Curmudgeonly & Skeptical presents Boned Jello: 102 year old lens remount

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

102 year old lens remount

“

I have an upcoming photography project that needs a vintage look. My friend, a Russian lens technician called me into his store ... He has something for me.... He found in a box of random parts, hidden inside anther lens this gem. A circa 1908 ( possibly earlier) 35mm lens. Still functioning, mostly brass, and not nearly as much dust or fungus as one would think after sitting in a box for over a hundred years. This lens is a piece of motion picture history, and at this point rare beyond words. So i say to him, "Wow... what do you have in mind?" he smiles, and says, ( in the thickest russian accent you can imagine) " i can make this fit EF you know..."

The story is richer than this excerpt showa; and there's pictures.

Rodger the Real King of France 9/28/2010 02:48:00 PM 10 Comments

"If the number of Islamic terror attacks continues at the current rate, candlelight vigils will soon be the number-one cause of global warming. "
Argus Hamilton

10 comments:

Juice said...: Absolutely. Amazing!; 9/28/10, 3:09 PM
clem said...: There's software to do it, but the most authentic way to get a vintage feel is to use vintage equipment.

Or at least vintage-style equipment. For instance, Janusz Kamiński used a purposely mis-timed rotary disk shutter in Saving Private Ryan to get a WW2 newsreel-type look.; 9/28/10, 3:28 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm still waiting for someone to market a digital film device that fits into a 35mm camera, that makes the camera think it's real film.
marcm; 9/28/10, 4:40 PM
clem said...: Me, I want to see a digital camera that works exactly like an old 35mm camera. Twist the rings to set the exposure and ISO, twist the others to set the F-number and focus. Maybe even a lever to "advance the film". A built-in light meter is acceptable; many 35mm cameras have those.

A preview display is for babies. No autofocus, no automatic white balance, no zoom lens. Wind it back to take double exposures.

The only difference is that you can download the pictures instead of getting them developed. It's like anon 4:40's idea, except with his you need a separate 35mm camera.

I do like his idea, though-- if I was entrepreneurial, I'd be tempted to steal it. There's a lot of old 35mm gear going unused in the digital age.; 9/28/10, 5:52 PM
Randy Rager said...: Why overcomplicate things? Shoot film, send it to North Coast Photo to be developed and scanned, load the images from the their DVD to your hard drive.

Or if you're one of those folks that prefer negative film (I'm not, but to each their own), tote it down to your local Costco and have them develop and scan it in an hour. Most of them still process film, and the processing and scanning quality is pretty good.; 9/28/10, 10:04 PM
gahoolie said...: Ummm... Randy, did you miss out on the whole digital revolution? There's a reason (not just porn, either) why we don't just send our film to North Coast or Costco.

There are plenty of places to send digital pics to get photo prints, too.; 9/28/10, 10:43 PM
Randy Rager said...: I run a 1 Hour Photo that grosses about a quarter million dollars a year, most of it from professional photographers who use digital cameras, so what do you think?

I'm also a keen amateur photographer that's compared film to digital, and I'm here to tell you that for landscape and studio work, film is still worlds away better. Since that's what I shoot, that's what I use.

Sure, go ahead and shoot digital if you want. Just do us all a favor and stop complaining that your digital camera doesn't work like a Canon AE-1 or a Pentax Spotmatic, ok?; 9/29/10, 12:04 AM
gahoolie said...: Actually, it's a Pentax K1000, but that's trivial. I get your point.

It's also a help to young photographers to learn all about F-stops and shutter speeds. A few all-black images and they learn pretty quick.; 9/29/10, 2:25 AM
JMcD said...: My ex father-in-law was a photography and home movie buff, and even tho I wasn't in to it as much as he, I did learn one valuable trick from him for producing clear, sharp pictures and that was to remove the lens cover.
He, on the other hand, living to a ripe old age old 85, never did learn the trick.; 9/29/10, 3:40 AM
Randy Rager said...: I inherited my Dad's Pentax, and it's nice (sharp glass! just damn!), but the Nikon N80 I prefer has far better metering.

I recently helped someone I work with buy a used Nikon N90s for her 14 year old boy who is taking photography this year. They're allowed to use a digital camera but they're encouraged to use film. I liked it so much I offered to buy it back from her if he decided he didn't care for photography, but given how much his 18 year old brother likes it too, I don't think I'll get the chance.

Film isn't dead. In fact, it's undergoing a bit of a Renaissance with artists who just aren't happy with the results they're getting from digital.; 9/29/10, 12:12 PM

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

102 year old lens remount

10 comments:

Post a Comment