Ray, you’ve been killing it recently, keep up the great work. Curtis, welcome back! Leighton, I can’t bring myself to like your spider. I hate those things.
I keep learning things I never knew. While cleaning the 1937 8.5cm f4.5 Apotar and shutter on an original Jsolette I learned that the Tessar lens formula patent ran out in 1902. Almost every lens after that was a variation on the 4 element in 3 groups Tessar lens formula (sometimes 4 in 4). In seems every lens that ends in "ar" up to the mid 1940s or beyond is actually a Tessar formula lens. This camera was worked on by a brute, but remarkably the camera is so well constructed that I'll be able to put it right. Whoever had it before me got so frustrated in not being able to remove the top plate that they drilled two eighth of an inch holes in it to clean the viewfinder. Even chipping one of the view finder lenses. I plan on mixing epoxy with lamp black - tape some wax paper over the holes, and let gravity do it's thing. It doesn't need to be light tight, but I don't want dust getting in since I cleaned it. Which didn't require removal of the top plate. Here are the before and after lens cleaning + plus the drill damage.
Pre-cleaning
Post cleaning - required unmounting the lens & checking collimation afterwards. 55mm f3.5 ai micro from here on
Drill damage
Unlike other Isolettes - the original has the film moving - from the back - right to left. The model II goes the opposite direction. I may add a cold shoe on the unused right flat of the top plate for my tiny add on rflx light meter or the waist level finder. Cement and screws would be permanent, but will likely use alien tape which won't harm the top. And something new next post.
Meanwhile the most beaten up 1920s (I'm guessing 1929 or 1930) Voightlander 6x9 Bessa turned up with a lovely hand written note hoping I would love it as much as they had. It was so cheap that I had planned to redo the leatherette in 1960's navy blue woven nylon Oldsmobile seat cover cloth from a bolt I have been carting around since a neighbor gave it to me as a kid. However, everything works great on the camera, and the missing leathers, glue and rust are growing on me. All 55mm f3.5 ai micro
Voightlander Voigtar 10.5cm f4.5 Lens - missing it's name ring
All in Columbia Gorge. The first 2 are Coyote Wall.
These were a test of the 135/3.5 Q that Curtis sent me. Camera was Z6. I was curious if image quality of the old lens would hold up. It’s definitely sharp. The contrast is a bit lower than modern multicoated optics, but easily corrected in post.
According to the serial number list on the photosynthesis website, http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html, the lens should be about 52 years old. So I guess both lens and photographer are certifiably old codgers. I turned 75 two weeks ago today, and I think the lens is doing better than I am. I know it will certainly outlast me.
All in Columbia Gorge. The first 2 are Coyote Wall.
These were a test of the 135/3.5 Q that Curtis sent me. Camera was Z6. I was curious if image quality of the old lens would hold up. It’s definitely sharp. The contrast is a bit lower than modern multicoated optics, but easily corrected in post.
According to the serial number list on the photosynthesis website, http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html, the lens should be about 52 years old. So I guess both lens and photographer are certifiably old codgers. I turned 75 two weeks ago today, and I think the lens is doing better than I am. I know it will certainly outlast me....Show more →
This is great, Ken. I like my 135/3.5Q, more than my 135/2.8 AIS. Heavier for sure, but it has yet to take an image I didn't like.
Points at Matt -> Spiders and their webs are cool.
Points at Regina -> Catepillars of any sort are not cool. Can't stand the things. So glad they change into something beautiful.
James Markus wrote:
Meanwhile the most beaten up 1920s (I'm guessing 1929 or 1930) Voightlander 6x9 Bessa turned up with a lovely hand written note hoping I would love it as much as they had. It was so cheap that I had planned to redo the leatherette in 1960's navy blue woven nylon Oldsmobile seat cover cloth from a bolt I have been carting around since a neighbor gave it to me as a kid. However, everything works great on the camera, and the missing leathers, glue and rust are growing on me. All 55mm f3.5 ai micro
SiMuMe wrote:
Points at Matt -> Spiders and their webs are cool.
Points at Regina -> Catepillars of any sort are not cool. Can't stand the things. So glad they change into something beautiful.
I souped a roll of Technical Pan 25 last night that I found while cleaning the darkroom awhile back, and it turned out to be from 1998. That would make it the Nikon F3HP with the 35-105mm ais lens. I purchased expired Kodak chemistry off ebay - none of which looked bad. I was surprised at the highlight density (super dense), but I think I was using a Sunpak flash. Either that or I over developed, the film crystals grew in the cassette over the last 26 years, or it reacted with the C-41 120mm roll I had in the tank with 35mm reel. (I thought it was a 120 roll of tech pan) These are 6 of my 7 kids (last wasn't born yet) in the family portrait tree on the edge of Kehl lake.
Beautiful family James and lovely image. These are definitely treasures to keep. It appears from the age range of you kids that you kept your wife very busy for a few years. The oldest looks about ten and the youngest about three... plus a baby. You may be familiar with the movie called Cheaper by the Dozen that came out in 1950. You lived it... with a slightly smaller herd. Well done!
Almost looks like an indoor shot. Great work getting all three in the focus plane.
---------------------------------------------
AdaptedLenses wrote:
Ray, you’ve been killing it recently, keep up the great work. Curtis, welcome back! Leighton, I can’t bring myself to like your spider. I hate those things.
Thanks Matt! Work has afforded a little bit of the luxury of time lately coinciding with decent light.
---------------------------------------------
James Markus wrote:
Meanwhile the most beaten up 1920s (I'm guessing 1929 or 1930) Voightlander 6x9 Bessa turned up with a lovely hand written note hoping I would love it as much as they had. It was so cheap that I had planned to redo the leatherette in 1960's navy blue woven nylon Oldsmobile seat cover cloth from a bolt I have been carting around since a neighbor gave it to me as a kid. However, everything works great on the camera, and the missing leathers, glue and rust are growing on me. All 55mm f3.5 ai micro
All in Columbia Gorge. The first 2 are Coyote Wall.
These were a test of the 135/3.5 Q that Curtis sent me. Camera was Z6. I was curious if image quality of the old lens would hold up. It’s definitely sharp. The contrast is a bit lower than modern multicoated optics, but easily corrected in post.
According to the serial number list on the photosynthesis website, http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html, the lens should be about 52 years old. So I guess both lens and photographer are certifiably old codgers. I turned 75 two weeks ago today, and I think the lens is doing better than I am. I know it will certainly outlast me....Show more →
That is quite a sloped wall, the tipped vertical faces are throwing me off.
---------------------------------------------
James Markus wrote:
I souped a roll of Technical Pan 25 last night that I found while cleaning the darkroom awhile back, and it turned out to be from 1998. That would make it the Nikon F3HP with the 35-105mm ais lens. I purchased expired Kodak chemistry off ebay - none of which looked bad. I was surprised at the highlight density (super dense), but I think I was using a Sunpak flash. Either that or I over developed, the film crystals grew in the cassette over the last 26 years, or it reacted with the C-41 120mm roll I had in the tank with 35mm reel. (I thought it was a 120 roll of tech pan) These are 6 of my 7 kids (last wasn't born yet) in the family portrait tree on the edge of Kehl lake.
SiMuMe wrote:
Still want to know the secret to getting close to spiders/web. Notice most of my spider webs have no spiders. If there is one, it's a tiny thing.
Move slowly and deliberately, use a longer lens (this one was 120mm full frame equivalent FL), and utilize post processing crop. In my 45 minute walk the morning of this shot, this was the only web with the owner.
---------------------------------------------
leighton w wrote:
Two things I like the most about this image.
First, how the light is just touching the top of the trees. And secondly, the composition, the two separate clumps of trees acting as bookends, and for a bonus, the deer. Well seen.
Thanks Leighton. This shot was just to the left of the following pano.
This is a re-post with the Nikkor 135 F2.8 Q, non AI lens. Lens S/N is 298204 which dates it in the 1969 to 1973 group.
This is Palmer (first name) from the Navajo Nation in Arizona. I took this last year, 2023, at the Arizona State Fair w hen i was only 90 years old. Iam happy with the results from this Q lens.
Harry Palmer
Curtis I am familiar with the "Cheaper by the Dozen" franchise, but the 1968 Henry Fonda & Lucille Ball "Yours, Mine, and Ours" is more autobiographical - IMO. We both were widowed on opposite sides of the planet, and made the improbable choice to combine our two broken families into one. Thank God it worked!
CGrindahl wrote:
Beautiful family James and lovely image. These are definitely treasures to keep. It appears from the age range of you kids that you kept your wife very busy for a few years. The oldest looks about ten and the youngest about three... plus a baby. You may be familiar with the movie called Cheaper by the Dozen that came out in 1950. You lived it... with a slightly smaller herd. Well done!
Harry, I was curious about the 600mm ais - any owl photos yet?
Kingfishphoto wrote:
This is a re-post with the Nikkor 135 F2.8 Q, non AI lens. Lens S/N is 298204 which dates it in the 1969 to 1973 group.
This is Palmer (first name) from the Navajo Nation in Arizona. I took this last year, 2023, at the Arizona State Fair w hen i was only 90 years old. Iam happy with the results from this Q lens.
Harry Palmer
