, I can confirm the "gift" and friendly relations of the original owner with the German engineer, since I've seen a set of pictures of the latter with his Belgian counterpart, taken in the early 1970s on the occasion of a "reencounter" in Antwerp where they hold together the "piece".

 

 

Pecole, dank u wel!... for the clear explanation and good to know that not everything back then had the flavour of wartimes.

[zeitz]

An interesting feature of the drawing is that the flange-to-flange dimension is 63.5mm instead of the production 62.5mm.

[Pecole]

An interesting feature of the drawing is that the flange-to-flange dimension is 63.5mm instead of the production 62.5mm.

 

You are damned right ! I hadn't mentioned that... What can be the explanation ?

[luigi bertolotti]

You are damned right ! I hadn't mentioned that... What can be the explanation ?

 

I think that this is really a prototype, to say an item developed BEFORE that the lenses for it (200, initially, then 400) were in their final design stage: so, there can be a little variation in respect to the final design: lenses' mounts, of course must match the global length of PLOOT + std. Leica flange distance, but can be that at the time of this prototype they weren't yet defined. The depth of PLOOT, of course is limited by mirror, but nothing strange that designers tried to keep it as short as possible to achieve a good compactness... well, they succeded in "sparing 1 mm" in the final design. They maintained the same in the Viso I, then made much better with the Viso II, which needs the well known OUBIO to reach PLOOT's depth.

 

BTW, in the above drawing the TOP view is a bit strange... the 24x36 frame is drawn 90° to its standard position, though seems there is not a facility to rotate the camera's body to take vertical pics while maintaining the PLOOT in standard position (as is in the Visoflex I, see under)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jc_braconi]

BTW, in the above drawing the TOP view is a bit strange... the 24x36 frame is drawn 90° to its standard position, though seems there is not a facility to rotate the camera's body to take vertical pics while maintaining the PLOOT in standard position (as is in the Visoflex I, see under)

 

Luigi,

Can I tell you that you are not able to read a design ?

check there is the locking blade and the 2 milled grooves on the threaded rear ring

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jc_braconi]

I think that this is really a prototype, to say an item developed BEFORE that the lenses for it (200, initially, then 400)

 

It was develloped for the use of Belows I & lenses head that already existed. "may be"

 

 

 

 

[zeitz]

JC, tell us more. My pre-war catalogs don't list a bellows. Laney says it was introduced in 1951. Your bellows clearly is glossy black. I have never seen one like this before. When do you think your bellows was produced? Did it come with the second series "PLOOT" in the picture?

 

The other interesting thing on the UR-PLOOT is that the controls are switched side to side.

[luigi bertolotti]

Luigi,

Can I tell you that you are not able to read a design ?

check there is the locking blade and the 2 milled grooves on the threaded rear ring

... 19.48 and dinner ready is my only modest excuse...

[jc_braconi]

This bellows did not came with this PLOOT, it is glossy painted and if I compare with the two other ones I have

it does not wear the magnification ratio on the side scales

lens ring is 'spring' connected to the compendium, not clamped as a hood as on the other ones

I cannot tell you when it was made,

 

[luigi bertolotti]

It was develloped for the use of Belows I & lenses head that already existed.

 

 

 

Sure ? the lenses heads were indeed already removable, on the prewar 13,5 and 9 , but I thought the Bellows didn't existed yet... for what I remember, at that times, for macrophotography they listed the various focusing stages with tubes, "legs" etc...

[jc_braconi]

".... the short mount as the ZOOAN for the lens head 13.5cm / 4.5 Hektor...."

Lager III Accessories p 193

[zeitz]

Nice family photo, JC. I really enjoy these discussions from the time that the Leica system was invented.

 

The introduction of the ZOOAN can be fairly well dated due to the design change to the front of the 135 Hektor and the associated serial number, given in the catalogs, when the change occurred. ZOOBA is also listed, which is essentially sending the lens to the service department, updating the front of the older Hektors to the new design and providing a ZOOAN to go with it.

 

But I don't see the connection to Bellows I. UR-PLOOT "was develloped for the use of Belows I & lenses head that already existed." Lens heads were removable prior to PLOOT, but there is no evidence that Bellows I or lens head adapters were in existence before PLOOT, released in 1935. I do think your glossy black bellows pre-dates 1951, but I think it was made during WWII or shortly after. Obviously this is a guess and I have no way to prove it.

 

Perhaps this will lead us into a discussion of focusing stages and the associated adapters for it. I have never observed any commonality between the focusing stage systems and the reflex housing systems.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[luigi bertolotti]

A side consideration about PLOOT... does someone know by sure if Leitz was the first to have a reflex housing for RF cameras ? I know that Zeiss made the Flektoscop for Contax... I think around 1936 - Olympics (even if the famous "Olympia Sonnar" was made also in direct mount version), but probably after the PLOOT's intro... but maybe there have been some 3rd party reflex housing before both of them... I do not know.