jdos2
Well-known
The Voigtlander Prominent
Designed by committee.
I arrived at the book store where my dealer likes to work. Inconspicuously we made the deal, him sipping at his mug, me pulling at my shot of espresso like the addict I’ve become…
Papers signed and passed, odd shaped leather containers pushed across the table, and I walk out with my latest fix.
The Voigtlander Prominent was made right smack dab in the middle of the heyday of the rangefinder era- the mid 50’s. It’s styling reflects that, as does the quality of workmanship. It’s a very finely detailed camera, substantial yet small. Very dense. It doesn’t feel cheap.
My dealer didn’t have the famous Nokton lens (50mm f/1.5), so I’m not going to review that until I get it. I’ll include separate reviews of the lenses as I test them, so here will be a simple overview of them, and initial impressions (really where I am at with the camera, anyway).
First impressions are the typical “levers and buttons,” of the typical camera. No glance is needed at the manual except to identify the film wind-on interlock button; all controls are pretty obvious.
The 50mm f/2 (“Ultron”) lens mounts on the front flange of the shutter, in a twist bayonet mount, with the button lock on the bottom. No surprises there.
The shutter is a common Synchro-Compur shutter, 10 speed model (B-1/500, old sequence) on a focusing mount. The self timer is on the same lever as the shutter cocking action, and the user manual instructs the operator to not use the “B” setting or 1/500th in concert with the self timer. There is an additional shutter behind the main shutter that works as a light trap in case the primary shutter doesn’t close all the way or leaks a bit of light. It opens as the shutter plunger is pressed and doesn’t noticeably affect any operation of the camera.
The lenses all mount in front of the shutter on either the front of the shutter itself (as in the 50mm’s) or to the body with the lens focused by the hole in the shutter pressing on a focusing ring on the mounted lenses. It’s “different,” and as I think about it, I wonder how lenses had to be optimized, particularly the shorter ones for being so far ahead of the focal plane. More research I need to perform, I guess. The back of all lenses is literally a little tube that fits into the hole of the shutter.
Focusing is done by moving the shutter closer and farther from the film plane, and the operator does this by turning the celebrated focusing knob on the left side of the camera, surrounding the rewind key. It’s a point that is often made about the camera- it’s an odd arrangement. Focusing adjustments are conferred to the operator through a coincident rangefinder familiar to all rangefinder aficionados; the camera is a left eye preferred, and the rangefinder spot is not razor-edge, nor terribly bright. It is NOT compensated for any parallax, one uses the “Turnit” finder for that (and that’s a WONDERFUL finder)
Winding is done by knob (or a lever in some models; I’ve the 1b, not a lever) on the right hand side which performs the double duty of advancing the film and cocking the shutter, something that can be done by hand if the operator chooses. At 1/500, it’s actually recommended that the operator do so to make winding on easier, and I’d guess, to reduce stress on the lens cocking mechanism—a cam that literally pushes the same cocking lever the way the operator would.
Film is loaded in an unsurprising way, via back door and typical Voigtlander locking mechanism. The rewind key lifts to help in loading the cassette, the take-up reel is slotted along its entire length to allow loading of even uncut films; the wind knob lifts to allow the user to more easily reset the film counter, a conical ring under the wind knob, and one of the more attractively styled pieces of the camera. Set the film to “F”, wind and shoot twice, and the camera is set to go.
I’ve described the operations above in piecemeal, but that’s sort of how the camera works until one gets used to the flow, just like any other. The finder is a bit dim (no dimmer than my G2, similar to my Kiev’s) and the finder baselength is less than I usually prefer, but it does work fine with the lenses I have (the 35, 50 f/2, and 100 f/4.5), focusing them just fine (THAT’S ANOTHER WRITEUP). Compose the 35mm and 100mm through the brilliantly thought out "Turnit" finder. Shutter speed is set on the shutter on the front of the body, and the lenses besides the 50mm that use the body mount make it harder to reach the shutter adjustment. It’s an obvious example of “what next” engineering, as if the problem of shutter speed adjustment had only been partially thought through. The shutter is typical Compur- not too loud, not too quiet. Probably a bit louder as an M3 of the same era, but I’ll have to meter it to be sure. The slow speeds make more noise, as the shutter mechanism is right out front, and the timers make their not-unpleasing noise in the open. 1/500 and the associated booster spring make a louder click than 1/250. Winding is smooth, if not fast.
I wanted to talk a bit about the camera’s notoriety as a horrible tool from the standpoint of ergonomics and utility. The camera is a left eyed dim/short based rangefinder focused with a dial on one hand while the other takes the picture and winds. The picture I’d like to convey is that of a camera that immediately needs two hands with which to work, and that’s how it feels comfortable. My first response to picking up the camera every time is to reach for the lens- as it to focus. That’s wrong on this camera obviously, and reminding myself to move my hand to the left side of the camera is an unnatural action, but not one that isn’t easily un-learned.
I found, though, that I do like the camera. It’s easier to steady with both hands as solidly holding it as necessary to take the pictures. There is no motion on pressing the shutter- none. Even my M3 kicks a bit as the shutter lets go. The manual describes two focus points to use with the 50mm lenses set at f/8 for “general photography,” point-and-shoot type work. I’ll give it a try to see if the camera can be worked with one hand, with the obvious exception for winding.
This isn’t a G2.
The pictures are nice as expected from a 50’s era camera. Sharp stopped down, but not so much wide open. Flare is a bother, but with all lenses no worse than even the “best” of the time (and it could be argued, in the same league as the CZ and CZJ lenses of the same period, rather better than the soft coatings provided by others). I don’t have the hoods but I’m gong to get them, and will use temporary replacements until I do.
I can’t wait to try the Nokton.
Voigtlander either made LOTS of these cameras, or else people are just dumping them. They aren’t the simple point-and shoot of the Vito series. They are a different approach to rangefinder photography in a very expensive and sometimes poorly thought out way, but the quality of the mechanisms is beyond any doubt, making up for what could have been an awful camera. It isn’t that, by the way.
(edits for readability re-writes, along with the standard corrections for an aging, nicotine deprived mind)
Designed by committee.
I arrived at the book store where my dealer likes to work. Inconspicuously we made the deal, him sipping at his mug, me pulling at my shot of espresso like the addict I’ve become…
Papers signed and passed, odd shaped leather containers pushed across the table, and I walk out with my latest fix.
The Voigtlander Prominent was made right smack dab in the middle of the heyday of the rangefinder era- the mid 50’s. It’s styling reflects that, as does the quality of workmanship. It’s a very finely detailed camera, substantial yet small. Very dense. It doesn’t feel cheap.
My dealer didn’t have the famous Nokton lens (50mm f/1.5), so I’m not going to review that until I get it. I’ll include separate reviews of the lenses as I test them, so here will be a simple overview of them, and initial impressions (really where I am at with the camera, anyway).
First impressions are the typical “levers and buttons,” of the typical camera. No glance is needed at the manual except to identify the film wind-on interlock button; all controls are pretty obvious.
The 50mm f/2 (“Ultron”) lens mounts on the front flange of the shutter, in a twist bayonet mount, with the button lock on the bottom. No surprises there.
The shutter is a common Synchro-Compur shutter, 10 speed model (B-1/500, old sequence) on a focusing mount. The self timer is on the same lever as the shutter cocking action, and the user manual instructs the operator to not use the “B” setting or 1/500th in concert with the self timer. There is an additional shutter behind the main shutter that works as a light trap in case the primary shutter doesn’t close all the way or leaks a bit of light. It opens as the shutter plunger is pressed and doesn’t noticeably affect any operation of the camera.
The lenses all mount in front of the shutter on either the front of the shutter itself (as in the 50mm’s) or to the body with the lens focused by the hole in the shutter pressing on a focusing ring on the mounted lenses. It’s “different,” and as I think about it, I wonder how lenses had to be optimized, particularly the shorter ones for being so far ahead of the focal plane. More research I need to perform, I guess. The back of all lenses is literally a little tube that fits into the hole of the shutter.
Focusing is done by moving the shutter closer and farther from the film plane, and the operator does this by turning the celebrated focusing knob on the left side of the camera, surrounding the rewind key. It’s a point that is often made about the camera- it’s an odd arrangement. Focusing adjustments are conferred to the operator through a coincident rangefinder familiar to all rangefinder aficionados; the camera is a left eye preferred, and the rangefinder spot is not razor-edge, nor terribly bright. It is NOT compensated for any parallax, one uses the “Turnit” finder for that (and that’s a WONDERFUL finder)
Winding is done by knob (or a lever in some models; I’ve the 1b, not a lever) on the right hand side which performs the double duty of advancing the film and cocking the shutter, something that can be done by hand if the operator chooses. At 1/500, it’s actually recommended that the operator do so to make winding on easier, and I’d guess, to reduce stress on the lens cocking mechanism—a cam that literally pushes the same cocking lever the way the operator would.
Film is loaded in an unsurprising way, via back door and typical Voigtlander locking mechanism. The rewind key lifts to help in loading the cassette, the take-up reel is slotted along its entire length to allow loading of even uncut films; the wind knob lifts to allow the user to more easily reset the film counter, a conical ring under the wind knob, and one of the more attractively styled pieces of the camera. Set the film to “F”, wind and shoot twice, and the camera is set to go.
I’ve described the operations above in piecemeal, but that’s sort of how the camera works until one gets used to the flow, just like any other. The finder is a bit dim (no dimmer than my G2, similar to my Kiev’s) and the finder baselength is less than I usually prefer, but it does work fine with the lenses I have (the 35, 50 f/2, and 100 f/4.5), focusing them just fine (THAT’S ANOTHER WRITEUP). Compose the 35mm and 100mm through the brilliantly thought out "Turnit" finder. Shutter speed is set on the shutter on the front of the body, and the lenses besides the 50mm that use the body mount make it harder to reach the shutter adjustment. It’s an obvious example of “what next” engineering, as if the problem of shutter speed adjustment had only been partially thought through. The shutter is typical Compur- not too loud, not too quiet. Probably a bit louder as an M3 of the same era, but I’ll have to meter it to be sure. The slow speeds make more noise, as the shutter mechanism is right out front, and the timers make their not-unpleasing noise in the open. 1/500 and the associated booster spring make a louder click than 1/250. Winding is smooth, if not fast.
I wanted to talk a bit about the camera’s notoriety as a horrible tool from the standpoint of ergonomics and utility. The camera is a left eyed dim/short based rangefinder focused with a dial on one hand while the other takes the picture and winds. The picture I’d like to convey is that of a camera that immediately needs two hands with which to work, and that’s how it feels comfortable. My first response to picking up the camera every time is to reach for the lens- as it to focus. That’s wrong on this camera obviously, and reminding myself to move my hand to the left side of the camera is an unnatural action, but not one that isn’t easily un-learned.
I found, though, that I do like the camera. It’s easier to steady with both hands as solidly holding it as necessary to take the pictures. There is no motion on pressing the shutter- none. Even my M3 kicks a bit as the shutter lets go. The manual describes two focus points to use with the 50mm lenses set at f/8 for “general photography,” point-and-shoot type work. I’ll give it a try to see if the camera can be worked with one hand, with the obvious exception for winding.
This isn’t a G2.
The pictures are nice as expected from a 50’s era camera. Sharp stopped down, but not so much wide open. Flare is a bother, but with all lenses no worse than even the “best” of the time (and it could be argued, in the same league as the CZ and CZJ lenses of the same period, rather better than the soft coatings provided by others). I don’t have the hoods but I’m gong to get them, and will use temporary replacements until I do.
I can’t wait to try the Nokton.
Voigtlander either made LOTS of these cameras, or else people are just dumping them. They aren’t the simple point-and shoot of the Vito series. They are a different approach to rangefinder photography in a very expensive and sometimes poorly thought out way, but the quality of the mechanisms is beyond any doubt, making up for what could have been an awful camera. It isn’t that, by the way.
(edits for readability re-writes, along with the standard corrections for an aging, nicotine deprived mind)
Last edited:
I do not feel as guilty anymore...
jdos2
Well-known
Heeheehee! What fun! Just went for a long walk with it. Can't wait to see the negatives tonight!
K
KirkT
Guest
Nice write-up. I'd like to see more of this type of thing on other cameras. Good work.
jdos2
Well-known
Oh, find me an obsession, and let me loose. How 'bout the Mamiya Universal?
(rubs hands together)
Or Leica?
"Heavy for it's size, this pretentious little red-dotted camera of dubious..."
JUST KIDDING!
(rubs hands together)
Or Leica?
"Heavy for it's size, this pretentious little red-dotted camera of dubious..."
JUST KIDDING!
P
pshinkaw
Guest
Judging from the prices these cameras are going for, I wouldn't call it "unloading". It may be more like "cashing in".
-Paul
-Paul
taffer
void
Nice and enjoyable writing Jeff, fun as a ... fun review must be
Hope to see some results soon, I'll have my fingers crossed and my eyes open for one of those Noktons !
Btw, want an obsession ? Something really tough ? Ok, I'll give it:
Foton 155A
Hope to see some results soon, I'll have my fingers crossed and my eyes open for one of those Noktons !
Btw, want an obsession ? Something really tough ? Ok, I'll give it:
Foton 155A
jdos2
Well-known
Got an extra? None on e-Bay right now. :-(
I actually shot a couple rolls already, and developed 'em.
First one- very out of focus, because, just like every other bloody used camera, this one came crawling to me with focusing problems, among other things.
I have the procedure for adjusting the rangefinder. If Joe would be so kind as to create a "repair notes" forum...
The second roll of film showed good focus, and luckily I had a photogenic model. I'll upload one or two. They are "nice," as the camera of the day was expected to be.
I actually shot a couple rolls already, and developed 'em.
First one- very out of focus, because, just like every other bloody used camera, this one came crawling to me with focusing problems, among other things.
I have the procedure for adjusting the rangefinder. If Joe would be so kind as to create a "repair notes" forum...
The second roll of film showed good focus, and luckily I had a photogenic model. I'll upload one or two. They are "nice," as the camera of the day was expected to be.
JD, thanks for sharing your impressions of this interesting old camera!
taffer
void
jdos2 said:
What? An extra Foton ? Indeed no Jeff, it was one of the bigger 'fiascos' of Bell & Howell, a so strangely made camera that in fact the lens was not marked on f stops but on t ones !
I have some info about it on the Matanle book, and I saw ONE on eBay some weeks ago, I think I still have the link somewhere so let's see if I can find some pictures...
Oscar
jdos2
Well-known
There's a lens up there- an F/2. Lots of money.
Are they FSU? I'm looking around for them.
Are they FSU? I'm looking around for them.
bmattock
Veteran
JD,
That was a very well-written story. Thank you very much!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
That was a very well-written story. Thank you very much!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Very good review and I am looking forward to seeing some pictures. The Ultron may not be as "famous" as its big brother, but I have a friend with one and it is quite sharp. It will also work with the Adapters for Nikon/Contax.
I will have to be on the lookout for "quirky" camera suggestions for the future; but this one is way up there.
Ever use a Tessina? They have a flip-up optical viewfinder in addition to the Twin-Lens reflex... They print a mirror image on the negative, so you have to scan/print with the negative in the "wrong" direction... Wind-up Motor...
I will have to be on the lookout for "quirky" camera suggestions for the future; but this one is way up there.
Ever use a Tessina? They have a flip-up optical viewfinder in addition to the Twin-Lens reflex... They print a mirror image on the negative, so you have to scan/print with the negative in the "wrong" direction... Wind-up Motor...
jdos2
Well-known
I've got some more write-up's planned. I liked thinking about the "user experience" portion- the specs are really available for almost any camera on the internet, the "experience" isn't so much.
I've found the online manual for the camera, I'll include it as a link above later today.
I've found the online manual for the camera, I'll include it as a link above later today.
taffer
void
jdos2
Well-known
What a wild beast! It looks designed as if to appear complicated. COOL! A "tad" expensive, though...
jdos2
Well-known
I wanted to add a few more musings on the Prominent, as I developed some film this weekend.
I hadn't been using the camera, having both acquired a digital SLR and also using the Contax G2. I had gotten so far away from the thing that I didn't develop the b&w film in the case... Something I did this past weekend.
I had two Prominents, and now I have one-and-a-half, sacrificing one for the sake of a very poorly done CLA some (probable) couple dozen years ago.
The biggest complaint that I had with both of the Prominents after using them for a while was the finder- it was not only dark and the focusing patch indistinct, but "fuzzy," and the glass was obviously dirty inside the rangefinder housing.
Having developed the rediscovered film, I started scanning it and was becoming increasingly delighted, just waiting to see each banal image to pop up in the directory, as the particular look of the lenses emerged onto my screen. Honestly, these aren't the work of someone that went out to find things to take pictures of, but rather someone with a camera that took pictures of whatever came in front of him. I was testing.
I used often the Ultron (50mm f/2) with a Voigtlander orange filter. The particular camera I used had a problem with the second shutter not opening all the way. Even so, I was amazed. The pictures are vibrant, contrasty, and very, very attractive. Many pictures were out-of-doors, taken in the fall, and the orange filter made the leaves bright, and the sky dark. The ones taken in-doors, in low light settings, or with flash, are simply very attractive pictures, being very sharp at all apertures, yet offering a roundness that is very difficult to describe. I'll post some.
As a group all pictures looked rather different from what I've come to expect from the razor G2. All the lenses had roundness, sharpness, and a beauty (and lack of flare!) that surprised me.
I was so surprised about the results, I decided to unpack the Voigtlanders and have a look-see if there were any improvements I could make.
The two bodies came to me with problems. The first wouldn't focus as the lens register wasn't set correctly to the film plane (originally, I fixed this with a collimation- but that wasn't the right thing to do!). The second's (older) rangefinder was off, but the register distance was perfect.
The second had a bet advance knob- a sure sign it had been dropped. Also, the shutter ran very slowly (quick spritz of a very light bicycle lube with teflon fixed that!)
I decided to clean the rangefinder on the first one. This is the one that required me fiddling with the registration distance on the shutter/lens mount. As I dug into the camera farther than I ever planned to go, I became increasingly aware of the problems with it- the registration was off because it wasn't set correctly. Someone had filled it with grease that vaporized and deposited on the rangefinder windows. The focusing mechanism was so screwed up that it was simply impossible to set the lens correctly to infinity and close up... The camera is apart now, sitting in pieces and parts are separated in egg-carton bins. The Prominent is actually not all that complicated, truth be told, as much of the complication is in the shutter and rangefinder, both of which come off with a minimum of fuss.
I took the lessons I learned from the first one, and applied it to the second, cleaning the rangefinder glass (no exposed mirrors, all prizms- they'll last!) and, using ROR, getting all optical surfaces as clean as they'll go. I again checked lens registration and found what was missing on the first one, and also figured out the intent of all the little adjustments in the focusing system, and I believe, Why They Designed It That Way. The first camera became much more clear to me, the problems all pointed to someone who didn't understand what was going on with the camera diving in and "fixing" things- and completely removing the subtle alignment along the way, using the coarse adjustments to make the camera work "well enough." The second body isn't like that at all, where all focusing is a very balanced system, the lens registering at infinity even with the focusing knob off (the first camera using the stop in the knob itself to hold infinity register!) I did take the unbent advance knob off the first one and used it on the second.
The upshot is that I've a very well working Voigtlander Prominent that creates striking images with all the lenses on which I attach it. The ergonomics make much more sense now that I've used the camera so much, and I'm very well pleased at the choice of lenses I have for it. The rangefinder is now MUCH more contrasty, the focusing patch is an obvious gold in the center of a clear (if only slightly dark) field, and the viewfinder is now a pleasure instead of the dim excuse it used to be.
I have more respect for the makeup of these little gems than I did before I started. I'm also much more secure doing repairs to the bodies, and though I really need a repair manual, I'll have the first one back together soon enough and in much better internal condition than when I got it originally.
Now, I have to figure out a good way of doing B&W on the 10D that I can mimic filters without sacrificing dynamic range, but that's a different winter project...
I hadn't been using the camera, having both acquired a digital SLR and also using the Contax G2. I had gotten so far away from the thing that I didn't develop the b&w film in the case... Something I did this past weekend.
I had two Prominents, and now I have one-and-a-half, sacrificing one for the sake of a very poorly done CLA some (probable) couple dozen years ago.
The biggest complaint that I had with both of the Prominents after using them for a while was the finder- it was not only dark and the focusing patch indistinct, but "fuzzy," and the glass was obviously dirty inside the rangefinder housing.
Having developed the rediscovered film, I started scanning it and was becoming increasingly delighted, just waiting to see each banal image to pop up in the directory, as the particular look of the lenses emerged onto my screen. Honestly, these aren't the work of someone that went out to find things to take pictures of, but rather someone with a camera that took pictures of whatever came in front of him. I was testing.
I used often the Ultron (50mm f/2) with a Voigtlander orange filter. The particular camera I used had a problem with the second shutter not opening all the way. Even so, I was amazed. The pictures are vibrant, contrasty, and very, very attractive. Many pictures were out-of-doors, taken in the fall, and the orange filter made the leaves bright, and the sky dark. The ones taken in-doors, in low light settings, or with flash, are simply very attractive pictures, being very sharp at all apertures, yet offering a roundness that is very difficult to describe. I'll post some.
As a group all pictures looked rather different from what I've come to expect from the razor G2. All the lenses had roundness, sharpness, and a beauty (and lack of flare!) that surprised me.
I was so surprised about the results, I decided to unpack the Voigtlanders and have a look-see if there were any improvements I could make.
The two bodies came to me with problems. The first wouldn't focus as the lens register wasn't set correctly to the film plane (originally, I fixed this with a collimation- but that wasn't the right thing to do!). The second's (older) rangefinder was off, but the register distance was perfect.
The second had a bet advance knob- a sure sign it had been dropped. Also, the shutter ran very slowly (quick spritz of a very light bicycle lube with teflon fixed that!)
I decided to clean the rangefinder on the first one. This is the one that required me fiddling with the registration distance on the shutter/lens mount. As I dug into the camera farther than I ever planned to go, I became increasingly aware of the problems with it- the registration was off because it wasn't set correctly. Someone had filled it with grease that vaporized and deposited on the rangefinder windows. The focusing mechanism was so screwed up that it was simply impossible to set the lens correctly to infinity and close up... The camera is apart now, sitting in pieces and parts are separated in egg-carton bins. The Prominent is actually not all that complicated, truth be told, as much of the complication is in the shutter and rangefinder, both of which come off with a minimum of fuss.
I took the lessons I learned from the first one, and applied it to the second, cleaning the rangefinder glass (no exposed mirrors, all prizms- they'll last!) and, using ROR, getting all optical surfaces as clean as they'll go. I again checked lens registration and found what was missing on the first one, and also figured out the intent of all the little adjustments in the focusing system, and I believe, Why They Designed It That Way. The first camera became much more clear to me, the problems all pointed to someone who didn't understand what was going on with the camera diving in and "fixing" things- and completely removing the subtle alignment along the way, using the coarse adjustments to make the camera work "well enough." The second body isn't like that at all, where all focusing is a very balanced system, the lens registering at infinity even with the focusing knob off (the first camera using the stop in the knob itself to hold infinity register!) I did take the unbent advance knob off the first one and used it on the second.
The upshot is that I've a very well working Voigtlander Prominent that creates striking images with all the lenses on which I attach it. The ergonomics make much more sense now that I've used the camera so much, and I'm very well pleased at the choice of lenses I have for it. The rangefinder is now MUCH more contrasty, the focusing patch is an obvious gold in the center of a clear (if only slightly dark) field, and the viewfinder is now a pleasure instead of the dim excuse it used to be.
I have more respect for the makeup of these little gems than I did before I started. I'm also much more secure doing repairs to the bodies, and though I really need a repair manual, I'll have the first one back together soon enough and in much better internal condition than when I got it originally.
Now, I have to figure out a good way of doing B&W on the 10D that I can mimic filters without sacrificing dynamic range, but that's a different winter project...
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
taffer said:What? An extra Foton ? Indeed no Jeff, it was one of the bigger 'fiascos' of Bell & Howell, a so strangely made camera that in fact the lens was not marked on f stops but on t ones !
Well, whaddaya expect? Bell & Howell was primarily in the motion picture camera business -- in fact, they were HUGE in that business, so much that when they finally got out of it, independent manufacturers took over the manufacture of some of their models simply because the industry couldn't get along without 'em!
And at the era when B&H introduced the Foton, the T-stop was a widely-discussed topic and considered the wave of the future among cinematographers. Made sense, too -- zoom lenses with a lot of elements were coming into use, and the actual transmittance of these lenses was significantly lower than that of the single focal length optics. In the movie biz, where footage shot with different lenses had to match exactly, the t-stop seemed like an idea whose time had come.
furcafe
Veteran
My understanding is that t-stops are still the rule in cinematography & they could easily serve the same purpose for still photography today as well. The simple fact is that t-stops are a more rational & objective system for marking lens apertures; it's just too bad it never caught on in the still world.
jlw said:
furcafe
Veteran
Re: The Maligned Voigtlander Prominent (The Sporty Corvair?)
My impression of the Prominent is that it is a 35mm camera designed by person or persons (not necessarily a committee) coming from a 1930s-40s medium format perspective, which explains its ergonomic "pecularities." If you ever seen or handled a Bessa or Bessa II folder, you'll notice similarities between many of their controls & those on the Prominent. Indeed, my opinion is that the Prominent needs more than 2 hands to work well, it needs to be mounted on a tripod!
My impression of the Prominent is that it is a 35mm camera designed by person or persons (not necessarily a committee) coming from a 1930s-40s medium format perspective, which explains its ergonomic "pecularities." If you ever seen or handled a Bessa or Bessa II folder, you'll notice similarities between many of their controls & those on the Prominent. Indeed, my opinion is that the Prominent needs more than 2 hands to work well, it needs to be mounted on a tripod!
jdos2 said: