| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 17 2011 : 08:55:49 AM
Hello,
This is probably the strangest Fed 1 I have ever seen:
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/17112011_Photos PYC 0 017.jpg
First, it was painted in yellow/green. Then, the viewfinder/rangefinder was suppressed and the cover replaced by another one, without accessory shoe. Last (but not least!) there is an Industar 7 mounted on it with a strange barrel...
The body is a very homogeneous late 1b or early 1c (let us say between c. 50000 and c. 80000). Of course, it is impossible to say if all that was made in 1937-38. But that cannot be only the fantasy of an ingenious seller to make money...
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/17112011_Photos PYC 0 002.jpg
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/17112011_Photos PYC 0 008.jpg
And considering the lens, the whole item was certainly made for something. But what for?
Amitiés. Jacques. |
| 21 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Dec 09 2011 : 05:17:04 AM
Wow! Great! 
An article of 1939... The body was very probably made in 1937 or 1938...
I do hope it will be possible to translate it.
Many thanks, Aidas.
Jacques. |
| AidasCams |
Posted - Dec 09 2011 : 01:37:33 AM
Hello Jacques,
hoping that an article about Fed with Industar-7 lens from prewar Sovietskoe Foto magazine (1938 No.9) will assist you in your further investigation . Text in Russian only, may be any of Forum members could translate it to you.
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/9122011_Sov_foto_1938_9_004.jpg
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/9122011_Sov_foto_1938_9_005.jpg
Best regards,
Aidas |
| nightphoto |
Posted - Dec 08 2011 : 10:09:00 AM
Hello Jacques,
Yes, the lens was used for macro, as you have shown, but, I think, not on this camera body. Instead on a body that had a finder or maybe a Zenit so that the actual focus could be seen.
There was good reason to take the time to construct such a lens, as a real macro lens would be hard to find in the 1950s (lens barrel looks like 1950s construction) in the Soviet Union. And, probably there were Reporter cameras that had been damaged, so making the very fine lens available.
Regards, Bill
|
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Dec 08 2011 : 08:36:54 AM
Hello Bill!
My friend will be happy: a military periscope was just the first supposition we had made between us. And it is the reason why he bought the item.
Neither the body, nor the lens were made for pleasure: they were too much transformed. And were bought for not much money...
The second hypothesis -macro use- is possible too. The 2mm wedge on the thread of the lens shows that a precise adaptation was required between the lens and the body.
More: there are two small brass guides which are screwed, in order to prevent the film from any forward deformation. They only appear at the Z position (impossible to show without dismounting). Another proof that all that was conceived with a project.
Thanks, Bill!
Amitiés. Jacques.
|
| nightphoto |
Posted - Dec 07 2011 : 10:57:48 PM
Hello Jacques,
I think that maybe the camera itself is military, possibly for use on some vehicle or instrument that already had a viewfinder, such as a periscope, bomb sight, tank periscope, etc. So no viewfinder or rangefinder was needed as the scope itself had those functions. So, whatever the viewer saw in whatever scope it was, was focused with the scope lens and then the viewer just had to hit the shutter button to record the view. If this is the case then probably the lens has nothing to do with it and was put together from a Reporter lens, barrel, and LTM ring for use on another camera.
This is just a guess on my part! For military use like this it would be better not to have the rangefinder for two reasons ... simplicity for use ... and ... no soldier will be tempted to use the camera (or take it) for family photography or to sell.
Very nice and authentic looking ... not a fake made to sell. The lens project is authentic looking also ... not so easy to make!
Regards, Bill
|
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Dec 07 2011 : 08:41:07 AM
Hello,
So, it seems that the "normal use" of the outfit would be given by the 16,4 mm ring. With that ring, a neat image occurs at about 90cm (helicoïd out) and infinity (helicoïd in). I must add that there is a 2mm wedge at the back of the lens. And all that is not very precise (I always use tracing paper).
This normal use does not mean anything without a viewfinder. Unless the camera was used always at the same distance: industry survey?
But I merely think of a macro use, like some of you. With larger rings, it is possible to take macro photos with interesting distances from the object.
As we don't really know the exact configuration of this outfit when it was used, it is certainly difficult to go farther... Perhaps we will know more from the precedent owner?
Amitiés. Jacques.
|
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Dec 06 2011 : 10:53:03 AM
I have received the macro rings sent by the owner of this strange FED.
Mounted on a LTM body (Zorki 3) with the 16,4mm ring, a neat image occurs at # 70/80 cm, helicoïd of the Industar 7 totally out.
I will make more precise (I hope!) experiments tomorrow.
Amitiés. Jacques. |
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 21 2011 : 09:49:16 AM
Yes, Sandor.
But if I look for one, I will have fifty in three months! 
|
| Messsucher |
Posted - Nov 21 2011 : 09:14:20 AM
@Jacques
Huh, now you have to look for a good old Zenit(1)!  |
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 21 2011 : 06:42:09 AM
Here we are.
So, this lens would work normally on M39 (Zenit type). It is what I guessed at the beginning.
A pity I don't have any Zenit to try.
Probably the lens could work too on that Fed body with a ring of about 16mm (difference of registers M39 Zenit type/LTM Fed type)? Or perhaps I am stupid...
Anyway, I don't have such (macro) rings to try...
Thanks, Luiz.
Amitiés. |
| Luiz Paracampo |
Posted - Nov 20 2011 : 5:16:06 PM
Considering the original use of a Reporter helicoid the lens once mounted on Zenit M39 body will not work on acro but only in distances from 1.40meter to infinity (original Reporter scale range).
LP |
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 20 2011 : 06:55:13 AM
Many thanks Luis! So, the lens comes from a Reporter.
I cannot say anything about the origin, Christian. The owner (one of my friends, a French collector, too) will ask the seller about that.
I confirm there is no image in macro with a LTM body. At the infinity, helicoïd totally out, there is an image but not as neat as it should (always on LTM body). Probably some lacking millimeters...
The image occurs at about 5,2cm (helicoïd in)and 3,8cm (helicoïd out). Far from the register of 28,8 mm...
Amitiés. Jacques.
|
| Luiz Paracampo |
Posted - Nov 19 2011 : 5:53:20 PM
The Industar 7
In Reporter cameras it is focused by helicoid
In Turist cameras it has front element focus
In Fotokor cameras they have no focusing device at all once focus is done via bellows estending
The helicoid in your device came from a Reporter camera although lens ringis quite different.
LP
Jacques M.
Another question. These lenses were put on Reporters, Turists and Fotokors, and perhaps even some other cameras. Were they always with that helicoïd that we can see too on Bill's Reporter ? |
| Niko80 |
Posted - Nov 19 2011 : 5:23:04 PM
Interesting...
Somehow it makes sense, the 28,8mm registration of the body is by far too small to obtain a picture with such a lens - unless it was heavily modified.
But the question is what this strange combination was made for. As some sort of military-style fake it seems too crudely made.
Can you tell us something about the origin, Jacques?
Regards,
Christian
|
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 19 2011 : 05:26:25 AM
My last tests show it is impossible to get an image with the couple lens/LTM body. The lens seems out of focus with these bodies even when trying macro.
Another question. These lenses were put on Reporters, Turists and Fotokors, and perhaps even some other cameras. Were they always with that helicoïd that we can see too on Bill's Reporter ?
http://www.nightphoto.com/report.html
By the serial number, is there a way to know the date of making?
Thanks. Jacques.
|
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 18 2011 : 08:15:01 AM
Hi Christian,
There is nothing special under this cover: only the mechanism corresponding to the dial speed. And the normal holes!
The rangefinder was dismounted (holes seen from the inside).
Amitiés. Jacques. |
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 18 2011 : 08:09:25 AM
Many thanks.
I have just put the lens on a Fed 2, back removed, with a piece of tracing paper to see what happens.
In fact, there is a picture when looking at infinity. It seems to be neat when the helicoïd is completely out.
Difference about helicoïd between positions in and out: # 1,3 cm.
For the moment, I cannot obtain anything in macro use. But I agree with you, Juhani: no need of rangefinder/viewfinder for that use...
Following tests to morrow!
Amitiés. Jacques.
|
| cedricfan |
Posted - Nov 17 2011 : 10:50:04 PM
If this combination is for extreme macro use, which is most evident, then there simply is no use for a finder!
And if the lens has not had other modifications than this adapting with tube, then it does focus. But to a near close up.
Best regards,
Juhani |
| Niko80 |
Posted - Nov 17 2011 : 9:10:21 PM
Is it even possible to obtain a sharp picture with this lens on a FED body?
If this camera-lens combination was made for something, it should focus correctly (or at least at some point at all)...
If it doesn't you can rule out this hypothesis.
I can see no reason to remove the viewfinder - unless it was some attempt to repair a broken body. What's the small plate screwed on top of the cover?
Regards,
Christian |
| Vlad |
Posted - Nov 17 2011 : 8:30:59 PM
Nice find! Some kind of stationary macro device?
Cheers,
Vlad |
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 17 2011 : 09:49:44 AM
Mmmm... I was probably too lyric in my previous post.
I have just checked the lens, and the image occurs roughly at 4cm, like the Industar 24M. So, this Industar 7 was probably assembled for a 39mm Zenit. Anyway, it cannot have been made for a LTM body which needs 28,8mm.
Jacques. |
