Does anyone know what size filter I would look for on a Duo? I'd like to get a
red filter for BW pictures.

Thanks.

Philip

Well with help of a flashlight and a dark room I found three additional
tiny light leaks so I guess that was my problem after all.  I painted a
bit of black silicone rtv over the leaks.  This Duo was pretty worn
which is the reason I chose it for modification.  I didn't look over the
bellows as well as I should have.

I don't come close to snapping 10k worth of digital photos but it works.
Sort of keeping one foot in chemistry and the other in digital.

On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 20:21 -0400, Philip Greene wrote:
>
> RCB
>
> Thanks for the info. I like Tri X. Too bad Panatomic X is still not
> available. I only shot a roll or two a long time ago and was amazed at
> the results.
>
> Here's a link on Flickr to a color shot by a photographer using a Duo
> that makes me want to try color:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ektarama/138397802/
>
> Makes sense to use digital for color. Although I understand there are
> more labs that are doing develop and high resolution scans to CD for
> not a lot of money. Although, obviously, snapping 10,000 digital
> photos is a lot cheaper than getting that done in film.
>
> With the popularity of Holgas a little light flare is considered
> nice:)
>
> Philip
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:01 PM, R.C.Booth <rcbooth@...>
> wrote:
>
>         Philip,
>
>         The most recent shots are TriX.  I believe the others are also
>         TriX.  No, I haven't tried color.  I probably won't either.  I
>         really enjoy black & white.  I develop the film myself - just
>         standard D76 and scan the negatives with an old Epson 1750
>         flatbed photo scanner.  It does a real nice job with medium
>         format negatives but not so nice with 35mm.  I use a Minolta
>         Dimage IV for 35mm negatives.  For any color I use digital
>         (Nikon D2x).  Its getting more difficult to conveniently get
>         film processed locally with reasonable quality and digital
>         gets around that.
>
>         The shot of the ducks on the deck is a small crop from the
>         center of the negative.  Its probably about 20% of the total
>         negative.  For that frame there was some strange light flare
>         near the top left and lower right of the negative.  I had
>         found and sealed a leak in the bellows a while back and
>         thought there might be some more leaks.  But, strangely, the
>         other frames did not exhibit that pattern.
>
>         RCB
>
>         Philip Greene wrote:
>
>         >
>         >
>         > RCB,
>         >
>         > Thanks for the link. Those snaps are pretty interesting. The
>         > lens gives your photos that - long  time ago feel. What kind
>         > of film did you use? Have you tried any color?
>         >
>         > I like the rail bridge piers shot.
>         >
>         > Philip
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM, R.C.Booth
>         > <rcbooth@...> wrote:
>         >
>         >         Philip:
>         >
>         >         This link (http://rcbooth.zenfolio.com/p796883833)
>         >         leads to a few of my
>         >         snaps with a Duo. I was out shooting with it
>         >         yesterday. Its in user
>         >         condition and I've modified it to use regular 120
>         >         spools on the supply
>         >         side that drop in.
>         >
>         >         RCB
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >         On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 19:00 -0400, Philip Greene
>         >         wrote:
>         >         >
>         >         > Hi Pete,
>         >         >
>         >         > Thanks for the advice on Duo restoration - seeing
>         >         as I am not in a
>         >         > position to throw money at a restoration right now
>         >         and since I do have
>         >         > a working Duo (with German etching on top). I am
>         >         looking forward to
>         >         > trying Fuji Velvia in the Duo.
>         >         >
>         >         > I'll also have a look at the files and photos
>         >         section. I especially
>         >         > like to find photos taken with Duo. Though I have
>         >         not found many.
>         >         > There are a few nice photos on Flickr. But I think
>         >         the Duo is a bit
>         >         > overlooked and maybe underrated?
>         >         >
>         >         > I am looking for a red filter for BW photography.
>         >         Do you know what
>         >         > size I should look for on eBay?
>         >         >
>         >         > Thanks again!
>         >         >
>         >         > Philip
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 8:16 AM, pete.naylor
>         >         > <pete.naylor@...> wrote:
>         >         >
>         >         > Hi, Philip Hmmm, I hate to be the prophet of doom,
>         >         but if the
>         >         > black actuating arm on your Duo is badly bent,
>         >         plus the
>         >         > chromed shutter release lever is loose, it sounds
>         >         like more
>         >         > than a CLA is needed.
>         >         >
>         >         > Camera technicians who are prepared to tinker with
>         >         70-year old
>         >         > cameras like these Duo's are hard to find. Time is
>         >         money, and
>         >         > their services won't come cheap. So although Duo
>         >         prices do
>         >         > seem to be rising around the globe, you can still
>         >         find
>         >         > bargains, especially if they have cosmetic faults.
>         >         For
>         >         > example, a couple of years ago I was lucky enough
>         >         to score an
>         >         > identical art-deco Duo to the one carried by
>         >         Amelia Earhart on
>         >         > her last fateful flight, here in Perth for a mere
>         >         $25. It had
>         >         > a crack in the front VF and the Compur shutter was
>         >         sleepy but
>         >         > otherwise it was in excellent nick.
>         >         >
>         >         > If you want to get serious about collecting Duo's
>         >         (or any
>         >         > other classic), it's not a bad idea to build up a
>         >         collection
>         >         > of non-goers to cannabalize. I'm almost ashamed to
>         >         confess the
>         >         > number of cameras in my 300-plus collection that
>         >         are actually
>         >         > 'Frankenstein' models, made up from this or that
>         >         bit or bits.
>         >         > The main thing is the end result, I reckon!
>         >         >
>         >         > Thanks for the BH prices of their 620 stuff, which
>         >         I'm sure
>         >         > will be welcome news to the other guys in the
>         >         Group.
>         >         >
>         >         > Regarding my Duo article on Mischa's website, I
>         >         have to
>         >         > confess that it needs some minor upgrading. Some
>         >         of my
>         >         > original assumptions have been proved wrong,
>         >         thanks to
>         >         > information from guys in this Group and elsewhere.
>         >         For
>         >         > example, it appears that the f3.5 Kodak Anastigmat
>         >         lenses
>         >         > fitted to US market Duo's were NOT rebadged
>         >         4-element
>         >         > Schneider Xenars, but more likely Schneider
>         >         Radionar triplets.
>         >         > What's strange is that the European market models
>         >         were fitted
>         >         > with Xenars! Go figure, eh?
>         >         >
>         >         > Please take your time to view the considerable
>         >         amount of scans
>         >         > and photos of relevant stuff contributed by the
>         >         guys in this
>         >         > Group in both the 'Photos' and 'Files' areas. I
>         >         doubt that
>         >         > there's a more informative single source anywhere
>         >         in the
>         >         > world, about those Duo's. However, if you have any
>         >         additional
>         >         > stuff - be it adverts, brochures or whatever,
>         >         please post it.
>         >         > Yahoo have very kindly widened the limits for
>         >         Groups such as
>         >         > ours of late, so file sizes are not so crucial as
>         >         they used to
>         >         > be.
>         >         >
>         >         > PETE NAYLOR
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         > --- In duo620@..., Philip Greene
>         >         > <philipgreenephotography@...> wrote:
>         >         > >
>         >         > > Hi Peter,
>         >         > >
>         >         > > Thanks for the reply and advice and welcome. No
>         >         problem with
>         >         > delays!
>         >         > >
>         >         > > The bent part is the black actuating arm - bent
>         >         completely
>         >         > back at the elbow
>         >         > > that goes up to the chorme arm ( which
>         >         incidentally is a
>         >         > little loose and
>         >         > > does not fire the shutter properly, I may go
>         >         ahead and try
>         >         > what you said -
>         >         > > although I was debating aboout sendning it to
>         >         "Classic
>         >         > Camera for CLA and
>         >         > > repair. I suspect the bent arm may be from
>         >         folding the
>         >         > lens/bellows back in
>         >         > > improperly by someone.
>         >         > >
>         >         > > BH also sells a number of BW 620 films including
>         >         TriX, Plus
>         >         > X, Portra 160
>         >         > > color film and Efke. They all range from $10 -
>         >         12.00 a roll
>         >         > - not bad for
>         >         > > this film.
>         >         > >
>         >         > > BTW a Duo 620 CRF just went for about $112.00 on
>         >         eBay. I
>         >         > have seen about 2
>         >         > > in 6 months on eBay. One that is repeatedly
>         >         there but not
>         >         > sold, has an
>         >         > > asking price of $450.00.
>         >         > >
>         >         > > Just bought a German version of Duo 620 with
>         >         Carl Zeiss 3.5
>         >         > lens for $40.00
>         >         > > on eBay in very clean condition.
>         >         > >
>         >         > > I'll post some pictures after I use the new Duo.
>         >         I love to
>         >         > see what they can
>         >         > > do and thought Fuji Velvia could be interesting.
>         >         > >
>         >         > > I ran across an article you write on Mischa
>         >         (sp?) Koenig's
>         >         > web site. Nicely
>         >         > > written and informative.
>         >         > >
>         >         > > Below are 2 links to some of my photos - mostly
>         >         digital -
>         >         > though digital has
>         >         > > got me interested in film again.
>         >         > >
>         >         > > Best,
>         >         > >
>         >         > > Philip
>         >         > >
>         >         > >
>         >         > >
>         >         >
>         >         > > On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:40 AM, pete.naylor
>         >         > <pete.naylor@...>wrote:
>         >         >
>         >         > >
>         >         > > >
>         >         > > >
>         >         > > > Hi, Philip First of all - welcome to the
>         >         Group, mate - and
>         >         > my apologies for
>         >         > > > taking so long to acknowledge your application
>         >         to join.
>         >         > Mea Culpa, etc, etc
>         >         > > > - I've been having some problems with acessing
>         >         Yahoo
>         >         > stuff, which was
>         >         > > > apparently due to me still using IE7. Now I've
>         >         got
>         >         > upgraded to IE8, things
>         >         > > > seem A - OK. BTW - if anybody else is
>         >         experiencing similar
>         >         > problems, I
>         >         > > > suggest you do the same! The upgrade is free.
>         >         > > >
>         >         > > > Thanks for the tip about BH Photo stocking 620
>         >         Fuji
>         >         > Velvia. That sure
>         >         > > > sounds better than going through the angst of
>         >         reloading
>         >         > 120 flm onto 620
>         >         > > > spools, or resizing 120 spool ends to 620
>         >         proportions. Do
>         >         > you know how much
>         >         > > > BH are charging?
>         >         > > >
>         >         > > > Regarding the bent shutter arm on your Series
>         >         11 Duo, are
>         >         > we talking about
>         >         > > > the chromed vertical arm that actually
>         >         attaches to the
>         >         > shutter internals, or
>         >         > > > the black painted actuating arm that moves
>         >         laterally when
>         >         > you hit the
>         >         > > > shutter button on the top cover? If as I
>         >         suspect, it's the
>         >         > latter, then it's
>         >         > > > maybe the dog-leg arm that's got bent. This is
>         >         only made
>         >         > from mild steel
>         >         > > > AFAIK and could be realigned with a tweak from
>         >         a pair of
>         >         > pointy-nose pliers,
>         >         > > > if the bend isn't excessive.
>         >         > > >
>         >         > > > It's not an unusual problem with folders that
>         >         have a
>         >         > remote shutter release
>         >         > > > on the top cover. Some post-war British Ensign
>         >         Selfixes
>         >         > are common sufferers
>         >         > > > from the same malady.
>         >         > > >
>         >         > > > PETE NAYLOR (Moderator)
>         >         > > >
>         >         > > >
>         >         >
>         >         > > > --- In duo620@... <duo620%
>         >         > 40yahoogroups.com.au>,
>         >         >
>         >         > > > "philipjohngreene" <philipgreenephotography@>
>         >         wrote:
>         >         > > > >
>         >         > > > > Hi I'm just curious if anybody has
>         >         experience with
>         >         > repairing bent linkage
>         >         > > > below bellows - the piece that pushes the
>         >         shutter lever. I
>         >         > have a duo 620
>         >         > > > series II that needs this repair. I'm
>         >         wondering how to get
>         >         > under the bellows
>         >         > > > and if bending the metal back might not break
>         >         it?
>         >         > > > >
>         >         > > > > BTW in case you don't already know BH photo
>         >         carries 620
>         >         > Fuji Velvia 100.
>         >         > > > I was amazed to see that available.
>         >         > > > >
>         >         > > > > Thanks for any input.
>         >         > > > >
>         >         > > > > Philip
>         >         > > > >
>         >         > > >
>         >         > > >
>         >         > > >
>         >         > >
>         >         > >
>         >         > >
>         >         >
>         >         > > --
>         >         > > http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
>         >         > > http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04
>         >         > >
>         >         > > Tel. 203-747-9892
>         >         > > Home 203-458-9988
>         >         > >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         > --
>         >         > http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
>         >         > http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04
>         >         >
>         >         > Tel. 203-747-9892
>         >         > Home 203-458-9988
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > --
>         > http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
>         > http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04
>         >
>         > Tel. 203-747-9892
>         > Home 203-458-9988
>         >
>         >
>         > ____________________________________________________________
>         >
>         >
>         > No virus found in this incoming message.
>         > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>         > Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.115/2403 - Release Date:
09/29/09 17:56:00
>         >
>         >
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
> http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04
>
> Tel. 203-747-9892
> Home 203-458-9988
>
>
>
>

 

RCB,

Thanks for the link. Those snaps are pretty interesting. The lens gives your photos that - long  time ago feel. What kind of film did you use? Have you tried any color?

I like the rail bridge piers shot.

Philip

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM, R.C.Booth <rcbooth@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

 

Philip:

This link (http://rcbooth.zenfolio.com/p796883833) leads to a few of my
snaps with a Duo. I was out shooting with it yesterday. Its in user
condition and I've modified it to use regular 120 spools on the supply
side that drop in.

RCB

On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 19:00 -0400, Philip Greene wrote:
>
> Hi Pete,
>
> Thanks for the advice on Duo restoration - seeing as I am not in a
> position to throw money at a restoration right now and since I do have
> a working Duo (with German etching on top). I am looking forward to
> trying Fuji Velvia in the Duo.
>
> I'll also have a look at the files and photos section. I especially
> like to find photos taken with Duo. Though I have not found many.
> There are a few nice photos on Flickr. But I think the Duo is a bit
> overlooked and maybe underrated?
>
> I am looking for a red filter for BW photography. Do you know what
> size I should look for on eBay?
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Philip
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 8:16 AM, pete.naylor
> <pete.naylor@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> Hi, Philip Hmmm, I hate to be the prophet of doom, but if the
> black actuating arm on your Duo is badly bent, plus the
> chromed shutter release lever is loose, it sounds like more
> than a CLA is needed.
>
> Camera technicians who are prepared to tinker with 70-year old
> cameras like these Duo's are hard to find. Time is money, and
> their services won't come cheap. So although Duo prices do
> seem to be rising around the globe, you can still find
> bargains, especially if they have cosmetic faults. For
> example, a couple of years ago I was lucky enough to score an
> identical art-deco Duo to the one carried by Amelia Earhart on
> her last fateful flight, here in Perth for a mere $25. It had
> a crack in the front VF and the Compur shutter was sleepy but
> otherwise it was in excellent nick.
>
> If you want to get serious about collecting Duo's (or any
> other classic), it's not a bad idea to build up a collection
> of non-goers to cannabalize. I'm almost ashamed to confess the
> number of cameras in my 300-plus collection that are actually
> 'Frankenstein' models, made up from this or that bit or bits.
> The main thing is the end result, I reckon!
>
> Thanks for the BH prices of their 620 stuff, which I'm sure
> will be welcome news to the other guys in the Group.
>
> Regarding my Duo article on Mischa's website, I have to
> confess that it needs some minor upgrading. Some of my
> original assumptions have been proved wrong, thanks to
> information from guys in this Group and elsewhere. For
> example, it appears that the f3.5 Kodak Anastigmat lenses
> fitted to US market Duo's were NOT rebadged 4-element
> Schneider Xenars, but more likely Schneider Radionar triplets.
> What's strange is that the European market models were fitted
> with Xenars! Go figure, eh?
>
> Please take your time to view the considerable amount of scans
> and photos of relevant stuff contributed by the guys in this
> Group in both the 'Photos' and 'Files' areas. I doubt that
> there's a more informative single source anywhere in the
> world, about those Duo's. However, if you have any additional
> stuff - be it adverts, brochures or whatever, please post it.
> Yahoo have very kindly widened the limits for Groups such as
> ours of late, so file sizes are not so crucial as they used to
> be.
>
> PETE NAYLOR
>
>
>
>
> --- In duo620@yahoogroups.com.au, Philip Greene
> <philipgreenephotography@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > Thanks for the reply and advice and welcome. No problem with
> delays!
> >
> > The bent part is the black actuating arm - bent completely
> back at the elbow
> > that goes up to the chorme arm ( which incidentally is a
> little loose and
> > does not fire the shutter properly, I may go ahead and try
> what you said -
> > although I was debating aboout sendning it to "Classic
> Camera for CLA and
> > repair. I suspect the bent arm may be from folding the
> lens/bellows back in
> > improperly by someone.
> >
> > BH also sells a number of BW 620 films including TriX, Plus
> X, Portra 160
> > color film and Efke. They all range from $10 - 12.00 a roll
> - not bad for
> > this film.
> >
> > BTW a Duo 620 CRF just went for about $112.00 on eBay. I
> have seen about 2
> > in 6 months on eBay. One that is repeatedly there but not
> sold, has an
> > asking price of $450.00.
> >
> > Just bought a German version of Duo 620 with Carl Zeiss 3.5
> lens for $40.00
> > on eBay in very clean condition.
> >
> > I'll post some pictures after I use the new Duo. I love to
> see what they can
> > do and thought Fuji Velvia could be interesting.
> >
> > I ran across an article you write on Mischa (sp?) Koenig's
> web site. Nicely
> > written and informative.
> >
> > Below are 2 links to some of my photos - mostly digital -
> though digital has
> > got me interested in film again.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Philip
> >
> >
> >
>
> > On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:40 AM, pete.naylor
> <pete.naylor@...>wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi, Philip First of all - welcome to the Group, mate - and
> my apologies for
> > > taking so long to acknowledge your application to join.
> Mea Culpa, etc, etc
> > > - I've been having some problems with acessing Yahoo
> stuff, which was
> > > apparently due to me still using IE7. Now I've got
> upgraded to IE8, things
> > > seem A - OK. BTW - if anybody else is experiencing similar
> problems, I
> > > suggest you do the same! The upgrade is free.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the tip about BH Photo stocking 620 Fuji
> Velvia. That sure
> > > sounds better than going through the angst of reloading
> 120 flm onto 620
> > > spools, or resizing 120 spool ends to 620 proportions. Do
> you know how much
> > > BH are charging?
> > >
> > > Regarding the bent shutter arm on your Series 11 Duo, are
> we talking about
> > > the chromed vertical arm that actually attaches to the
> shutter internals, or
> > > the black painted actuating arm that moves laterally when
> you hit the
> > > shutter button on the top cover? If as I suspect, it's the
> latter, then it's
> > > maybe the dog-leg arm that's got bent. This is only made
> from mild steel
> > > AFAIK and could be realigned with a tweak from a pair of
> pointy-nose pliers,
> > > if the bend isn't excessive.
> > >
> > > It's not an unusual problem with folders that have a
> remote shutter release
> > > on the top cover. Some post-war British Ensign Selfixes
> are common sufferers
> > > from the same malady.
> > >
> > > PETE NAYLOR (Moderator)
> > >
> > >
>
> > > --- In duo620@yahoogroups.com.au <duo620%
> 40yahoogroups.com.au>,
>
> > > "philipjohngreene" <philipgreenephotography@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi I'm just curious if anybody has experience with
> repairing bent linkage
> > > below bellows - the piece that pushes the shutter lever. I
> have a duo 620
> > > series II that needs this repair. I'm wondering how to get
> under the bellows
> > > and if bending the metal back might not break it?
> > > >
> > > > BTW in case you don't already know BH photo carries 620
> Fuji Velvia 100.
> > > I was amazed to see that available.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for any input.
> > > >
> > > > Philip
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> > --
> > http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
> > http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04
> >
> > Tel. 203-747-9892
> > Home 203-458-9988
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
> http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04
>
> Tel. 203-747-9892
> Home 203-458-9988
>
>
>
>

--
http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04

Tel. 203-747-9892
Home 203-458-9988

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.115/2403 - Release Date: 09/29/09 17:56:00

I've added a two more snaps taken with my Dup620.  Here is a link to one
of them:  http://rcbooth.zenfolio.com/p796883833/h3d0fe12e#h3d0fe12e.

I'm always amazed at how sharp this Xenar is.

RCB

Philip:

This link (http://rcbooth.zenfolio.com/p796883833) leads to a few of my
snaps with a Duo.  I was out shooting with it yesterday.  Its in user
condition and I've modified it to use regular 120 spools on the supply
side that drop in.

RCB


On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 19:00 -0400, Philip Greene wrote:
>
> Hi Pete,
>
> Thanks for the advice on Duo restoration - seeing as I am not in a
> position to throw money at a restoration right now and since I do have
> a working Duo (with German etching on top). I am looking forward to
> trying Fuji Velvia in the Duo.
>
> I'll also have a look at the files and photos section. I especially
> like to find photos taken with Duo. Though I have not found many.
> There are a few nice photos on Flickr. But I think the Duo is a bit
> overlooked and maybe underrated?
>
> I am looking for a red filter for BW photography. Do you know what
> size I should look for on eBay?
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Philip
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 8:16 AM, pete.naylor
> <pete.naylor@...> wrote:
>
>         Hi, Philip Hmmm, I hate to be the prophet of doom, but if the
>         black actuating arm on your Duo is badly bent, plus the
>         chromed shutter release lever is loose, it sounds like more
>         than a CLA is needed.
>
>         Camera technicians who are prepared to tinker with 70-year old
>         cameras like these Duo's are hard to find. Time is money, and
>         their services won't come cheap. So although Duo prices do
>         seem to be rising around the globe, you can still find
>         bargains, especially if they have cosmetic faults. For
>         example, a couple of years ago I was lucky enough to score an
>         identical art-deco Duo to the one carried by Amelia Earhart on
>         her last fateful flight, here in Perth for a mere $25. It had
>         a crack in the front VF and the Compur shutter was sleepy but
>         otherwise it was in excellent nick.
>
>         If you want to get serious about collecting Duo's (or any
>         other classic), it's not a bad idea to build up a collection
>         of non-goers to cannabalize. I'm almost ashamed to confess the
>         number of cameras in my 300-plus collection that are actually
>         'Frankenstein' models, made up from this or that bit or bits.
>         The main thing is the end result, I reckon!
>
>         Thanks for the BH prices of their 620 stuff, which I'm sure
>         will be welcome news to the other guys in the Group.
>
>         Regarding my Duo article on Mischa's website, I have to
>         confess that it needs some minor upgrading. Some of my
>         original assumptions have been proved wrong, thanks to
>         information from guys in this Group and elsewhere. For
>         example, it appears that the f3.5 Kodak Anastigmat lenses
>         fitted to US market Duo's were NOT rebadged 4-element
>         Schneider Xenars, but more likely Schneider Radionar triplets.
>         What's strange is that the European market models were fitted
>         with Xenars! Go figure, eh?
>
>         Please take your time to view the considerable amount of scans
>         and photos of relevant stuff contributed by the guys in this
>         Group in both the 'Photos' and 'Files' areas. I doubt that
>         there's a more informative single source anywhere in the
>         world, about those Duo's. However, if you have any additional
>         stuff - be it adverts, brochures or whatever, please post it.
>         Yahoo have very kindly widened the limits for Groups such as
>         ours of late, so file sizes are not so crucial as they used to
>         be.
>
>         PETE NAYLOR
>
>
>
>
>         --- In duo620@..., Philip Greene
>         <philipgreenephotography@...> wrote:
>         >
>         > Hi Peter,
>         >
>         > Thanks for the reply and advice and welcome. No problem with
>         delays!
>         >
>         > The bent part is the black actuating arm - bent completely
>         back at the elbow
>         > that goes up to the chorme arm ( which incidentally is a
>         little loose and
>         > does not fire the shutter properly, I may go ahead and try
>         what you said -
>         > although I was debating aboout sendning it to "Classic
>         Camera for CLA and
>         > repair. I suspect the bent arm may be from folding the
>         lens/bellows back in
>         > improperly by someone.
>         >
>         > BH also sells a number of BW 620 films including TriX, Plus
>         X, Portra 160
>         > color film and Efke. They all range from $10 - 12.00 a roll
>         - not bad for
>         > this film.
>         >
>         > BTW a Duo 620 CRF just went for about $112.00 on eBay. I
>         have seen about 2
>         > in 6 months on eBay. One that is repeatedly there but not
>         sold, has an
>         > asking price of $450.00.
>         >
>         > Just bought a German version of Duo 620 with Carl Zeiss 3.5
>         lens for $40.00
>         > on eBay in very clean condition.
>         >
>         > I'll post some pictures after I use the new Duo. I love to
>         see what they can
>         > do and thought Fuji Velvia could be interesting.
>         >
>         > I ran across an article you write on Mischa (sp?) Koenig's
>         web site. Nicely
>         > written and informative.
>         >
>         > Below are 2 links to some of my photos - mostly digital -
>         though digital has
>         > got me interested in film again.
>         >
>         > Best,
>         >
>         > Philip
>         >
>         >
>         >
>
>         > On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:40 AM, pete.naylor
>         <pete.naylor@...>wrote:
>
>         >
>         > >
>         > >
>         > > Hi, Philip First of all - welcome to the Group, mate - and
>         my apologies for
>         > > taking so long to acknowledge your application to join.
>         Mea Culpa, etc, etc
>         > > - I've been having some problems with acessing Yahoo
>         stuff, which was
>         > > apparently due to me still using IE7. Now I've got
>         upgraded to IE8, things
>         > > seem A - OK. BTW - if anybody else is experiencing similar
>         problems, I
>         > > suggest you do the same! The upgrade is free.
>         > >
>         > > Thanks for the tip about BH Photo stocking 620 Fuji
>         Velvia. That sure
>         > > sounds better than going through the angst of reloading
>         120 flm onto 620
>         > > spools, or resizing 120 spool ends to 620 proportions. Do
>         you know how much
>         > > BH are charging?
>         > >
>         > > Regarding the bent shutter arm on your Series 11 Duo, are
>         we talking about
>         > > the chromed vertical arm that actually attaches to the
>         shutter internals, or
>         > > the black painted actuating arm that moves laterally when
>         you hit the
>         > > shutter button on the top cover? If as I suspect, it's the
>         latter, then it's
>         > > maybe the dog-leg arm that's got bent. This is only made
>         from mild steel
>         > > AFAIK and could be realigned with a tweak from a pair of
>         pointy-nose pliers,
>         > > if the bend isn't excessive.
>         > >
>         > > It's not an unusual problem with folders that have a
>         remote shutter release
>         > > on the top cover. Some post-war British Ensign Selfixes
>         are common sufferers
>         > > from the same malady.
>         > >
>         > > PETE NAYLOR (Moderator)
>         > >
>         > >
>
>         > > --- In duo620@... <duo620%
>         40yahoogroups.com.au>,
>
>         > > "philipjohngreene" <philipgreenephotography@> wrote:
>         > > >
>         > > > Hi I'm just curious if anybody has experience with
>         repairing bent linkage
>         > > below bellows - the piece that pushes the shutter lever. I
>         have a duo 620
>         > > series II that needs this repair. I'm wondering how to get
>         under the bellows
>         > > and if bending the metal back might not break it?
>         > > >
>         > > > BTW in case you don't already know BH photo carries 620
>         Fuji Velvia 100.
>         > > I was amazed to see that available.
>         > > >
>         > > > Thanks for any input.
>         > > >
>         > > > Philip
>         > > >
>         > >
>         > >
>         > >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>
>         > --
>         > http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
>         > http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04
>         >
>         > Tel. 203-747-9892
>         > Home 203-458-9988
>         >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
> http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04
>
> Tel. 203-747-9892
> Home 203-458-9988
>
>
>
>

Hi, Philip      Hmmm, I hate to be the prophet of doom, but if the black
actuating arm on your Duo is badly bent, plus the chromed shutter release lever
is loose, it sounds like more than a CLA is needed.

Camera technicians who are prepared to tinker with 70-year old cameras like
these Duo's are hard to find.   Time is money, and their services won't come
cheap.  So although Duo prices do seem to be rising around the globe, you can
still find bargains, especially if they have cosmetic faults.   For example, a
couple of years ago I was lucky enough to score an identical art-deco Duo to the
one carried by Amelia Earhart on her last fateful flight, here in Perth for a
mere $25.   It had a crack in the front VF and the Compur shutter was sleepy but
otherwise it was in excellent nick.

If you want to get serious about collecting Duo's (or any other classic), it's
not a bad idea to build up a collection of non-goers to cannabalize.    I'm
almost ashamed to confess the number of cameras in my 300-plus collection that
are actually 'Frankenstein' models, made up from this or that bit or bits.   
The main thing is the end result, I reckon!

Thanks for the BH prices of their 620 stuff, which I'm sure will be welcome news
to the other guys in the Group.

Regarding my Duo article on Mischa's website, I have to confess that it needs
some minor upgrading.   Some of my original assumptions have been proved wrong,
thanks to information from guys in this Group and elsewhere.   For example, it
appears that the f3.5 Kodak Anastigmat lenses fitted to US market Duo's were NOT
rebadged 4-element Schneider Xenars, but more likely Schneider Radionar
triplets.   What's strange is that the European market models were fitted with
Xenars!   Go figure, eh?

Please take your time to view the considerable amount of scans and photos of
relevant stuff contributed by the guys in this Group in both the 'Photos' and
'Files' areas.    I doubt that there's a more informative single source anywhere
in the world, about those Duo's.   However, if you have any additional stuff -
be it adverts, brochures or whatever, please post it.    Yahoo have very kindly
widened the limits for Groups such as ours of late, so file sizes are not so
crucial as they used to be.


PETE NAYLOR







--- In duo620@..., Philip Greene <philipgreenephotography@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> Thanks for the reply and advice and welcome. No problem with delays!
>
> The bent part is the black actuating arm - bent completely back at the elbow
> that goes up to the chorme arm ( which incidentally is a little loose and
> does not fire the shutter properly, I may go ahead and try what you said -
> although I was debating aboout sendning  it to "Classic Camera for CLA and
> repair. I suspect the bent arm may be from folding the lens/bellows back in
> improperly by someone.
>
> BH also sells a number of BW 620 films including TriX, Plus X, Portra 160
> color film and Efke. They all range from $10 - 12.00 a roll - not bad for
> this film.
>
> BTW a Duo 620 CRF just went for about $112.00 on eBay. I have seen about 2
> in 6 months on eBay. One that is repeatedly there but not sold, has an
> asking price of $450.00.
>
> Just bought a German version of Duo 620 with Carl Zeiss 3.5 lens for $40.00
> on eBay in very clean condition.
>
> I'll post some pictures after I use the new Duo. I love to see what they can
> do and thought Fuji Velvia could be interesting.
>
> I ran across an article you write on Mischa (sp?) Koenig's web site. Nicely
> written and informative.
>
> Below are 2 links to some of my photos - mostly digital - though digital has
> got me interested in film again.
>
> Best,
>
> Philip
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:40 AM, pete.naylor <pete.naylor@...>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hi, Philip First of all - welcome to the Group, mate - and my apologies for
> > taking so long to acknowledge your application to join. Mea Culpa, etc, etc
> > - I've been having some problems with acessing Yahoo stuff, which was
> > apparently due to me still using IE7. Now I've got upgraded to IE8, things
> > seem A - OK. BTW - if anybody else is experiencing similar problems, I
> > suggest you do the same! The upgrade is free.
> >
> > Thanks for the tip about BH Photo stocking 620 Fuji Velvia. That sure
> > sounds better than going through the angst of reloading 120 flm onto 620
> > spools, or resizing 120 spool ends to 620 proportions. Do you know how much
> > BH are charging?
> >
> > Regarding the bent shutter arm on your Series 11 Duo, are we talking about
> > the chromed vertical arm that actually attaches to the shutter internals, or
> > the black painted actuating arm that moves laterally when you hit the
> > shutter button on the top cover? If as I suspect, it's the latter, then it's
> > maybe the dog-leg arm that's got bent. This is only made from mild steel
> > AFAIK and could be realigned with a tweak from a pair of pointy-nose pliers,
> > if the bend isn't excessive.
> >
> > It's not an unusual problem with folders that have a remote shutter release
> > on the top cover. Some post-war British Ensign Selfixes are common sufferers
> > from the same malady.
> >
> > PETE NAYLOR (Moderator)
> >
> >
> > --- In duo620@... <duo620%40yahoogroups.com.au>,
> > "philipjohngreene" <philipgreenephotography@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi I'm just curious if anybody has experience with repairing bent linkage
> > below bellows - the piece that pushes the shutter lever. I have a duo 620
> > series II that needs this repair. I'm wondering how to get under the bellows
> > and if bending the metal back might not break it?
> > >
> > > BTW in case you don't already know BH photo carries 620 Fuji Velvia 100.
> > I was amazed to see that available.
> > >
> > > Thanks for any input.
> > >
> > > Philip
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.philipgreenephotography.com
> http://flickr.com/photos/30905774@N04
>
> Tel. 203-747-9892
> Home 203-458-9988
>

Hi, Philip        First of all - welcome to the Group, mate - and my apologies
for taking so long to acknowledge your application to join.   Mea Culpa, etc,
etc - I've been having some problems with acessing Yahoo stuff, which was
apparently due to me still using IE7.   Now I've got upgraded to IE8, things
seem A - OK.   BTW - if anybody else is experiencing similar problems, I suggest
you do the same!    The upgrade is free.

Thanks for the tip about BH Photo stocking 620 Fuji Velvia.   That sure sounds
better than going through the angst of reloading 120 flm onto 620 spools, or
resizing 120 spool ends to 620 proportions.    Do you know how much BH are
charging?

Regarding the bent shutter arm on your Series 11 Duo, are we talking about the
chromed vertical arm that actually attaches to the shutter internals, or the
black painted actuating arm that moves laterally when you hit the shutter button
on the top cover?   If as I suspect, it's the latter, then it's maybe the
dog-leg arm that's got bent.   This is only made from mild steel AFAIK and could
be realigned with a tweak from a pair of pointy-nose pliers, if the bend isn't
excessive.

It's not an unusual problem with folders that have a remote shutter release on
the top cover.   Some post-war British Ensign Selfixes are common sufferers from
the same malady.

PETE NAYLOR (Moderator)












--- In duo620@..., "philipjohngreene"
<philipgreenephotography@...> wrote:
>
> Hi I'm just curious if anybody has experience with repairing bent linkage
below bellows - the piece that pushes the shutter lever. I have a duo 620 series
II that needs this repair. I'm wondering how to get under the bellows and if
bending the metal back might not break it?
>
> BTW in case you don't already know BH photo carries 620 Fuji Velvia 100. I was
amazed to see that available.
>
> Thanks for any input.
>
> Philip
>

Hi I'm just curious if anybody has experience with repairing bent linkage below
bellows - the piece that pushes the shutter lever. I have a duo 620 series II
that needs this repair. I'm wondering how to get under the bellows and if
bending the metal back might not break it?

BTW in case you don't already know BH photo carries 620 Fuji Velvia 100. I was
amazed to see that available.

Thanks for any input.

Philip

Thanks, Mike, for posting the pics of your Duo and adding its vital stats to the
database.

The 'French Connection' aspect to Duo's is interesting, although I suspect that
you might have got yours via Fleabya US, seeing you mentioned '$22' rather than
20 Euros or whatever.

If you look at 'Files', then 'Adverts From Round The World', you'll see that the
fifth entry is a French advert for the Duo Ser 11, kindly scanned and sent to me
by Bernard Plazonet (de Chamalieres).   It's interesting from a couple of
aspects.   One is that it's for the lower-end version with F4.5 Kodak Anastigmat
lens and Pronto shutter, which doesn't seem to have been sold in the US for
example, although it surely was in the UK seeing I've got one complete with
original purchase receipt dated 1941.   (Gosh - wasn't there a war on then?)

The other is that the camera shown in the advert definately has an accessory
shoe on the top cover for the Kodak Rangefinder, unlike say the local-market
German models which don't.   However, now the plot thickens, Moriarity ......   
I have a French-market Duo 11, ie with writing 'en francais' on the depth of
field circular scale, but with NO accessory shoe.   In other words - it's the
same as the German-market models, apart from the writing difference.

So, Mike, if in the course of your travels, visits to Bievre, etc, you ever get
the chance to find anything more about the local French situation with the Duo
620, please post about it.   At the moment I'm a bit purplexed because of the
variation between the one in the advert and the one in my own collection!

Regards From Pete N.

Hi there everyone,
thanks for the welcome Pete, like a good boy, I've put the info about my camera
on the database, and I've also posted a few pics of the camera.
Of all the many folders that I've owned over the years, this is far and away my
favourite, and it's the first choice if I want to use a film camera on a journey
or day out. 6x4.5 is not to everyones taste, but I like it a lot, but not enough
to haul a Bronica ETRS or Mamiya 645 around with me!
Kind Regards,
Mike

Let's all welcome new Group member 'Mike' from France, who has a Duo 620 but
wants to know more about them.

Mike, you'll see there's already a lot of relevant docs and stuff posted both in
the 'Files' and 'Photos' area, but feel free to add anything you may have.    If
your camera is different in any way from those already pictured, eg lens/shutter
type or viewfinder, we'd love to see a pic of it posted.

We also have three databases going, so please consider adding the details of
your camera.   The more we have, the merrier!

PETE NAYLOR
(Moderator)

A big 'Hi' to new Group member 'Moe' from Canada, who's a collector of Kodaks in
general.    Please feel to post about yourself, and your interest in the Duo
620s.   We also have a database for the three main variants of the Duo, to which
you're invited to add the details of your stuff.

Pete Naylor
(Moderator)

Sorry, folks - it appears that "Rave Trade" was just using the Group to
advertise non-relevant stuff.   So I've given him/her/it the flick.

PETE NAYLOR (Moderator)

A big welcome to new member 'Rave Trade' - and my apologies for not checking the
'Members Pending' situation for a few weeks, mate!


PETE NAYLOR (Moderator)

A big welcome to newby member 'Curt', who has several Duo's and other
Nagel models.

Curt, feel free to post a message here about yourself and your
collecting interests if you wish.   As you can see from what's in
the 'Photos' and 'Files' areas in the left-side menu, we've already
got quite a collection of photos of Duo's of all types and
configurations, plus related brochures and documents.    If you cna
add anything we've haven't yet got, please post it!

We also have the three databases going.   So if you'd like to add your
cameras' details, please do.   The more information we have, the
better!

PETE NAYLOR - MODERATOR

--- In duo620@..., "pete.naylor" <pete.naylor@...> wrote:
>
> Well, guys - a hearty welcome to newby member Don, who some of us
> already know through the IDCC connection.
>
> Don, with your special interest in accessory rangefinders, you'll
find
> there's already both pictures of Ser 11 Duo 620s fitted with both the
> Kodak Pocket RF and the later Standard RF, in the 'Photos' area.
> We'v also had several brochures and such posted in the 'Files' area,
> plus there's been an ongoing thread in the discussion messages on the
> topic.   So please feel free to join in, mate!
>
>
> (Pete N)
> Hi everyone, it's a pleasure to be with the Duo 620 group, although
I'm not a collector of such, I've been invited here by several for my
project I'm compiling information for, that being trying to find anyone
who has information about any accessory range finders. I received an
email from my good friend showing a Duo camera with the Kodak Clip
model range finder, and noticed it has a special clip that can be used
to allow the unit to lie horizontally on camera. I'm wonder if anyone
has a clearer shot of that attachment, and would share the photo's with
me, or if they have a mounting foot they want to sell, or send me so I
can include it in photo's for my book. Again, it's a pleasure to be
here with some Kodak collectors. More about range finders later.
Thanks, and thanks to Peter N. God Bless. My Motto: "Making New
Friends - Makes for a Better World.
DonP.(SKIP)

Well, guys - a hearty welcome to newby member Don, who some of us
already know through the IDCC connection.

Don, with your special interest in accessory rangefinders, you'll find
there's already both pictures of Ser 11 Duo 620s fitted with both the
Kodak Pocket RF and the later Standard RF, in the 'Photos' area.
We'v also had several brochures and such posted in the 'Files' area,
plus there's been an ongoing thread in the discussion messages on the
topic.   So please feel free to join in, mate!


(Pete N)

Hi, Dave          Well, mate - you seem to have the same sort of
varied collecting interests as most of us.    I've long since given
up trying to explain why I collect this, that and the other - with
no apparent common theme.   Of late, for example,  I seem to have
become an inadverted collector of Japanese 50s/early 60s 'Walz'
cameras and accessories, for no other reason that I bought a 'Walz
Wide' out of curiousity at a Perth Swap Meet and since then folks
have been bombarding me with all sorts of stuff, big and small, with
the 'Walz' name on it.   I've even been offered a Walzflex TLR to
add to the growing pile.

Now, getting back to your Duo's - please feel free to post any pics
you've taken, and also mention how you did the respooling of the
120.   If you look back at previous posts, you'll see there's been
some detailed discussion about this.  It may not actually be
necessary to respool, if you're handy with rounded nailclippers and
a fine file to take out the 'hills'.

Regarding the various numbers on a Duo, the one on the side of your
Ser 11 will be the s/no of the Compur shutter.   I hadn't included
these numbers in the database qustions, because they seem to dart
around all over the place and bear little chronological relevance to
the camera's body s/no which is the one you mentioned, close to the
film plane.    (On your art-deco Ser 1 Duo, it'll be close to the
hinge inside the back door.)   The body s/nos and lens s/nos (other
than Zeiss Tessar ones) do seem to follow with some degree of logic,
though, as you'll see from those already in the databases.

Pete N.










--- In duo620@..., "gkardmw" <gkardmw@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Pete!  (and everyone else)
>
> By way of introduction, I am a Catholic school teacher, age 47,
living
> in the good ole USA in the Cleveland, Ohio area.  My wife and I
have 3
> teenagers (yikes!) who for the most part take it easy on us.
>
> I collect cameras!  Specifically, pentax screwmount and kmount,
> rangefinders (various brands) several tlr's, Kodak retinas
(folders)
> several medium format folders (Ikonta's) and of course two Duo
620's.
>  These are recent additions - I have one each of a version I and a
> version II.  The version I is currently getting its shutter
cleaned so
> I can use it.  I do not think they vary that much from what I saw
in
> the photo section.
>
> I have recently been trying the "stand method" for developing some
apx
> 100 - have to reduce the agitation (blocking highlights, but
otherwise
> super nice).  Is anyone still doing wet printing or has everyone
gone
> the other route?
>
> A couple of questions:
>
> 1.  Is is okay to post pictures taken with the Duo 620's?  That was
> one feature of this group I was hoping to see.  I haven't run film
> through either camera, but am likely to in the next week or so. I
will
> try to roll some 120 onto the 620 spool.  I hope that is not too
much
> of a problem.
>
> 2.  I notice on my version II that there is a serial number on the
> side of the shutter - is that suppose to match the number near the
> lens or the one near the film plane?
>
> Looking forward to hearing from others.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In duo620@..., "pete.naylor" <pete.naylor@>
wrote:
> >
> > Hi, David W.     Welcome to the Duo 620 Group!    Please feel
free to
> > post any scans of relevant historical stuff about the Duo,
whether
> > sales brochures or whatever.  Original photo magazine "road
tests" are
> > very welcome too.
> >
> > Any photos of your cameras, especially if they're ones with
different
> > lens/shutter combinations from those already posted, are also
> > welcome.
> >
> > Lastly, if you access the "Database" area in the left-side menu,
> > you'll see we've already got the details of quite a few cameras,
> > broken down into the three main types of Duo's.    Please feel
free to
> > add yours, when you get the chance.    All you have to do is
hit "Add"
> > at the bottom right, and the Yahoo computer will enter each
camera in
> > the correct place going by body s/no.
> >
> > Pete Naylor - Moderator
> >
>

Hi Pete!  (and everyone else)

By way of introduction, I am a Catholic school teacher, age 47, living
in the good ole USA in the Cleveland, Ohio area.  My wife and I have 3
teenagers (yikes!) who for the most part take it easy on us.

I collect cameras!  Specifically, pentax screwmount and kmount,
rangefinders (various brands) several tlr's, Kodak retinas (folders)
several medium format folders (Ikonta's) and of course two Duo 620's.
  These are recent additions - I have one each of a version I and a
version II.  The version I is currently getting its shutter cleaned so
I can use it.  I do not think they vary that much from what I saw in
the photo section.

I have recently been trying the "stand method" for developing some apx
100 - have to reduce the agitation (blocking highlights, but otherwise
super nice).  Is anyone still doing wet printing or has everyone gone
the other route?

A couple of questions:

1.  Is is okay to post pictures taken with the Duo 620's?  That was
one feature of this group I was hoping to see.  I haven't run film
through either camera, but am likely to in the next week or so. I will
try to roll some 120 onto the 620 spool.  I hope that is not too much
of a problem.

2.  I notice on my version II that there is a serial number on the
side of the shutter - is that suppose to match the number near the
lens or the one near the film plane?

Looking forward to hearing from others.

Dave





--- In duo620@..., "pete.naylor" <pete.naylor@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, David W.     Welcome to the Duo 620 Group!    Please feel free to
> post any scans of relevant historical stuff about the Duo, whether
> sales brochures or whatever.  Original photo magazine "road tests" are
> very welcome too.
>
> Any photos of your cameras, especially if they're ones with different
> lens/shutter combinations from those already posted, are also
> welcome.
>
> Lastly, if you access the "Database" area in the left-side menu,
> you'll see we've already got the details of quite a few cameras,
> broken down into the three main types of Duo's.    Please feel free to
> add yours, when you get the chance.    All you have to do is hit "Add"
> at the bottom right, and the Yahoo computer will enter each camera in
> the correct place going by body s/no.
>
> Pete Naylor - Moderator
>

Hi, David W.     Welcome to the Duo 620 Group!    Please feel free to
post any scans of relevant historical stuff about the Duo, whether
sales brochures or whatever.  Original photo magazine "road tests" are
very welcome too.

Any photos of your cameras, especially if they're ones with different
lens/shutter combinations from those already posted, are also
welcome.

Lastly, if you access the "Database" area in the left-side menu,
you'll see we've already got the details of quite a few cameras,
broken down into the three main types of Duo's.    Please feel free to
add yours, when you get the chance.    All you have to do is hit "Add"
at the bottom right, and the Yahoo computer will enter each camera in
the correct place going by body s/no.

Pete Naylor - Moderator

Hi, Jack          That sounds a great idea, mate - please proceed!
If you could touch on your impresssions on their comparative ease of
use on the Ser 11 Duo's, that would be nice.    I think you've
previously mentioned that you're a proponent of the later Service RF,
so it would be relevant to hear your viewpoint again on that
aspect.    I keep looking at Paul K's pics of his Standard RF on a
Duo, and I keep thinking that my large hands and fingers would have
some difficulty in accessing the focussing control - but I'm open to
hearing otherwise!

PETE IN A MILDER 25C PERTH











--- In duo620@..., "jack_hufnagel" <huffy49@...> wrote:
>
> Pete:
>
> As is happens, I'm expecting a Kodak Service Rangefinder in the mail
> late this week.  Would it be proper for me to write up an article for
> the files area comparing the two (Service and Pocket), as these are
> possibly the only two which fit the Duo?
>
> I also own a pair of Hugo Meyer units, a Prazisa, a Watameter, a
> Voigtländer, an Ideal (by Federal Instruments), and a Kopil. One I
> started to collect old folders, the inclusion of accessory
> rangefinders was inevitable, I suppose.
>
> We're having a warm spell here at 3º C!
>
> Jack
>

Pete:

As is happens, I'm expecting a Kodak Service Rangefinder in the mail
late this week.  Would it be proper for me to write up an article for
the files area comparing the two (Service and Pocket), as these are
possibly the only two which fit the Duo?

I also own a pair of Hugo Meyer units, a Prazisa, a Watameter, a
Voigtländer, an Ideal (by Federal Instruments), and a Kopil. One I
started to collect old folders, the inclusion of accessory
rangefinders was inevitable, I suppose.

We're having a warm spell here at 3º C!

Jack

Hi, Jack       Thanks for adding your cameras' details to the
databases.   Slowly but surely we're getting some kind of picture
appearing .........

Regarding the accessory rangefinder issue, I admit I'm in no
position of experience whatsoever to make profound statements such
as the Kodak Pocket Rangefinder appearing to be an easier
proposition for the Ser 11 Duo's, compared to the later Standard RF -
  it was all purely based on comparing your pic and Paul K's that had
made me think the earlier one would have been better.

I guess I really need to acquire one (or both) of these RFs, so I
can speak from some authority.   The only accessory RFs I've got are
Voss Photometers from the late 40s/early 50s, which are typically
German horizontal ones with 'wide' feet.    Nice units that look
great on early Diaxes, but not much bloody use on a Duo 620!

(Pete In A Miraculously Cooler Perth)













--- In duo620@..., "jack_hufnagel" <huffy49@...>
wrote:
>
> Pete:
> I updated the database per your hint. Having used the Pocket
> rangefinder, I'm of the opinion that the Service rangefinder may be
> the easier to use when mounted on the camera, as the lower
placement
> of the focusing wheel would allow a hand to turn it whilst holding
the
> camera. It would also put  a LOT less less pressure on the shoe and
> mount. Using the Service rangefinder on the Duo is very much a two
> handed exercise, and awkward at that.
>
> On the accessory shoe size, the skulduggery by the Great Yellow
Father
> was in making the shoes on the Monitor and Tourists incapable of
> accepting most standard accessory feet.  I was puzzled by this fact
> until I got my hands on a Kodak accessory rangefinder (with its
> smaller foot.)
>
> Jack
> (Here in substantially cooler Philadelphia (-20C at 4:00pm)
>
>
> --- In duo620@..., "pete.naylor" <pete.naylor@>
wrote:
> >
> > Hi, Jack    Many thanks for posting that pic of the Ser 11 Duo
with
> > the Pocket Rangefinder in situ.    When you compare it with Paul
K's
> > pics of his Duo with the later Standard Rangefinder in place,
it's
> > pretty obvious which one would have been easier to use thanks to
the
> > focussing control being high up and well away from the VFs.
> >
> > Another thing about the Pocket Rangefinder is that it was quite
> > expensive at $7.00 in 1937, which equates today to just over
$100
> > using the CPI yardstick.
> >
> > By the way, if you haven't yet looked at the 'Database'
listings,
> > have a peek some time at the Series 11 item.  One of the
questions I
> > included was whether a camera has a shoe or not, and although
we're
> > still in early days (hint!) with the number of cameras listed
it's
> > already clear that local German market cameras didn't have a
> > shoe.    The msot likely reason for that would have been the
expense
> > of the US-made Kodak item incl import duties, compared to local
> > grown rangefinders which wouldn't have fitted anyway thanks to
the
> > shoe's narrower width.
> >
> > I'd originally suspected that this was due to some retailing
> > skulduggery by the Great Yellow Father in Rochester, but when
you do
> > some measuring you find there isn't enough space to fit a wider
> > standard shoe anyway.
> >
> > Interestingly, I have a 35mm half-frame Mercury 11 CX of c. 1945
> > vintage which has had its original second wide-type shoe, the
one
> > just above the VF, removed and replaced by a really narrow one
of
> > just 10 mm.   Hard to work out just why a previous owner had
done
> > this other than because he had a really tiny RF sitting around
doing
> > nothing, and necessity being the mother of invention .......
> > I've just posted a pic of the Merc along with an Argus Model A
and
> > Perfex 55 in my Flickr Portfolio Pages, so if anybody's
interested,
> > here's the link:
> >
> >         http://www.flickr.com/photos/32113303@N07/3194218190/
> >
> >
> >
> > Pete N. (In A Cooler Perth)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Pete:
I updated the database per your hint. Having used the Pocket
rangefinder, I'm of the opinion that the Service rangefinder may be
the easier to use when mounted on the camera, as the lower placement
of the focusing wheel would allow a hand to turn it whilst holding the
camera. It would also put  a LOT less less pressure on the shoe and
mount. Using the Service rangefinder on the Duo is very much a two
handed exercise, and awkward at that.

On the accessory shoe size, the skulduggery by the Great Yellow Father
was in making the shoes on the Monitor and Tourists incapable of
accepting most standard accessory feet.  I was puzzled by this fact
until I got my hands on a Kodak accessory rangefinder (with its
smaller foot.)

Jack
(Here in substantially cooler Philadelphia (-20C at 4:00pm)


--- In duo620@..., "pete.naylor" <pete.naylor@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, Jack    Many thanks for posting that pic of the Ser 11 Duo with
> the Pocket Rangefinder in situ.    When you compare it with Paul K's
> pics of his Duo with the later Standard Rangefinder in place, it's
> pretty obvious which one would have been easier to use thanks to the
> focussing control being high up and well away from the VFs.
>
> Another thing about the Pocket Rangefinder is that it was quite
> expensive at $7.00 in 1937, which equates today to just over $100
> using the CPI yardstick.
>
> By the way, if you haven't yet looked at the 'Database' listings,
> have a peek some time at the Series 11 item.  One of the questions I
> included was whether a camera has a shoe or not, and although we're
> still in early days (hint!) with the number of cameras listed it's
> already clear that local German market cameras didn't have a
> shoe.    The msot likely reason for that would have been the expense
> of the US-made Kodak item incl import duties, compared to local
> grown rangefinders which wouldn't have fitted anyway thanks to the
> shoe's narrower width.
>
> I'd originally suspected that this was due to some retailing
> skulduggery by the Great Yellow Father in Rochester, but when you do
> some measuring you find there isn't enough space to fit a wider
> standard shoe anyway.
>
> Interestingly, I have a 35mm half-frame Mercury 11 CX of c. 1945
> vintage which has had its original second wide-type shoe, the one
> just above the VF, removed and replaced by a really narrow one of
> just 10 mm.   Hard to work out just why a previous owner had done
> this other than because he had a really tiny RF sitting around doing
> nothing, and necessity being the mother of invention .......
> I've just posted a pic of the Merc along with an Argus Model A and
> Perfex 55 in my Flickr Portfolio Pages, so if anybody's interested,
> here's the link:
>
>         http://www.flickr.com/photos/32113303@N07/3194218190/
>
>
>
> Pete N. (In A Cooler Perth)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi, Jack    Many thanks for posting that pic of the Ser 11 Duo with
the Pocket Rangefinder in situ.    When you compare it with Paul K's
pics of his Duo with the later Standard Rangefinder in place, it's
pretty obvious which one would have been easier to use thanks to the
focussing control being high up and well away from the VFs.

Another thing about the Pocket Rangefinder is that it was quite
expensive at $7.00 in 1937, which equates today to just over $100
using the CPI yardstick.

By the way, if you haven't yet looked at the 'Database' listings,
have a peek some time at the Series 11 item.  One of the questions I
included was whether a camera has a shoe or not, and although we're
still in early days (hint!) with the number of cameras listed it's
already clear that local German market cameras didn't have a
shoe.    The msot likely reason for that would have been the expense
of the US-made Kodak item incl import duties, compared to local
grown rangefinders which wouldn't have fitted anyway thanks to the
shoe's narrower width.

I'd originally suspected that this was due to some retailing
skulduggery by the Great Yellow Father in Rochester, but when you do
some measuring you find there isn't enough space to fit a wider
standard shoe anyway.

Interestingly, I have a 35mm half-frame Mercury 11 CX of c. 1945
vintage which has had its original second wide-type shoe, the one
just above the VF, removed and replaced by a really narrow one of
just 10 mm.   Hard to work out just why a previous owner had done
this other than because he had a really tiny RF sitting around doing
nothing, and necessity being the mother of invention .......
I've just posted a pic of the Merc along with an Argus Model A and
Perfex 55 in my Flickr Portfolio Pages, so if anybody's interested,
here's the link:

         http://www.flickr.com/photos/32113303@N07/3194218190/



Pete N. (In A Cooler Perth)








-- In duo620@..., "jack_hufnagel" <huffy49@...> wrote:
>
> I've uploaded a shot of my Duo-620 Series II with the earlier Kodak
> Pocket Rangefinder attached. This unit, also designed by Joseph
> Mihalyi, is my all-time favorite accessory rangefinder due to the
> included pocket clasp and the distance scale visible in the
> viewfinder. It's also the only accessory rangefinder I own (of
about
> about 10 or so) that also fits my Kodak Monitors. I suppose Kodak
> designed the Monitors accessory shoe specifically to fit their
> rangefinders.  Interestingly, the later Kodak Tourist only uses the
> later Kodak Service Rangefinder as the pocket clasp on the Pocket
unit
> gets in the way.
>
> The Great Yellow Father was always right <sigh>.
>

I've uploaded a shot of my Duo-620 Series II with the earlier Kodak
Pocket Rangefinder attached. This unit, also designed by Joseph
Mihalyi, is my all-time favorite accessory rangefinder due to the
included pocket clasp and the distance scale visible in the
viewfinder. It's also the only accessory rangefinder I own (of about
about 10 or so) that also fits my Kodak Monitors. I suppose Kodak
designed the Monitors accessory shoe specifically to fit their
rangefinders.  Interestingly, the later Kodak Tourist only uses the
later Kodak Service Rangefinder as the pocket clasp on the Pocket unit
gets in the way.

The Great Yellow Father was always right <sigh>.