Old cameras are still good performers!

[Robert.M]

I love old cameras, recently I found for 20€ this camera that was unknown to me, it’s a
Nagel Vollenda 70/0 produced in Stuttgart between 1930 / 1934. The principal originality of this folder is the back opening system, the hinges are disposed on the long side of the camera.
Focusing is made with a knob moving the entire lens, shutter is a Gauthier with 3 speeds (1/25 1/50 1/100) plus B & T.
The lens is a Schneider-Kreuznach Radionar 6.3/105mm, a classical triplet
[FONT=&quot]After a short lens cleaning, I decided to try this veteran…,[/FONT][FONT=&quot]loaded with Ilford Delta 100, it was enough to apply sunny f16[/FONT][FONT=&quot]!

Here's the camera

and the result of the first test

[/FONT]

 

[citizen99]

Very nice pictures from la belle France !

 

[unixrevolution]

Superb! a good photographer can get good results from older gear, and the lens and camera certainly didn't let you down.

 

[raid]

"Old Photographers are still Good Performers."

 

[lynnb]

Very nice find Robert, and lovely photos - thanks for sharing them.
(from another appreciator of old folders)

 

[Moto-Uno]

It's enough to drive me around the bend , great photos from rather rudimentary devices
and I've spent a fortune on gear and still end up with so-so photos , there's just no
justice . Peter

 

[graywolf]

It's enough to drive me around the bend , great photos from rather rudimentary devices
and I've spent a fortune on gear and still end up with so-so photos , there's just no
justice . Peter

GRIN! When you just have rudimentary gear, you learn how to overcome it. Complicated gear takes an expert to get the best out of it. In the end it is not the gear that makes the photos it is the user. If my camera is smarter than I am, how am I going to learn anything.

Back in the old days folks told me that if they had an expensive camera like mine they would get better pictures. I would tell them that if we swapped cameras, I would still get better photos than they would. They didn't like to hear that.

But it is like one day I was out canoeing, and some guy asked how I made my boat go so straight. I almost started to give him instructions when, when I suddenly realize he was out for a couple of hours in a rental canoe, Instead I said, "Well, I've been on the water 200 hours so far this year". That kind of gave him real information without insulting him.

Any real skills take thousands of hours to learn. Over the years I have spent maybe 20-30 hours trying to learn how to play a keyboard. Needless to say, I am not a musician yet.

I guess one has to learn how to use their tools without thinking about it, before one can actually start to become an artist. One can only think about so many things at once, if someone is trying to figure out how to get the focus right, and the exposure right, it is kind of hard to figure out how to get the composition right. Automatic cameras can get 70% of the things right 70% of the time. But if you leave the camera on auto during those times, then you don't really know what to do the other 30% of the time, that is when the camera is smarter than you.

The other end of having those skills if you do not stay in practice, you lose them. Oh you can get them back quicker that starting from the beginning, hundreds of hours of practice instead of thousands, plus you know, from experience, that you can do it which makes it easier. I am very out of practice, plus getting kind of old, so I know all about this first hand.

Also, a very skilled person usually knows 100's of short cuts that a newbee never even imagines exist.

By the way, I just used Peter's post as a lead in to this one, I am not saying he is not skilled.

 

[Spanik]

Had the same experience with a Korelle Reflex. When you get to see the results you get hit with how little progress we have made.

It's enough to drive me around the bend , great photos from rather rudimentary devices
and I've spent a fortune on gear and still end up with so-so photos , there's just no
justice . Peter

I'd say that old cameras just don't have a mind of their own and do what you tell them to do. With those all automatic singing and dancing ones you have to know what the camera was programmed to do and foretell what he will do the moment you push the button. Very likely it is not what you would have wanted it to do.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I have an ancient pre-war Rolleiflex Automat. Its the first version of the Automat, with UNcoated 75mm Tessar lens, made in 1938. I don't use it often, but it gives incredibly sharp photographs, and as long as I avoid backlit and other flare-prone light, the uncoated lenses don't flare; tonality is nice.

I made this portrait of my son a few yrs ago with the 1938 Rolleiflex on Tmax 400.

 

[gdmcclintock]

This picture I made with a circa 1920s Ansco 5x7 field camera and a "Zeiss Kodak" lens from the same era.

 

[Moto-Uno]

More proof of my earlier remarks , it'd be embarrassing for me to act surprised at how great many of these photos are , Çuz , I'd got myself a Welta Weltur around a year ago
( a 6x6 , which is without a doubt my least favorite format ) , uncoated lens , etc and from it I got one of my 2 or 3 favorite pictures . So , I'm now considering putting my Mamiya 7 kit up for sale with the 50,80 & 150 lens . Everything about that camera is perfection , the sorry truth of the matter is I'm not ! Peter

 

[Kent]

Indeed!

I love to shoot with older cams, because every single good frame really triggers some pride, since it was you who did the job. You know what I mean?

The same can be true for "older" digital cams as well, by the way. "Older" here means 1/10 of analogue years, though.
Just have a look at what my 10-year-old (!) daughter did with her 5-MPix-Digicam:
https://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/2016/08/23/wie-der-papa-so-die-tochter/

 

[Ko.Fe.]

To be honest with 120 film and frame of 6x9 size it is hard to get it wrong if you know what you are doing as long as lens and camera are in working order.
Even 120 film Brownie with meniscus lens and single shutter speed, aperture is good enough! 🙂

 

[oftheherd]

Indeed!

I love to shoot with older cams, because every single good frame really triggers some pride, since it was you who did the job. You know what I mean?

The same can be true for "older" digital cams as well, by the way. "Older" here means 1/10 of analogue years, though.
Just have a look at what my 10-year-old (!) daughter did with her 5-MPix-Digicam:
https://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/2016/08/23/wie-der-papa-so-die-tochter/

You need to get your daughter a better camera so she can take better pictures. 😀 😀 😀

Those are indeed nice photos.

 

[oftheherd]

Nagle afik made cameras not only for themselves, but for other brands as well. I think they made some for Sears, and certainly made some for Kodak. Also for B&B iirc.

You have some nice photos with that old Nagle. Thanks for sharing.

 

[charjohncarter]

To be honest with 120 film and frame of 6x9 size it is hard to get it wrong if you know what you are doing as long as lens and camera are in working order.
Even 120 film Brownie with meniscus lens and single shutter speed, aperture is good enough! 🙂

This camera (Mamiya Super 23) isn't all that old but it is 6x9:

TMY-2 Rodinal 1+50 by John Carter, on Flickr

And a Brownie Hawkeye Flash (this is with the portrait attachment):

AristaEDUultra100 HC-110h by John Carter, on Flickr

 

[Dirk]

Indeed!

I love to shoot with older cams, because every single good frame really triggers some pride, since it was you who did the job. You know what I mean?

The same can be true for "older" digital cams as well, by the way. "Older" here means 1/10 of analogue years, though.
Just have a look at what my 10-year-old (!) daughter did with her 5-MPix-Digicam:
https://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/2016/08/23/wie-der-papa-so-die-tochter/

She is very talented. Did you teach her on lighting, composition, etc.?

 

[MikeMGB]

Beautiful photographs! I really need to run some 120 through some of my old folders.

 

[sevo]

Nagle afik made cameras not only for themselves, but for other brands as well. I think they made some for Sears, and certainly made some for Kodak.

Nagel were only around for four years, 1928 to 1932, when they were sold to Kodak - in its independent founding years they mostly made semi-professional pocket size plate cameras, it was not until they became part of Kodak that they shifted focus to 35mm and 120. Sears probably did not re-brand the Nagel Recomar, but later (Kodak) cameras.

 

[steveyork]

I've been stunned recently how well circa 50's Kiev rangefinders perform, as well as early Contax. Incredible 'bang for the buck.'