Marc James Small
Member
These were one of the very few cameras to have ever honestly born the Carl Zeiss name. They were manufactured at a satelitte plant of Jena at Eisfeld. This was a plant established during Wordl War II for the production of binoculars and artillery gunsights. (It later passed to Docter Optics and then returned to Carl Zeiss (West German) control in recent yeas.)
These are grand cameras. I regularly shoot with a Werra III and I own both of the auxiliary lenses save for the vaunted, but never seen, stereo rig. I took one of my favorite shots of my wife with my Werra III.
The Werra I and II had no rangefinders. The III and later did have rangefinders.
Any comments?
Marc
These are grand cameras. I regularly shoot with a Werra III and I own both of the auxiliary lenses save for the vaunted, but never seen, stereo rig. I took one of my favorite shots of my wife with my Werra III.
The Werra I and II had no rangefinders. The III and later did have rangefinders.
Any comments?
Marc
oilman930
Established
I purchased a WERRA mat at a flea market in New Jersey for $30. The seller had no idea how to use it. It sat on a shelf for 10 years until I got the inspiration to repair some internal damage. The camera was dropped sometime before I purchased it. Now it works OK. It could use a CLA. I find it light and simple to use. It helps being left handed as it makes it easier to load and advance the film.
The WERRA mat model doesn't have a rangefinder or interchangeable lenses, but it does have an internal light meter .
The WERRA mat model doesn't have a rangefinder or interchangeable lenses, but it does have an internal light meter .
jesse1dog
Light Catcher
On my bookcase:
'WERRA - ABC' by P.Kroll
- a super little book even if you don't know German. A book that I believe is quite difficult to find even at a price.
I've an old WERRA 1 which seems to have been painted over from the original green at some time. The disappointment if there is one, is the reversable lens hood and cap which is chipped. I think this is quite common though. Odd in some ways that these weren't in metal.
jesse
'WERRA - ABC' by P.Kroll
- a super little book even if you don't know German. A book that I believe is quite difficult to find even at a price.
I've an old WERRA 1 which seems to have been painted over from the original green at some time. The disappointment if there is one, is the reversable lens hood and cap which is chipped. I think this is quite common though. Odd in some ways that these weren't in metal.
jesse
Marc James Small
Member
I do own Thiele's work on the Werra cameras, and it is helpful. Well, helpful to those of us who can read German! I do hold the Werra III in very high regard -- it has what is probably the best rangefinder for my troubled eyes. A neat, slim package, and its two auxilary lenses do not make much of an impact in the cargo pockets in my leather jacket. Highly recommended!
Marc
Marc
ruby.monkey
Veteran
I've owned a Werra 1 and a Werramatic, and while they're surprisingly competent cameras with some really neat features, I found the body design too cramped for a right-hander, and (on the Werramatic) the focussing ring too narrow and awkward to grip, especially with the hood attached.
Occasionally I feel the urge to try another, but so far I've managed to resist.
Occasionally I feel the urge to try another, but so far I've managed to resist.
Marc James Small
Member
You are one of many who has commented that right-handers have problems with the Werra. Well, I am EXTREMELY right-handed and I have no problem with the Werra, but that is probably just my being contrary. You might like an Ektra, the southpaw's delight. (My father was a leftie, as is my best friend. I know all the jokes!)
The Werra does have a very narrow focusing ring. I just learned to use the camera as it was meant to be used, and so I use it to this day. Nothing comes without experience, I am bull-headed enough to get into a camera system with both feet above my head, all the way, and so forth, and, once I have learned the system, I often sell it off. As it is, I have kept Leica RF, Contax RF, Werra RF, and Retina RF cameras, along with a couple of Super Ikonta B's (Prewar) and a slew of Rollei and Hasselblad gear.
Marc
The Werra does have a very narrow focusing ring. I just learned to use the camera as it was meant to be used, and so I use it to this day. Nothing comes without experience, I am bull-headed enough to get into a camera system with both feet above my head, all the way, and so forth, and, once I have learned the system, I often sell it off. As it is, I have kept Leica RF, Contax RF, Werra RF, and Retina RF cameras, along with a couple of Super Ikonta B's (Prewar) and a slew of Rollei and Hasselblad gear.
Marc
ruby.monkey
Veteran
You'll have to explain that, because unless you mean you're using the Force then I'm somewhat at a loss.
The problem for me was not so much the ring itself, but the hood on the Werramatic which is rather bulbous and left very little room between itself and the lens body to get at said ring. The Werra 1 had a more slimline hood, so there was no problem there.
winoto
Established
Thanks guys, I was just about to sell my quirky werra with auxilliary lenses in the classifieds. Now I think I'll keep it. It even has the original receipts where it was bought in Paris.
JohnTF
Veteran
Have several of them, one was gummed up from a bath in a broken bottle of liquor, so I had it CLA'd at FotoSkoda in Prague, they were reasonable, like $30.
Very nicely engineered cameras, not uncommon in Prague, have only seen one at the camera shows here.
Regards, John
Very nicely engineered cameras, not uncommon in Prague, have only seen one at the camera shows here.
Regards, John
Muggins
Junk magnet
Another satisfied Werra user checking in! I've owned three workers, and reduced two junkers to spare parts in a misguided effort to fix at least one... Personally I find the Werra 1 extremely usable (I have a green flat-top), and love the almost anti-styled looks of the flat-top models.
The lens hoods do nearly always crack, or the threads wear as they are very easy to cross thread, so I've very rarely reversed one and used it as a hood. I suspect that the main weakness of the camera is that quirky double shutter - I suspect that the springs stretch with age, and eventually become too slack to function correctly. They are a pain in the rump to work on, so unless you are a good camera tech I'd suggest leaving shutter repairs to an expert.
The Werra 3 does indeed have a good rangefinder - I believe the seperate patch is unique to Werras, which is a pleasure to use. The EV coupling of the shutter speeds and aperture settings is rather more of a pain, though it's no worse than several other cameras of the period I've tried eg the Vitomatic.
So... How many of us have handed someone a wound-on Werra, and suggested they takle a couple of shots? I know I have!
Adrian
The lens hoods do nearly always crack, or the threads wear as they are very easy to cross thread, so I've very rarely reversed one and used it as a hood. I suspect that the main weakness of the camera is that quirky double shutter - I suspect that the springs stretch with age, and eventually become too slack to function correctly. They are a pain in the rump to work on, so unless you are a good camera tech I'd suggest leaving shutter repairs to an expert.
The Werra 3 does indeed have a good rangefinder - I believe the seperate patch is unique to Werras, which is a pleasure to use. The EV coupling of the shutter speeds and aperture settings is rather more of a pain, though it's no worse than several other cameras of the period I've tried eg the Vitomatic.
So... How many of us have handed someone a wound-on Werra, and suggested they takle a couple of shots? I know I have!
Adrian
BillBingham2
Registered User
It looks like the CL rather copied them in many ways?
Very interesting little cameras, have to keep my eyes open as I am out and about.
B2 (;->
Very interesting little cameras, have to keep my eyes open as I am out and about.
B2 (;->
Marc James Small
Member
Several quick notes:
First, the lens hood is an issue, but these occasionally turn up on eBay. Again, let the Force be with you: use cameras as they were intended to be used.
Second, there is a narrow gap between the lens hood and the focusing ring. Again, let the Force be with you: it can be handled.
Third, the camera is left-handed. I have no problem with this, but others do.
I simply use a camera as it was intended to be used, be it a Werra or an Ikoflex or a Leica IIIc. System cameras are greatE
Marc
First, the lens hood is an issue, but these occasionally turn up on eBay. Again, let the Force be with you: use cameras as they were intended to be used.
Second, there is a narrow gap between the lens hood and the focusing ring. Again, let the Force be with you: it can be handled.
Third, the camera is left-handed. I have no problem with this, but others do.
I simply use a camera as it was intended to be used, be it a Werra or an Ikoflex or a Leica IIIc. System cameras are greatE
Marc
jesse1dog
Light Catcher
Werra1
Werra1
Thought I would post a picture:
Werra1
Thought I would post a picture:
antipodiain
Newbie
The Werra Cameras
My understanding of the term ‘auxiliary lens’ is an optical cell that is attached to the front of a camera’s fixed lens to increase or decrease the focal length. By this definition the Werra lenses, other than the close-up attachments, are not auxiliary lenses but fully interchangeable lenses. The shutter is a ‘behind the lens’ leaf shutter that is not integral with the lens. The lenses are secured with a breech lock bayonet in front of the shutter. I own a 35mm f2.8 Flektogon and a 100mm f4 Cardinar. Either of these lenses improve the handling of the camera, compared to the Tessar 50mm, due to the greatly increased diameter and width of their focussing rings. They also both take the easily obtainable 49mm filters. Their optical quality is excellent.
My understanding of the term ‘auxiliary lens’ is an optical cell that is attached to the front of a camera’s fixed lens to increase or decrease the focal length. By this definition the Werra lenses, other than the close-up attachments, are not auxiliary lenses but fully interchangeable lenses. The shutter is a ‘behind the lens’ leaf shutter that is not integral with the lens. The lenses are secured with a breech lock bayonet in front of the shutter. I own a 35mm f2.8 Flektogon and a 100mm f4 Cardinar. Either of these lenses improve the handling of the camera, compared to the Tessar 50mm, due to the greatly increased diameter and width of their focussing rings. They also both take the easily obtainable 49mm filters. Their optical quality is excellent.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Any shots of the RF Werra III, and results, anyone?
JohnTF
Veteran
One passed by my eyes while picking up a bit, I bought a few in my trips to Prague, and the last one I tripped over in the dining room had a RF, was in the case, and I think has interchangeable lenses, so don't hold your breath, but it may exist. ;-)
I found my IIIc with a pinhole fitted at the same time, gotta start organizing things better, next thing is to see if there is film in them. ;-)
The Werra's always impressed me as rather neat cameras which could be used rather quickly in their day, if you had the lens cap off, with the rapid advance.
I used to spend too much time at BS Photo, Skodafoto, and Pazdera Photo, nice area to hang about, the two guys at BS were always a lot of fun, they had a huge Nikon telephoto case that held exactly three large Czech beers. They kept a bottle of water cold for me in the fridge as well. Hard to find, crazy hours, and they used to give me one day service on some older lenses for a cleaning.
They were responsible for a heavy second suitcase on the trip home a few times.
Regards, John
zniv
Member
Add a filter to the lens and the distance betwen the focussing ring and the lens hood increases enough to make focussing unproblemtic. filter size is 30.5 mm if i remember correctly.
julio1fer
Well-known
They have this Doppelwerra accessory, that is meant to tie two Werras together, so you can shoot two films at the same subject.
A Werra shot against the sun, with flare and all.
I find the Werra precise, compact and tidy. As said above, the focus ring is not very ergonomic (a trait shared with other German cameras of the 60s, such as the Voigtlander Vitos), and the hood threads are easily broken.
I have only the 50 mm Tessar available, which is quite decent.
A Werra shot against the sun, with flare and all.
I find the Werra precise, compact and tidy. As said above, the focus ring is not very ergonomic (a trait shared with other German cameras of the 60s, such as the Voigtlander Vitos), and the hood threads are easily broken.
I have only the 50 mm Tessar available, which is quite decent.
John Lawrence
Well-known
antipodiain
Newbie
Comparing Werra lenses
Comparing Werra lenses
I have just conducted a resolution test comparing my 35mm Flektogon, 50mm Tessar, and 100mm Cardinar lenses, using a Werramat camera body. I also included a newly acquired Yashica 35 CCN Wide, which has a fixed 35mm 1.8 lens and also qualifies as a Rangefinder Forum camera of interest
The details of the test are not important as no-one will be able to replicate my methods, suffice to say that I used a very high resolution film (Adox CHS 25) and photographed a test chart at 28 times the focal length of each lens with the camera on a solid tripod and carefully aligned. The important thing is that the lenses were tested under identical conditions so the results allow a direct comparison of resolution between them. They probably don’t mean much in real picture taking situations, and I know there is a lot more to optical quality than resolution, so please just accept this for what it is! Your Leicas and Contaxes may or may not have better lenses that the Werra but they were not in this test and valid comparisons cannot be made! Also the results only apply to my lenses - better or worse examples of the same focal lengths may exist but I have no information to offer on quality control. I have only tested one of each lens and only at one distance.
There is no “pass” score in this test and all the lenses have acceptable resolution for everyday photography. If the lens out-resolved the test chart at all apertures both in the centre and at the edge it would get a score of 100%. The overall order of merit was a little surprising. The Flektogon (85%) came in first, followed by the Yashica (80%), the Tessar (73%) and the Cardinar (60%).
At maximum aperture in the centre of the frame, with 100% being the maximum measurable resolution, the Flektogon (f2.8) achieved an excellent 95%, the Yashica (f1.8) 70%, the Tessar (f2.8) and the Cardinar (f4) each scored 60%.
Three of the lenses out-resolved the chart both in the centre and edge at their best apertures (the Yashica and Flektogon at f8 to f11, the Tessar at f11). The Cardinar’s best performance (80%) was from f5.6 to f11.
The Werramat has a far superior viewfinder to the Yashica 35 CCN. It is much larger and brighter, has dioptre correction, and the rangefinder spot is easier to see which compensates for the smaller apertures of its lenses. It also gives a lot more control over exposure (and the coupled selenium cell in my camera still works and is accurate). In addition, as I have previously posted, the 35mm and 100mm lenses improve the handling of the Werramat when compared with the Tessar lens. The Yashica is a very useable camera and f1.8 is more than a full stop advantage if you need it, but I think that my preferred carry round, snapshot camera will continue to be the Werramat with the Flektogon 35mm lens. The 35mm focal length utilises the full viewfinder. Unlike the later Leica M cameras the viewfinder guidelines for the 100mm lens are complete (similar to the M3), which makes framing easy, so the less well performing Cardinar could be well suited to portraiture as well as being adequate for most general photography. I wonder if this was a deliberate design consideration or just a characteristic of my lens. I have another one so I shall conduct another test to see how they compare.
Comparing Werra lenses
I have just conducted a resolution test comparing my 35mm Flektogon, 50mm Tessar, and 100mm Cardinar lenses, using a Werramat camera body. I also included a newly acquired Yashica 35 CCN Wide, which has a fixed 35mm 1.8 lens and also qualifies as a Rangefinder Forum camera of interest
The details of the test are not important as no-one will be able to replicate my methods, suffice to say that I used a very high resolution film (Adox CHS 25) and photographed a test chart at 28 times the focal length of each lens with the camera on a solid tripod and carefully aligned. The important thing is that the lenses were tested under identical conditions so the results allow a direct comparison of resolution between them. They probably don’t mean much in real picture taking situations, and I know there is a lot more to optical quality than resolution, so please just accept this for what it is! Your Leicas and Contaxes may or may not have better lenses that the Werra but they were not in this test and valid comparisons cannot be made! Also the results only apply to my lenses - better or worse examples of the same focal lengths may exist but I have no information to offer on quality control. I have only tested one of each lens and only at one distance.
There is no “pass” score in this test and all the lenses have acceptable resolution for everyday photography. If the lens out-resolved the test chart at all apertures both in the centre and at the edge it would get a score of 100%. The overall order of merit was a little surprising. The Flektogon (85%) came in first, followed by the Yashica (80%), the Tessar (73%) and the Cardinar (60%).
At maximum aperture in the centre of the frame, with 100% being the maximum measurable resolution, the Flektogon (f2.8) achieved an excellent 95%, the Yashica (f1.8) 70%, the Tessar (f2.8) and the Cardinar (f4) each scored 60%.
Three of the lenses out-resolved the chart both in the centre and edge at their best apertures (the Yashica and Flektogon at f8 to f11, the Tessar at f11). The Cardinar’s best performance (80%) was from f5.6 to f11.
The Werramat has a far superior viewfinder to the Yashica 35 CCN. It is much larger and brighter, has dioptre correction, and the rangefinder spot is easier to see which compensates for the smaller apertures of its lenses. It also gives a lot more control over exposure (and the coupled selenium cell in my camera still works and is accurate). In addition, as I have previously posted, the 35mm and 100mm lenses improve the handling of the Werramat when compared with the Tessar lens. The Yashica is a very useable camera and f1.8 is more than a full stop advantage if you need it, but I think that my preferred carry round, snapshot camera will continue to be the Werramat with the Flektogon 35mm lens. The 35mm focal length utilises the full viewfinder. Unlike the later Leica M cameras the viewfinder guidelines for the 100mm lens are complete (similar to the M3), which makes framing easy, so the less well performing Cardinar could be well suited to portraiture as well as being adequate for most general photography. I wonder if this was a deliberate design consideration or just a characteristic of my lens. I have another one so I shall conduct another test to see how they compare.