PDA

View Full Version : well.. i bought this camera...



miss_emma_jade
1-Aug-2010, 23:43
this is mostly just show and tell, guys n gals. I bought this 5x4 camera, and its kinda pretty, i think. does anyone know anything about these? its an acme it says (in the best American tradition) and the shutter is made by Bausch & Lomb opt. Co. and is a unicum, speeds T, B, 1,2,5,25,50, &100. f8- f128. it takes a standard 5x4 double dark slide, and folds into this sweet little leather covered box 5 1/2" x 6" x 2 1/2". ill upload some piccies, and maybe someone has one, or more information about it! http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4114/4851943191_d49d92dbb8.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4093/4851943905_1c40064cd3.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4081/4852563462_071e744799.jpg

jwaddison
1-Aug-2010, 23:56
I know nothing about old lf cameras, but want to say that this sure is an interesting looking one. The wood looks very well cared for. What is the little box on the left for I wonder?

Lachlan 717
2-Aug-2010, 00:15
What is the little box on the left for I wonder?

Is it a waist-level finder? Looks like one I have on an old 620 camera. You flip it depending on portrait/landscape.

miss_emma_jade
2-Aug-2010, 00:26
yes it is a waist level VF... has a little bit of ground glass in the top and a springy thing to flip it over for portrait.

Wade D
2-Aug-2010, 01:02
Very nice looking camera. I wish you good luck with it. Post some pictures taken with it when you can.

Bill_1856
2-Aug-2010, 01:13
Apparently, it was severaly damaged during the shipment to down under, since it would originally have been a 4x5 camera.
Other than that it's beautiful.

GPS
2-Aug-2010, 01:23
The Unicum shutter is not for taking pictures ...;-) As Jim Galli discovered and described in the forum the shutter blades are made of that time plastic and are not light tight for our films. Look at the Sun through the shutter and you will understand. And as I know the shutter times are very unreliable if at all true due to the miserable concept and construction of the shutter. Nice box otherwise, isn't it?

miss_emma_jade
2-Aug-2010, 01:45
Apparently, it was severaly damaged during the shipment to down under, since it would originally have been a 4x5 camera.
Other than that it's beautiful.

how do u mean??? its 5x4 for sure. and as for the shutter... ill take a pic n see. ive worked on shutters like this before. can only see

Steven Tribe
2-Aug-2010, 01:50
Dear Emma, this a nice example of the self casing advanced hobby cycle camera type made from around 1893 - 1914. This is a nickel plated model so most likely from the late 1890's or after. You forgot to show us your rear end - and the film/plate holders!
Acme was a Scovill (later, American Optical) product name but the only model I can find is pre the self casing era. Acme is a problem name as it was used by a number of camera manufacturers (E.g. Watson).

The waist level finder is probably very dim - but these can be improved.

miss_emma_jade
2-Aug-2010, 02:12
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4082/4852562964_9a0e6e3617.jpg

a picture of the back. my 4x5" holders fit beautifully.

GPS
2-Aug-2010, 02:13
Dear Emma, ...
You forgot to show us your rear end ...

:) Com'on Steven, this is a lady, can we keep it strictly technical...?:)

miss_emma_jade
2-Aug-2010, 02:26
lol.. back to the camera.. Ive learnt it has celluloid shutter leaves, and it may not keep time? it seems pretty good as far as time keeping, it works a lotttt better than my graflex shutter when i got that. I am a qualified watchmaker, so fixing any clockwork probs wont be a hassle. I have some 25 speed efke, and i might try a plate later and see how it goes...

Steven Tribe
2-Aug-2010, 02:37
This is a good deal more solid than the average cycle camera (when it was new) and the condition is extremely good. The leather covering has dried out so the top "skin" will be sensitive to the even minor knocks - as you can see. I have treated mine with black/dark brown boot cream which seems to help. This will also cover the small area of damage with pigment.
Looks like the original lens setup. This means that the lens may be designed to be convertible so the longer focal length of a single lens cell can utilise the extending bed facility.

GPS
2-Aug-2010, 03:45
lol.. back to the camera.. Ive learnt it has celluloid shutter leaves, and it may not keep time? it seems pretty good as far as time keeping, it works a lotttt better than my graflex shutter when i got that. I am a qualified watchmaker, so fixing any clockwork probs wont be a hassle. I have some 25 speed efke, and i might try a plate later and see how it goes...

Once I wanted to build a small RF holder camera entirely made of brass with a Unicum shutter. When I got the shutter (in "good" shape) I measured it with a Calumet shutter tester. 1s was good, the rest was all over and completely inconsistent. I took it apart, cleaned and studied. Then I understood... The construction is technically erroneous and the times depend a lot on mechanical disturbances that you can introduce just by holding or pressing the shutter parts in a certain way. I understood why these shutters were around just for a limited time. B&W on slow films could perhaps give some results with the slowest times on the shutter. Forget the 1/100 and 1/50s - they come on their own will or not. The pistons do not have a real function for these short times, only the spring but without a correct slowing device its of no real use for serious timing.
Beside the fact that the Sun shows nicely as a reddish disk with the shutter blades closed... (thanks Jim, without your warning I wouldn't have the thought to check it:) ).
There were some interesting details on the shutter, showing how the factory tried to cover the technical errors in its construction. The progress in films speeds and photography condemned this shutter (there were at least 20 other names and very similar constructions of it) - more precise types came quite soon after.

Michael Graves
2-Aug-2010, 05:37
This looks like a knockoff of the Zeiss Iconta Nettal (spelling??). I used to have one, back in the day, that shot 3 1/4 by 4 1/4. It looked a lot like this one, complete with the WL finder.

MIke Sherck
2-Aug-2010, 05:43
how do u mean??? its 5x4 for sure. and as for the shutter... ill take a pic n see. ive worked on shutters like this before. can only see

He was making a joke combining the way we call it '4x5' and most of the Commonwealth calls it '5x4', combined with the old saw about everything being backwards "down under".

Well, I laughed, anyway. Just a little bit. A teensy-weensy bit.

It helps that #1 daughter bought me season 12 of Top Gear and I've been watching that.

:)

Mike

GPS
2-Aug-2010, 05:58
This looks like a knockoff of the Zeiss Iconta Nettal (spelling??). I used to have one, back in the day, that shot 3 1/4 by 4 1/4. It looked a lot like this one, complete with the WL finder.

There were tens of cameras built like this one. It was the common construction - a box, rails on the cover, one lens, one focus scale, a simple viewfinder (to aim the camera, not to see what is on the ground glass!) and here we go. They were not meant for lens change (hence the one and only focus scale). Hundreds of thousands of these cameras were sold but from the technical point of view it was not any glory time, just a period of a mass camera cheap design. The technically most perfect part on it was the - woodwork...

Fotoguy20d
2-Aug-2010, 06:05
Very pretty. Looks very much like my Cycle Wizard B, but, most of these cycle cameras look similar. I've never photographed with mine but the unicum works very well - now I need to go look at the shutter blades and see if they're translucent.

Dan

miss_emma_jade
2-Aug-2010, 06:07
lol. lucky i'm not blonde...

actually the pics i'm expecting will hopefully be as good as my box brownie, or my vest pocket kodak. not expecting miracles. will see tommorrow i hope!

rjmeyer314
2-Aug-2010, 06:12
This type of camera is typically referred to as a Premo. The most commonly seen ones are the Pony Premos made by the Rochester Optical Company. I have one that is virtually identical to the one shown, right down to the B&L Unicum lens and shutter. Contrary to what someone said, the shutters take fine pictures (within the limits of lens quality) if they are working. The cameras weigh about 2 1/2 pounds, and are a pleasure to carry and use. The one I have has a rising and falling front and limited swings on the back by raising a pin and moving the whole sheet film back. You can store a few film holders in the back of the camera box (at least on mine), but I've forgotten how many. Probably only 2 or 3. The one I have came with a very light but serviceable wooden tripod. There's no reason not to use it if the bellows are light-tight. Oh, I forgot to mention that mine came with an additional lens that slipped on the front, giving an additional focal length. The shutter on my lens is calibrated in US numbers, not f/stops. Conversion tables can be found on the net.

miss_emma_jade
2-Aug-2010, 06:17
This looks like a knockoff of the Zeiss Iconta Nettal (spelling??). I used to have one, back in the day, that shot 3 1/4 by 4 1/4. It looked a lot like this one, complete with the WL finder.

its a bit different. i have one of those too, and its a little smaller. a little better made too i think..

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/4853335066_1b52508db4.jpg

GPS
2-Aug-2010, 06:18
...
I've never photographed with mine but the unicum works very well - ...
Dan

lol :)

GPS
2-Aug-2010, 06:21
its a bit different. i have one of those too, and its a little smaller. a little better made too i think..

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/4853335066_1b52508db4.jpg

And what you see on it is the next generation of shutters - entirely mechanical, with no pneumatic action, left for good reasons as films got higher speeds and so did lenses.

Fotoguy20d
2-Aug-2010, 06:35
This type of camera is typically referred to as a Premo. The most commonly seen ones are the Pony Premos made by the Rochester Optical Company.

I believe they are typically referred to as "Cycle" Cameras, also sometimes as "Hand & Stand". Their popularity in the 1890s conincided with that of of the bicycle in the United States and their size/weight/construction lended them to being carried on a bicycle of the day. But, you're right, there wre at least a dozen Premo models of various sizes. Later ones will have the shutters marked as "Eastman Kodak Successors to Rochester Optical". Some of the more common manufacturers seen today are (in no particular order): Seneca, Seroco (SEars RObuck CO), Conley, ROC (premos among others), Folmer & Schwing (a NY bicycle manufacturer who started with the RB Cycle Graphic, and eventually became Graflex), Gundlach, Manhattan (later merged with Gundlach), etc.

Dan

miss_emma_jade
2-Aug-2010, 06:53
And what you see on it is the next generation of shutters - entirely mechanical, with no pneumatic action, left for good reasons as films got higher speeds and so did lenses. lol... this is the most horrendous thing ever made. it works though, the BULB setting works, the TIME setting works, and the INST setting works.. now be interesting to see what takes the best pictures... when i work out how fast INST is.... I think they're probably both on a par, and i think the brass one is more likely to take pics somewhere close.. but the point i'm making is,its all relative.

GPS
2-Aug-2010, 06:59
Sure, it's the basic mechanical shutter. At least it doesn't pretend (unlike the pneumatic ones) to do what it cannot do. Its more developed cousins started the masses photography era with short timed exposures.

miss_emma_jade
2-Aug-2010, 07:21
your probably right, i know. Not expecting miricles out of either. But the experiment will be fun, and thats what its all about... Ill get some exposures tommorrow.

Steven Tribe
2-Aug-2010, 07:32
They may have been been produced in the thousands but they met a really appreciative public. The basic stability is quite good and the mahogany from Cuba(sometimes cherry) used is very good. The basic problem with these nowadays is the damaged leatherette covering which dries out. Some have solved this by removing completely and sanding and varnish the mahogany casing. They sometimes end up on e**y as "rare versions"! There are quite a few models with back movements. I have been very pleased with my long focus Poco 8x10 (or 10x8) which now has a back which allows me to mount the spring back from a studio Century - quite a contrast in weight and volume!

Chauncey Walden
2-Aug-2010, 08:05
And, Emma, those are US (Uniform Standard) stops so your 8, 16, 32, 64, 128 equals f/11, f/16, f/22, f/32, and f/45. The Unicum on my bicycle camera is quite accurate.

Peter Gomena
2-Aug-2010, 12:44
I, too have an almost identical camera, a "Ray No.1." It has the same lens and shutter as the one pictured. The shutter leaves and iris look to be made of a black, plastic-y/celluloid material. I recently used it to expose a couple of sheets of Delta 100 for about 8 seconds in heavily overcast conditions. There was no sign of fogging from light penetrating the shutter. The pictures were very sharp, and I would use the camera again or might try putting the lens on my modern 4x5. The OP's camera is a beauty, isn't it? In better condition than mine.

Peter Gomena

al olson
2-Aug-2010, 13:17
. . .
Beside the fact that the Sun shows nicely as a reddish disk with the shutter blades closed... (thanks Jim, without your warning I wouldn't have the thought to check it:) ).
. . .

However, these shutters were likely just fine with the old ortho films. Since these films were insensitive to the red side of the spectrum I would expect there to be no noticeable effect.

A slow ortho film should provide excellent results. Fortunately ortho films are still around.

Photos on ortho from a vintage camera for an olde time appearance. Add a little sepia to accentuate the look.

By the way, that is a beautiful camera. Looks to be in excellent condition. It shouldn't be to difficult to replace the leatherette.

GPS
2-Aug-2010, 13:32
Absolutely right, Al. That would be a top if they made cameras leaking light on their films... With a slow film of that era they served as they could. It was the progress in the film and lens production that killed the pneumatic shutters - for that was enough just about 7 years. 100 years after the digital tries to kill our wooden beauties...

miss_emma_jade
2-Aug-2010, 16:54
lol. Yes it has a red glow... :-) but i have some ortho 25 speed..... Cant wait to see what happens.

Fotoguy20d
2-Aug-2010, 16:57
Here's a photo of my Cycle Wizard B, taken over the weekend with a new (to me) 8x10 Eastman 2D and Turner Reich triple. Lacking film, I used a sheet of Ilford MG IV cut down to fit and processed in Ilford MG Developer. If you don't have ortho-lith film, you might want to try using paper. A bit flat tonally, but not too bad really, and probably fairly close to period film. I expose it at ASA 3.

Dan

miss_emma_jade
3-Aug-2010, 05:02
thanks guys. now heres the question!! I want to take a picture! i have 25 speed film, and maybe about a 100 shutter speed.
now for sunny 16 pics, where to i set the aperture? the settings are 8, 16, 32, 64, 128.
in an ideal world? this scale is a little strange to me.

GPS
3-Aug-2010, 05:19
As for the scale - read the post n. 29...

miss_emma_jade
3-Aug-2010, 05:40
As for the scale - read the post n. 29...

thanks.. i read it in passing at work this morning on my mobile, but couldnt find it tonight.

ur such a legend.

Steven Tribe
3-Aug-2010, 05:41
This may be a superfluous post but! Are you using the plate/film holders that came with the camera? If you are using more modern types, you may (will?) find that the gg distance may need to be adjusted to be able to make in-focus exposures.

miss_emma_jade
3-Aug-2010, 05:47
i'm using one off the pile on the book case.. hadnt thought of that.. ill adjust after i take one n have a look, i guess. none come with it, i guess maybe the ones that did were probably tin ones, so its a fair comment. thanks for the heads up.

Tracy Storer
3-Aug-2010, 10:10
Something that I've noticed on a couple camera of this vintage...(I have a Pony Premo #4 which I'm just dying to use, now where did I leave that box of 4x5 ortho?)
GROUND GLASS DISTANCE:
On my No4, the ground glass in installed "backwards", except, installed this way, the T distance is correct to the ground side. If the GG was removed and reinstalled with the ground side towards the lens, a focusing error would result.
So if you measure the "T Distance" an find it short, note the thickness of the glass and reverse/shim if necessary.

Steven Tribe
3-Aug-2010, 12:33
Tracey - this was probably done (reversing the ground glass) when the owner went over to using film instead of glass plates. The film is typically a glass plate's thickness deeper in the "film holder" so giving an extra glass plate's thickness to the ground glass focussing position could be given by this reversal.

But, of course, glass thicknesses vary and some sort of backing card/film sheaf may have been used to hold the negatives - which may account for spacers or absence of original spacers.

Or you may not have the original film holders and someone has done the calculation before you! Easier to change one GG rather than a whole set of film backs. I am doing precisely this callibration myself with replacement book style film/plate holders.

miss_emma_jade
4-Aug-2010, 08:13
well guys, an update. here is the first image taken by this camera, on efke 25. for old glass, and not real effort taken to focus, its not a bad picture, i think... :) ill be using this again!

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4116/4860364672_4a780b179a.jpg