Show yours!

[ragc]

Voigtlander Brilliant, First Export (English) Version? 1:7.7 Voigtar 75mm, c. 1932


Voigtlander Brilliant Export (English) Model, c.1933?


Voigtlander Brillant (German model) 1:9 Voigtar 75mm, c. 1933


Voigtlander Brilliant Export (English) 1:6.3 Voigtar 75mm, c. 1936?


Ciro-Flex (model unkn.), Made in USA c. 1949? 1:3.5 85mm Wollensak Velostigmat


Graflex 22, Model 200, Graftar 1:3.5 85mm, c. 1954, made in USA from Ciro-Flex dies


Rolleicord II (1936) 1:3.5 75mm Carl Zeiss Jena Triotar


Rolleicord IIb (1938) 1:3.5 75mm Carl Zeiss Jena Triotar


Rolleicord V (1954) 1:3.5 Scneider-Krausnach Xenar


Rolleicord Vb (1962) 1:3.5 75mm Schneider-Krausnach Xenar


Now post yours, or I'll post the rest of the TLRs and start the SLRs and MF SLRs!

[kb244]

okie dokie, two more guys recently added to collection. (like in the last 2 days)

Yashica Mat-124G


Sample - Kodak Verichrome Pan


Original Rolleiflex - #36231

Had to clean the shutters up and what not last night, and took some shots with it today, the hood assembly kind of messed up, hopefully I can find another one even if its a little beat so as long as it pops open and closes, here what the hood assembly looks like before I decided to prop it up with black masking tape.


Samples - Kodak Verichrome Pan

Rest can be seen at http://www.karlblessing.com/shares/rolleiflex/

I also have this guy, but I have yet to finish the roll inside of it.
Seagull SA-85


Then theres also this.

(ended up selling the C33, but I still got the lens and a Mamiya C3 which is nearly identical except no auto-cocking mechanism)

Sample- Kodak T400CN

[ragc]

I've been following your work with the Rollei. Glad to see that the focus is fixed and the lens as sharp as predicted. I believe any Rolleiflex or Rolleicord hood will fit, with the possible exception of the interchangeable ones of the later 'Flexes and the 'Cord Vb.

I am posting a couple more of the terrible photos of my TLRs. They come from an old website I had, which I am starting to re-vamp, and they are really bad! Later I will take fresh ones of the cameras I've acquired since.


Meopta Flexaret Va (1958-1962) 1:3.5 80mm Belar


Yashica 635 c. 1962? 1:3.5 80mm Yashikor


Salyut-S (Made in USSR-Ukraine) c. 1980? 1:2.8 90mm Vega-12B

[Ole]

What's with the humongous pictures?

My screen isn't wide enough to see more than a little bit at a time, so the pictures are as good as worthless.

Could everyone please be so kind as to resize their pictures to no more than 640 pixels wide? That way they'll fit on all screens...

[kb244]

What's with the humongous pictures?

My screen isn't wide enough to see more than a little bit at a time, so the pictures are as good as worthless.

Could everyone please be so kind as to resize their pictures to no more than 640 pixels wide? That way they'll fit on all screens...

only 640 wide? I thought everyone was using 1024x768 minimum for over a decade now....

[Ole]

only 640 wide? I thought everyone was using 1024x768 minimum for over a decade now....

Yes, my screen is wider. But it's recommended to leave a little space for scrollbars, side panel and suchlike. On a 1024x768 screen a 640 pixel wide image is over 60% of the full width, which should be enough.

Yours are not the worst - but how many here use a 2500 wide screen? There's a picture here that's 2048 pixels wide. How many can even fit all of in on the screen?

[kb244]

Yes, my screen is wider. But it's recommended to leave a little space for scrollbars, side panel and suchlike. On a 1024x768 screen a 640 pixel wide image is over 60% of the full width, which should be enough.

Yours are not the worst - but how many here use a 2500 wide screen? There's a picture here that's 2048 pixels wide. How many can even fit all of in on the screen?

No offense to anyone, but I believe the culprit may be someone who had little luck with a digital camera, and just uploads whatever the smallest is off their camera straight to the web without croping, resizing, or general touchups. (however the odd dimensions rules that out)

[firecracker]

No offense to anyone, but I believe the culprit may be someone who had little luck with a digital camera, and just uploads whatever the smallest is off their camera straight to the web without croping, resizing, or general touchups. (however the odd dimensions rules that out)

I get that on some email from my old friends sometimes. That's a pain.

Anyway, here's mine: Kodak Retinette 1a. I don't know too much about this camera, but it's a guess-focusing 35mm film camera from the 60's with F22 to F2.8 apertures and 1/250 to 1/30, and B shutter speeds. The lens is a 45mm F2.8 Schneider Reomar. It's a good P&S camera with 100 ASA film.

I resized my digi photo to 800 pixels wide, which I think is the smallest size to be able to read some of the letters on the camera.

[kb244]

I get that on some email from my old friends sometimes. That's a pain.

Anyway, here's mine: Kodak Retinette 1a. I don't know too much about this camera, but it's a guess-focusing 35mm film camera from the 60's with F22 to F2.8 apertures and 1/250 to 1/30, and B shutter speeds. The lens is a 45mm F2.8 Schneider Reomar. It's a good P&S camera with 100 ASA film.

I resized my digi photo to 800 pixels wide, which I think is the smallest size to be able to read some of the letters on the camera.

The Guess focus is often called scale focusing (shows the feets or meters) or zone focusing (I guess zones being flower, people, group, moutain, lol)

And speaking of the Retina 1A, thats one of the exact cameras we got up for auction this week.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=120054776943

Seemed like a nifty kodak, however didn't have those interchangeable lens (front elements) that the newer retinas had I noticed. (or was that one of the SLR style ones like a contaflex design)

[kb244]

Oh by the way on your Ia http://www.photoethnography.com/Clas...html~mainFrame scroll down a little bit you'll see some info, or at the very least it's production date.