View Full Version : Two down one to go . . .
I've had a British made Rolleicord an MPP Microcord for a few years now, the Xpres lens is superb, sharpest of all my TLR cameras lenses.
Now I've bought a British made Linhof, a MPP MifroTechincal Mk111, well more accurately almost 2, one complete the other a parts camera.
Off topic and currently out of my price range is a Reid III, the British made Leice. about 40 yeras ago crates of part built camera were found and finished I should have bought one then, they were incredibly cheap, a TTH Cooke lens that out-performedthe then current Summicron :D
Ian
Had to google these. Looks like they were from the era when the DRP were voided and small companies all over the world sprang to action. There is a Reid 50mm lens in LTM currently listed on ebay. Price is still reasonable, but bidding is active.
Kent in SD
If you want a British Leica, why not go with the Periflex? :p
I have several. One of them almost works.
Corfield were not far from where I live, I met Sir Kenneth Corfield a few times at trade shows when he was involved in Gandolfi and making his achiterural camera.
Ian
Drew Bedo
4-Sep-2016, 07:07
This thread is mostly unintelligible to me here in Houston,Texas. I do not think that the problem has anything to do with my accent though.
Will someone please put this discussion into historical and social context?
Cheers
:D
+1 for me in Luther, Oklahoma.
This thread is mostly unintelligible to me here in Houston,Texas. I do not think that the problem has anything to do with my accent though.
Will someone please put this discussion into historical and social context?
Cheers
This thread is mostly unintelligible to me here in Houston,Texas. I do not think that the problem has anything to do with my accent though.
Will someone please put this discussion into historical and social context?
Cheers
After WWII the Allies sent technicians etc into German factories as part of war reparations to learn trade secrets etc. The British Government wanted to rebuild the UK camera industry and so helped MPP who had access to the Linhof and Rollei factories and tooling, Taylor, Taylor, Hobson (Cooke) had access to the Leica plant.
The consequence was MPP's Microcord was a essentially a Rolleicord clone, the MicroTechnical a Linhof Techika clone (with minor differences). The Reid III camera was made by a subsidiary company set up by TTH and was slightly better than the comparative Leica as were the lenses, Leitz in fact later had some lenses made by TTH.
This was at a time when Britain had draconian Import restrictions after the end of WWII, you needed a special license to import cameras from Germany and even the US. MPP designed a MicroPress camera based on the MicroTechical but with a Wray Focal Plane shutter, however their version never went into production, instead a MicroPress based on a Speed Graphic went on sale instead. Essentially this was a way of getting round import restrictions, parts could be imported, there's still a great deal of secrecy about the MPP/Graflex deal.
So a British MicroPress uses a Graflex front standard and track bed. lens boards etc, a Graflex Focal Plane shutter, probably a Graflex made casing but with an internal top rangefinder (way before Graflex). The back and base for the rails are British made as are the rack, and pinion. The one I examined carefully had the Graflex teeth ground off the track-bed and two new sets attached.
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp10.jpg
You can see more details here (http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/mpp-micropress.htm), I did check parts to see how close they were between the MicroPress and a Pacemaker Speed Graphic. Some threads had been changed from US to British.
Ian
interneg
4-Sep-2016, 08:03
Taylor, Taylor, Hobson (Cooke) had access to the Leica plant.
Wasn't the 50/1.5 Summarit (and the Xenon?) a TTH design?
What I usually heard is that Xenon has the Zeiss Tessar lens design, from Schneider Optics.
Cheers,
interneg
4-Sep-2016, 09:12
What I usually heard is that Xenon has the Zeiss Tessar lens design, from Schneider Optics.
Cheers,
Not with a 7 element/ 5 group design - subsequent googling suggests that both are TTH designs - http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Xenon_f%3D_5_cm_1:1.5 - not totally surprising as TTH/ Cooke were massively innovative & influential in mid-20th century optics - their lenses were on the 3-strip technicolor cameras, and the SII/SIII speed panchros are still very desirable lenses in the cinema world today.
What I usually heard is that Xenon has the Zeiss Tessar lens design, from Schneider Optics.
Cheers,
You're muddling the Xenon with the Xenar which is a Tessar type design. The Leitz Xenon was designed by Horace Lee of TT&H.
Ian
Nop.
The document you've linked above has a link also to the article by Marco Cavina explaining the license acquired from Schneider in 1936 :
... in questo contesto, nonostante Max Berek avesse già impostato calcoli indipendenti su un Gauss f/1,5 di questo tipo, la Leitz si vide obbligata a scendere a patti con la Schneider di Bad Kreuznack, a sua volta titolare per conto della T,T & H di tali tormentati brevetti sul mercato europeo, ed acquisì l'usufrutto su licenza di un 50mm f/1,5 basato su tale progetto che venne commercializzato con la denominazione tipicamente Schneider di Xenon (nome che nella tassonomia della casa di Bad Kreuznach identifica una famiglia di ottiche Gauss luminose).
Il Leitz Xenon, dopo alcuni esemplari di prova assemblati nel 1936, entrò a regime nel 1936; le patenti di riferimento sono il brevetto inglese n° 373.950 ed americano 2.019.985 e vertono sostanzialmente, come detto, sull'impiego di due lenti spaziate ad aria nella parte posteriore del Gauss; tali brevetti erano ancora in vigore anche ai tempi dell'introduzione del Summarit, nel 1949, obbligando la Casa ad indicarne gli estremi anche sui primi esemplari di questo nuovo obiettivo, sostanzialmente identico allo Xenon ma finalmente dotato di trattamento antiriflessi, una caratteristica della quale il precedente modello, con 10 passaggi ad aria, avrebbe avuto un disperato bisogno per migliorare il contrasto e combattere il flare che lo affliggeva.
I'm expressing my remarks only about the name Xenon, not the design itself - which has developed from the early versions,
Cheers,
Renato
You're muddling the Xenon with the Xenar which is a Tessar type design. The Leitz Xenon was designed by Horace Lee of TT&H.
Ian
Yes Ian, seems I did, Xenon being a Gauss design and a Xenar a Tessar-type design, sorry for the inconvenience.
J. Patric Dahlen
4-Sep-2016, 22:48
I've had a British made Rolleicord an MPP Microcord for a few years now, the Xpres lens is superb, sharpest of all my TLR cameras lenses.
The Xpres is excellent. I regret selling my Ensign Selfix 6x9 with its uncoated Xpres. Front cell focusing, but it was sharper than the Ikontas' Tessar from that period. Built like a tank and with built-in mask for 6x6.
Now I've bought a British made Linhof, a MPP MifroTechincal Mk111, well more accurately almost 2, one complete the other a parts camera.
Very nice! Do you plan to use a british lens on it? :)
J. Patric Dahlen
4-Sep-2016, 22:55
You're muddling the Xenon with the Xenar which is a Tessar type design. The Leitz Xenon was designed by Horace Lee of TT&H.
To complicate it: The S-Xenar 50/2,8 was made under the Xenon name for the Kodak Retina for a couple of years before the war. It was a Tessar-type lens with the front element split in two. A very good lens.
Well the second MPP (after my Microcord) a MkIII MicroTechnical arrived just over two weeks ago, just as I was leaving for a trip to almost tropical BC. Canada. I actually recieved one complete camera missing a gg screen and the wire finder and most of a second, and the price was low . . . . . . . . .
The camera I'll restore just needs recovering to look good, functionally it's excellent. I needed to touch base here as many of us in the UK recommend MPP MicroTechnical cameras as starter LF cameras without really knowing why, except cheap and easy to find.
I've handled later MPP's like MkVII & MkVIII's. dim original focus screens and not been impressed, so checking out my MkIII has been a real eye opener. It's an amazing camera, it 's triple extesion 40+cm, loads of front tilt - the bed drops to two positions, plenty of rise/fall, front shift. It's a Linhof in British clothing. This is before restoration.
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-01.jpg
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-02.jpg
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-03.jpg
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-04.jpg
see next post
Next.
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-05.jpg
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-06.jpg
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-07.jpg
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-08.jpg
Rest to follow:
Finally
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-09.jpg
http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography/cameras/images/mpp-mkIII-10.jpg
I have all the missing range-finder and parts, also new semi silvered range finder mirror if needed. The camera only needs a cosmetic restortaion, the bellows are fine although I have spare set, but prefer to sort the original out.
THis is not the first time I've bought someone elses restoration project that's stalled, yet again I'm on course to restore the parts camera(s) as well.
Ian
The British Government wanted to rebuild the UK camera industry and so helped MPP...
...
The Reid III camera was made by a subsidiary company set up by TTH
MPP ???
TTH ???
Ian...
One of the cardinal rules of conveying information to a general audience is to avoid acronyms.
If they cannot be avoided, they should be expanded the first time they're used.
Just trying to help. It appears I'm not the only one with this issue.
- Leigh
MPP ???
TTH ???
Ian...
One of the cardinal rules of conveying information to a general audience is to avoid acronyms.
If they cannot be avoided, they should be expanded the first time they're used.
Just trying to help. It appears I'm not the only one with this issue.
- Leigh
Easy Leigh, it takes three for a Cooke triplet made by TT&H.
MPP is Micro Precision Products owned by Celestion of HiFi speaker fame.
Ian
MPP
I've handled later MPP's like MkVII & MkVIII's. dim original focus screens and not been impressed, so checking out my MkIII has been a real eye opener. It's an amazing camera, it 's triple extesion 40+cm, loads of front tilt - the bed drops to two positions, plenty of rise/fall, front shift. It's a Linhof in British clothing. This is before restoration.
Very interesting. I've stumbled on a couple of MPP cameras in antique shops but overpriced so I didn't spend much time looking. I got the idea from somewhere (maybe the MPP enthusiast webpage) that later models were the ones to look for, though I forget why. That Mk III looks great.
By the way, I have noticed the odd mention of some fellows Taylor, Taylor and Hobson... admittedly they sound like a group of undertakers, or possibly fine hat makers but maybe they made some decent stuff back in the day. Some bloke called Cooke has cropped up here a few times on this site too. Possibly our US cousins have no interest in such obscure antiquated British junk and wouldn't mind selling some back at bargain basement prices should they find any ;)
I didn't know MPP were connected to Celestion, very interesting.
Peter, the register of the backs on early MPP MicroTechnicals is non standard 5.08mm (0.200'') instead of the International standard 4.85 -4.90mm. The difference is so small that it's highly unlikely to affect sharpness using standard film holders, however if critical the options are use older MPP film holders of the same register (I'Have plenty) or correct the register which would be very easy.
Most MicroTechnicals pre the MkVII & MkVIII look in poor condition, usually worse than the reality of their overall mechanical condition, this is due to wear or deterioration of the original leather covering, later cameras used synthetic covering. That's certainly the case with this MkIII.
Prices MPP cameras sell for in the UK have risen quite significantly in the past few years, particularly compared to other LF cameras, it's rare to find bargains these days but even 2-3 years ago you could find a complete outfit - camera, 2 or 3 lenses, film holders, all in acase for around £200 ($340).
At £75 this MkIII with a second parts camera was a bargain not to be missed, I could get my money back selling just the parts if I don't decide to rebuild the second camera, which is missing the back. I'll recover the main camera.
I think the MPP MicroTechnical MkIII is a very underrated camera, it's an extremely versatile technical camera on a par with the Linhofs it's derived from.
Ian
The camera I'll restore just needs recovering to look good, functionally it's excellent. I needed to touch base here as many of us in the UK recommend MPP MicroTechnical cameras as starter LF cameras without really knowing why, except cheap and easy to find.
i wish these puppies would stray across the pond, i have only heard of them never seen one. that is a lovely camera !
Luckily I have a 135mm f4.7 Xenar bought on this forum or APUG and it's the main lens the MkIII was sold with. This camera has the sacle for a 135mm but the spare hase one for a 135mm, I may get duplicates engraved.
Ian
Mark Sampson
21-Sep-2016, 17:19
It's probable that MPP cameras were never sold in the USA (I'm assuming they weren't) because here you could buy a Graflex or Linhof. Market protection can work both ways, no?
David Lindquist
21-Sep-2016, 18:43
I dug into my archive of old Popular Photography buying guides and in some early 1960's issues found listings for both a Mark VI and a Mark VII Micro-Technical camera, 4X5. And back in 1975 I went to an Ansel Adams workshop at Yosemite. Arnold Newman was one of the instructors, I'm pretty sure he was using an MPP, don't know what "Mark".
David
It's probable that MPP cameras were never sold in the USA (I'm assuming they weren't) because here you could buy a Graflex or Linhof. Market protection can work both ways, no?
MPP started making cameras at a time of severe import restrictions into the UK, Graflex and Linhof couldn't be imported without a speciaal licence so they had a captive market. They were exported to the US probably only in very small quantities but sold under the importers name - Lloyd. This was common practice Thornton Pickard shutters were sold as Burke & James.
Basil Skinner's MPP book is sketchy about the Lloyd link, cameras do exist though, but then all sources deny the MPP/Graflex link where MPP were essentially selling Speed Graphics as MicroPress cameras somehow getting around the import restrictions. Parts could be imported without a licence. Skinner claims MPP copied the Speed Graphic but having examined a MicroPress it's blatantly ovious many of the parts were made by Graflex themselves.
MPP were quite a small companyand the last MkIII MicroTechnical camera serial number is quite low 2260, mine's 1040.
Ian
Peter, the register of the backs on early MPP MicroTechnicals is non standard 5.08mm (0.200'') instead of the International standard 4.85 -4.90mm. The difference is so small that it's highly unlikely to affect sharpness using standard film holders, however if critical the options are use older MPP film holders of the same register (I'Have plenty) or correct the register which would be very easy.
Most MicroTechnicals pre the MkVII & MkVIII look in poor condition, usually worse than the reality of their overall mechanical condition, this is due to wear or deterioration of the original leather covering, later cameras used synthetic covering. That's certainly the case with this MkIII.
Prices MPP cameras sell for in the UK have risen quite significantly in the past few years, particularly compared to other LF cameras, it's rare to find bargains these days but even 2-3 years ago you could find a complete outfit - camera, 2 or 3 lenses, film holders, all in acase for around £200 ($340).
At £75 this MkIII with a second parts camera was a bargain not to be missed, I could get my money back selling just the parts if I don't decide to rebuild the second camera, which is missing the back. I'll recover the main camera.
I think the MPP MicroTechnical MkIII is a very underrated camera, it's an extremely versatile technical camera on a par with the Linhofs it's derived from.
Ian
Thanks Ian, this is exactly the sort of information I wanted to know about before thinking about getting an MPP. I have a feeling I have a box with some MPP holders somewhere too...from a job lot of stuff I bought years ago on eBay. It was probably a few years ago that I saw an MPP camera for sale, but the antique seller in question is the sort of fellow who often has something worth looking at, but at prices that are invariably prohibitive.
There's two on eBay at quite reasonable prices, both I think MkVI, however the better one is missing the fitting for the strap and the other needs minor bellows repair, neither has the focus hood something really needed with no fresnel.
I looked and my spare parts body is missing one strap fitting, I do have a spare focus hood though, and a good st of bellows. At the moment I'm thinking of possible restoration though.
Ian
barnacle
22-Sep-2016, 12:04
Just to be awkward - I have an MPP press camera :)
It's awfully Speed Graphic-ish.
Paid a couple of hundred quid for it in a junk, er, antique shop maybe thirty years ago on no knowledge whatsoever. Probably got ripped off, but I don't think it owes me anything...
I only have a couple of gripes: it's *bloody* heavy (the thing is built like a tank) and there's no forward tilt without dropping the base - and the standard lens wants to sit over the bend in the track.
Neil
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.