Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

William, 

I regret I don't have the long Leica Mount Wray lens. I could not find it in the attic. I don't know what my great uncle used as a darkroom, he may well have used the one in my grandfather's house, which became my parent's house after my grandfather died in 1946. That had a very well set up darkroom with a rack of lightproof drawers for paper, two enlargers, a double sink with zinc draining boards and heating surfaces to keep chemicals at the correct temperature. Otherwise he may have set up one in his house. I did not think to ask my great aunt about that, as that might have been another place to look. I did not feel very comfortable about rummaging through all the stuff in the attic anyway. I think a lot of the clothes belonged to my great uncle's first wife, who had died from cancer in the late 1920's and his son who had died from Bright's disease about the same time. I have not joined the PCCGB. I feel that LSGB and LHSA are enough for me. I am not really a club joiner. 

Wilson

Edited by wlaidlaw
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wlaidlaw said:

William, 

I regret I don't have the long Leica Mount Wray lens. I could not find it in the attic. I don't know what my great uncle used as a darkroom, he may well have used the one in my grandfather's house, which became my parent's house after my grandfather died in 1946. That had a very well set up darkroom with a rack of lightproof drawers for paper, two enlargers, a double sink with zinc draining boards and heating surfaces to keep chemicals at the correct temperature. Otherwise he may have set up one in his house. I did not think to ask my great aunt about that, as that might have been another place to look. I did not feel very comfortable about rummaging through all the stuff in the attic anyway. I think a lot of the clothes belonged to my great uncle's first wife, who had died from cancer in the late 1920's and his son who had died from Bright's disease about the same time. I have not joined the PCCGB. I feel that LSGB and LHSA are enough for me. I am not really a club joiner. 

Wilson

I'm not really a joiner myself, but somehow I have got involved with LHSA (where I am VP/Treasurer), TLS ( just an ordinary member but occasional contributor to the magazine) and Photo Museum Ireland where I am the Chairperson. As for PCCGB, I am a regular contributor on their ZOOM talks and I have been asked to speak at the PCCGB AGM. The expertise of the members of PCCGB is absolutely staggering and a lot of the items which you have mentioned here have appeared at their meetings. In addition I have contributed over 45 articles on Macfilos. I am, of course, friendly with both Jim Lager and Lars Netopil who are my go to people on Leica matters. 

Maybe I should change that 'joiner' thing to 'I like to be busy'. 

When I get a chance I will send you a photo of the Wray version of the Leica VIOOH viewfinder, which may have been made to go with that lens you mentioned. 

William 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

William, 

I regret I don't have the long Leica Mount Wray lens. I could not find it in the attic. I don't know what my great uncle used as a darkroom, he may well have used the one in my grandfather's house, which became my parent's house after my grandfather died in 1946. That had a very well set up darkroom with a rack of lightproof drawers for paper, two enlargers, a double sink with zinc draining boards and heating surfaces to keep chemicals at the correct temperature. Otherwise he may have set up one in his house. I did not think to ask my great aunt about that, as that might have been another place to look. I did not feel very comfortable about rummaging through all the stuff in the attic anyway. I think a lot of the clothes belonged to my great uncle's first wife, who had died from cancer in the late 1920's and his son who had died from Bright's disease about the same time. I have not joined the PCCGB. I feel that LSGB and LHSA are enough for me. I am not really a club joiner. 

Wilson

Here they are , Wilson, two Wray Viewfinders modelled on the Leica VIOOH, shown back and front.

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!

Can you recall what focal length the Leica Mount Wray lens was? In this case the focal lengths are, on the left, 3.5cm, 5cm, 7.3 cm, 9cm and 13.5 cm and, on the right, 3.5cm, 5cm, 7.3cm, 9cm, 10.5cm and 13.5cm. So both of these are pre Summarex and one actually covers the Mountain Elmar.

William 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

William,

I have a VERY vague memory of my father saying that he thought it was 3.5 inches or 89mm. I would be guessing but I know my great uncle went to France and Switzerland on a combined business and pleasure trip with my grandfather in either 1935 or 36. I suspect it was 1936, after the death of my grandmother and before my great uncle remarried. He may have bought the long lens for that trip. He had bought his Model III new in 1934 with a 1932 Chrome Hektor 50mm/2.5, in Aberdeen. I have a wonderful picture of them in one of our family albums (back in the UK) of both them seated at a table having a café complet, on La Croisette in Cannes, both wearing their heavyweight three piece tweed suits and homburg hats 😀 My great uncle is even wearing spats! None of this fancy lightweight suit nonsense. 

Wilson

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I had a Wray finder, but all I could find was this Walz, a model 41b, with a chrome back. It has both 85 and 105mm frames. I think there were many copies of the Leica VIOOH finder, but I have not seen to many copies of the TUVOO attachment to produce a 28 frame, beyond the New York VIOAD.  Did Wray or anyone else make an attachment for 28mm?

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!

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tewe made an excellent zoom viewfinder which from memory goes from 35 to 200mm. However mine goes a bit below 35mm, so almost good enough for 28mm. However I mostly use it with my LTM Nikkor P 105mm/f2.5. I also have various fixed bright line finders, Leica 85mm (SGOOD), 50mm (SBOOI), 35mm (SBLOO), 28mm (SLOOZ) and 18mm (12022), which I much prefer to any of the variable finders

Wilson

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have three Tewe finders. One goes from 35mm to 135mm and the other two go up to 200mm. They have intermediate dots for other focal lengths, but I don’t know what they are intended for.

Nikon had a finder almost identical and there are Tewe finders for Robot cameras with a square frame.

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!

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alan mcfall said:

I thought I had a Wray finder, but all I could find was this Walz, a model 41b, with a chrome back. It has both 85 and 105mm frames. I think there were many copies of the Leica VIOOH finder, but I have not seen to many copies of the TUVOO attachment to produce a 28 frame, beyond the New York VIOAD.  Did Wray or anyone else make an attachment for 28mm?

 

Alan, the 'Universal ViewFinder' may have been made by a company which supplied them to the trade for use as 'own brand' items. Here are a couple more which I have, but they don't contain a dealer name. Do the 'Hb' ? initials in the middle mean anything to anyone? They were just described as Japanese Universal Viewfinders when I bought them. 

William 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

here's my Alpex zoom viewfinder (35-200) with adjustable foot - very similar to the Tewes - very solid/well made including a leather case (embossed with brand name)

I don't know much about Alpex - were they Japanese or Euro? Did they make cameras. Were they an el cheapo "knock off" brand?

I hardly use it as the images are so blurry/OOF (not dirty) - pity these didn't have dioptre adjustments

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!

Edited by romualdo
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

A Tewe-Polyfocus that shows up to 150 mm 

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!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your choice 1930?

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!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, romanus53 said:

Your choice 1930?

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!

The Colibri was for 127 film. It was a nice compact camera and came with fine Zeiss lenses. Back in 1930 Leica was still one of a new breed of 35mm film cameras, but 35mm had not yet fully established itself.

William 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There were a number of earlier French still cameras from the likes of Pathe, which used perforated 35mm film but I think they all used it in the vertically running cine format of 24 x 18mm or some used square 24 x 24mm as the later Benning Robot cameras did. It was Oscar Barnack's thinking outside the box, of turning the film through 90º, that was his flash of brilliance. 

Wilson

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeiss claimed a larger area of film means less enlargement and better resolution. The Kolibri wasn't cheap -  neither Leica or Contax were.

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!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

There were a number of earlier French still cameras from the likes of Pathe, which used perforated 35mm film but I think they all used it in the vertically running cine format of 24 x 18mm or some used square 24 x 24mm as the later Benning Robot cameras did. It was Oscar Barnack's thinking outside the box, of turning the film through 90º, that was his flash of brilliance. 

Wilson

True. It took some years for 35mm to become established. Barnack himself said that he had got complaints from people who did not how to use his 'kleine photo-wunder'. It was not until Paul Wolff and others published their findings as regards exposure etc that people were finding out about how to make fine pictures with the new compact format. Looking at German camera catalogues from the early 1930s most of the cameras are for formats which were larger than 35mm. The next big step forward came from a man ,who should be much better remembered, called Dr August Nagel. He did not produce 35mm cameras under how own name, but when he sold his company to Kodak he stayed on to produce the non reloadable 35mm cassette and the Kodak Retina to use it. By the end of the 1930s other German manufacturers, such as Welta and Balda, had joined Kodak, Leica and Zeiss (Contax) in producing 35mm cameras. Another contributory factor was the adoption of 35mm by military forces both before and during WWII, so that it was ready to take its place at the top once WWII was over. 

Most of the innovation heading towards the eventual dominance of 35mm took place in Germany. I would really like to see somebody writing an overview book in English about all of this, including makes other than Leica as well as Leica, of course. There are some books in German, but they too are not absolutely comprehensive.

Barnack played an important role, but he was not alone. I must mention Rudolph and others at Zeiss and Nagel, mentioned above. Barnack was the one who gave the initial impetus towards 35mm, but he also contributed interchangeable lens outfits (with some help from the British) and other features. Another contribution from Barnack was the small size, just barely enough to have the cassette, exposure area and the take up spool. That alone was a work of genius. A bit like the smartphone/ iPhone in more recent years.

William 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, willeica said:

I would really like to see somebody writing an overview book in English about all of this, including makes other than Leica as well as Leica, of course. There are some books in German, but they too are not absolutely comprehensive.

A book which I've found gives a useful coverage of the introduction and progresssion of 35mm over the years is the late Roger Hicks 'A History of the 35mm Still Camera', published by the Focal Press in 1984 (ISBN 0 240 51233 2). There are currently four secondhand copies available via Abe.

Alan

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just had a look at Roger & Frances' book (I bought a spare Tewe viewfinder from him some years ago). It does not give a lot of detail on the pre-Leica RF cameras, like for example my Richards camera which uses 10 cut strips of 35mm film mounted in aluminium holders, all held in an automatic loading magazine. It takes square 23 x 23mm images. These were made from around 1909 but mine is the military version dating from 1915, where the no longer obtainable Zeiss Tessar lenses of the original, were replaced by locally sourced copies. There are only some 17 pages in Roger's book on the history of the rangefinder. However, I am not sure there are many better books in English. There are one or two in German. 

One book maybe worth considering, is one given to me by my daughter's father-in-law, the well known professional photographer, Bob Creamer (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/what-camera-153011480/) which is Todd Gustavson's Camera. Now this book is published by Eastman Kodak, so inevitably there is a Kodak-ish flavour to it but very readable nonetheless. 

Wilson

 

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...