Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Today arrived the Visoflex IIa that I bought. On JC's beautiful website and in Laney I read that the Visoflex IIa appears in 1962 in the catalogue of Leitz New York. On the Visoflex IIa itself just the usual name of Leitz Wetzlar appears. So was it indeed produced in Wetzlar, and for the general market? Or primarily for the American market, which could explain the mention in that Leitz New York catalogue? My oldest catalogue is from 1970 and consequently only shows the Visoflex III.

Lex

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps we should use Enzo Ferrari's terms of Grande Costruttori vs Assemblatori to describe the situation.  The height of Leitz New York's Assemblatori phase as the motor drive for the M2 Mot and M4 Mot cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I was still wondering why no mention was made of the involvement of Leitz New York when they produced the Visoflex IIa. On a small item such as a filter (like a blue filter PF for a Summitar lens) the inscription says E. Leitz New York. I foun d an older article in Viewfinder (29, no. 1 1996) and the production is not mentioned at all. So perhaps Visoflex II pieces manufactured in Wetzlar were modified by Leitz New York to IIa.

Lex

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, sandro said:

 So perhaps Visoflex II pieces manufactured in Wetzlar were modified by Leitz New York to IIa.

Lex

Looks like this indeed : btw IIa isn't quoted in any European pricelist of the era (could be interesting to find a IIa with original box... maybe Leitz USA was quoted onto...) ; an even more interesting N.Y. modification was the Viso III coupled to N.Y. Electric motor... I don't remember to have seen one for sale... but would like to have one: the extreme tentative to confront the surging dominance of SLRs... 😎.. and years prior the intro of the 1st Leica SL MOT...

 

Edited by luigi bertolotti
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, sandro said:

So perhaps Visoflex II pieces manufactured in Wetzlar were modified by Leitz New York to IIa.

There is always the possibility that the Visoflex IIa was manufactured entirely in Wetzlar.  The IIa machine work and parts finish matches that of Wetzlar made pieces.  The mirror control knob, except for the third dot, exactly matches the one on the Visoflex III.  This is purely speculation, but perhaps Leitz decided that the IIa was not the answer and the Visoflex III was reason to skip the IIa.  Complete IIa units and remaining parts were then sent to Leitz NY to dump on US consumers.  This may sound silly, but it is exactly what happened with the 180mm f2.8 Tele-Elmarit.

4 hours ago, luigi bertolotti said:

an even more interesting N.Y. modification was the Viso III coupled to N.Y. Electric motor

There are at least two variants of the motor-coupled Visoflex III.  The one shown in Lager's Volume 3, page 176, has a removable cord on the right side; Lager does not say who made it whereas Laney attributes it to Leitz NY.  A motor-coupled Visoflex III was offered at Westlicht Auction #33 2018 with a fixed cord emerging on the left side.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, zeitz said:

There is always the possibility that the Visoflex IIa was manufactured entirely in Wetzlar.  The IIa machine work and parts finish matches that of Wetzlar made pieces.  The mirror control knob, except for the third dot, exactly matches the one on the Visoflex III.  This is purely speculation, but perhaps Leitz decided that the IIa was not the answer and the Visoflex III was reason to skip the IIa.  Complete IIa units and remaining parts were then sent to Leitz NY to dump on US consumers.  This may sound silly, but it is exactly what happened with the 180mm f2.8 Tele-Elmarit.

There are at least two variants of the motor-coupled Visoflex III.  The one shown in Lager's Volume 3, page 176, has a removable cord on the right side; Lager does not say who made it whereas Laney attributes it to Leitz NY.  A motor-coupled Visoflex III was offered at Westlicht Auction #33 2018 with a fixed cord emerging on the left side.

Yes,  I've always thought that the (Isco - Schneider) TE 180, the N.Y. motor and "its" modfied Viso III are parts of the same story... probably the modifed Viso III was a projoect to be credited to the well known Don Goldberg...  

Edited by luigi bertolotti
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, luigi bertolotti said:

probably the modifed Viso III was a projoect to be credited to the well known Don Goldberg...  

Not quite right.  Norman Goldberg, Don Goldberg's father, did the motor.  I am not sure Norman did the electric cord Viso III because Norman did the Camcraft Z housing which eliminated the mirror in its entirety and replaced it with a beam splitter prism specifically for his motor drive..  About 50 Camcraft Z housings were made.  Later Norman did a Visoflex III mod with a pellicle film.  Don thinks about 10 of the Camcraft Pellicle Viso IIIs were made.  See Westlicht Auction #12 2007 Lot 292.  Don thinks JPL was not the producer as the auction states, but the unit was made by his dad for NASA Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL).  This is based on two considerations:  known contracts with NASA and the shape of the label.  I have a Cramcraft Pellicle Viso III directly from Don (totally known provenance) that has a take residue on the upper right of the face that exactly matches the JPL label in the Westlicht Auction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Here are my Viso IIa examples. In my experience, the screw mount versions is much harder to find that the bayonet. Probably had to be ordered that way, as this as has been noted, was near the time of the arrival of the Viso III. The odd assembly in the middle, is actually a Viso III, likely customized by ELNY for the Opton corporation. The rear bayonet mechanism has been removed and a 2.1 inch  OD mount added, the lever for the camera shutter button has been removed and a different view screen is used. See the photo.  I have the complete instrument system, about 20 pounds in the attic. If there is interest, I can photograph it. The final photo shows a lens that was used in one application of this system, a Friedich Munchen 135mm f/4.5. I beleve thare are many examples of Leitz supplying various sub-system parts for use by others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by alan mcfall
cut photos
Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan, thanks for this interesting contribution. It would be interesting to see that setup that you have in your attic! There were probably more of such modifications as you mention, both in Visoflex II and IIa and in III. One of my Micro-Visoflex III reflex houses has the interchangeable glass holder, with normal glass. Strangely enough this thing doesn't fit another Micro-Visoflex III I have, nor can the ground glass of this second one be used in the first one. They just don't fit, perhaps because one of the two was modified for a specific purpose.

Lex

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, alan mcfall said:

The rear bayonet mechanism has been removed and a 2.1 inch  OD mount added, the lever for the camera shutter button has been removed and a different view screen is used.

Possibly for use with a Robot camera and an endoscope?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually prefer the Viso II with its separate mirror release to the Viso III. I have an LTM one, currently sitting on my 1935 Model II with a 200mm/f4.5 Telyt lens mounted. I also have both an LTM and M mount Viso I devices. The LTM one has the IFLEX dual screen attachment, which sadly is not in proper register as a couple of the tiny screws had dropped out before I acquired it. 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wilson, just today I used my Visoflex II again (not the newly acquired IIa though) and it works nicely. But why do you prefer it to the Visoflex III? I only use Leica M bodies with film. I noticed one drawback of the Viso II when using it on M6: once I had focussed properly I couldn't lift the mirror to use the light meter of the M6. With the III I often raise the mirror to measure the light after focusing.

Lex

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan Goldberg used to sell the parts needed to convert a Viso II to a IIa. Perhaps some of what was left over from Leitz, NY. I thought several times about purchasing one but ended up buying an M mount Viso IIa. I had extra Viso IIs that I did a bunch of parts swapping usually to try to get a few decent looking ones. As I recall, for quite some time I converted the IIa to screw mount and then If I wanted to use it on an M then I would just use an adapter and then kept an M style trigger handle handy. At some point I decided to ditch using the IIa on LTM cameras. I had gotten pretty proficient at flipping the mirror reset lever on the II to the point that the IIa wasn’t that much of an advantage. Generally when I use an LTM I am not trying to see how quickly I burn thru a roll of film anyway.

Regards,

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By dritz
      I purchased this new just a year ago. Barely used. I use my R lenses on an SL, so this is an unnecessary accessory for me.  Sale includes:
      Visoflex 020 base plate Leica nylon pouch box, instructions Lovely leather Art di Mano case (retails for $129 at Leica Store Miami) Shipping is at your expense and must be insured. Import duties at your expense.  Item ships from Seattle, USA.
      High resolution pictures (and more than the 5 permitted here) are here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1d-te2fFJBZD0tXBS2xf5myb7zlmEFd84?usp=sharing.
      Thanks.
      dritz40 (on that auction site)
    • By sml_photo
      Has anyone else had any problems connecting the GPS to the M10 Monochrom?  Most of the time, I see in the rear screen that the GPS icon has an "x" through it...obviously not connected.
      I have the Visoflex connected to the camera and the GPS turned on in the menu. 
      I realize there are areas that pose a problem for GPS connections, but I have tried various types of environments.
      Am I missing something?  I've only had it connect sporadically over the past few weeks. 
      Thanks.
    • By erniethemilk
      I'm wondering if the Visoflex is 'really' worth the cost of them?
      I use LV a lot on my M10-P when out with my tripod when I'm out shooting woodland and forest stuff.  I use a 35mm, 50mm and I'm thinking next year I'd like a 28mm & 75/90, but given the amount of time I'm looking at the back of the screen, I was wondering if the Visoflex would serve a purpose as opposed to constantly looking at the back of the camera and focussing off that. 
    • By rionda
      Hi,
      Is there really a way to distinguish between MOOSP ("15mm extension collar for TELYT 200cm") and FVOOQ ("Extension ring F, 15mm", for use with ZWTOO-ESUM), when they are unmarked?
      I'm asking because I have one of them, and it is unmarked, and I guess it could be either. You can see it in the picture below, 1st from the left. Since it was in a mix with a BOOQZ ("Extension ring B, 7mm") and a GVKOO ("Extension ring G, 30mm", not pictured), I'm going to assume that it is a FVOOQ.
      The 2nd from the left is also unmarked, but it looks (in height and threads (visoflex-to-visoflex)) very similar to the 3rd from the left, which is a BOOQZ (from the "B"). Could it be that? Any other opinion?
      The 4th from the left is completely unmarked. The male is for visoflex, but the female is too large do be either a visoflex or for the lens head of the Hektor 13.5cm 1:4,5 (the only lens head I have) or, I guess, heads of the same size. I do not know what it could be. Any idea?
      Thanks,
      Matteo

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!  
    • By LCL999
      I have a rather marvellous 400mm Telyt. It has a male 39mm O.D. thread which is bigger than the standard LTM. The normal way to connect it to an M series camera is to use a 16466 M which provides the matching female thread to a male M bayonet (23mm flange-to-flange), plus a Visoflex I or II which has M-bayonet to M-bayonet to connect to the camera and is 41mm flange-to-flange. The Visoflex houses the reflex mirror plus bits sticking out to set and trigger the mirror.
      Now that I have an SL, I don't need the Visoflex. It would be nice to replace it with a simple 41mm spacer with M-bayonets on each side. i.e a dummy Visoflex. Does such a thing exist?
      Alternatively I could replace both the Visoflex and the16466 with a 64mm spacer, 39mm female thread to male M-bayonet. Does such a thing exist?
      The third alternative is disassemble the Visoflex. I haven't tried that. If I do, what problems might I face?
×
×
  • Create New...