| Author |
Message |
    
Olly_ympus
Tinkerer
Username: Olly_ympus
Post Number: 31
Registered: 08-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, August 26, 2007 - 12:17 pm: | 
|
Photographers being the highly creative and technically minded people that they are raises a question.
I recently saw on ebay, what appeared to be a Russian Zenit, with most of the paint sanded off and with a film advance and rewind in silver added which appeared to be from old vintage cameras from the forties. But unfortunately it was unfinished, and the seller that listed it had not much information as to it's origin. I thought it was a way-cool idea!
Has anyone ever created their own unique camera from scrap/spare parts? |
Wernerjb
Tinkerer
Username: Wernerjb
Post Number: 185
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 08:58 am: |
|
Scroll down and you may be able to find one, a Yashica crossover Electro. And, just for the fun of it and because I had spares enough, I built myself a unique SRT with ALL the features of the Min model line, and most probably, a second one is to follow, W.
NB : cross-bred models are difficult (if not impossible) to make; there is more info on a prototypical homemade Nikon with a Leica lens mount on the net, maybe sb else knows the details. |
Olly_ympus
Tinkerer
Username: Olly_ympus
Post Number: 37
Registered: 08-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 09:58 am: |
|
I think if given enough parts to work with, a talented individual with the proper tools could conceivably invent anything.
Hmmm,...an Olympus digital filmback would be nice to have. :-) |
Wernerjb
Tinkerer
Username: Wernerjb
Post Number: 186
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 10:26 am: |
|
sorry to say I am sorry, digital renders me speechless, wrong input, incorrect password, barking up the wrong tree - over and done with |
Dgillette4
Tinkerer
Username: Dgillette4
Post Number: 75
Registered: 04-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 11:07 am: |
|
Hey : How about a film back for one of those digital reflexes? Don |
Olly_ympus
Tinkerer
Username: Olly_ympus
Post Number: 39
Registered: 08-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 03:12 pm: |
|
Ahh, forgive me,... but I only like the convenience of digital for posting pics online and such. No film processing to wait for. I have recently come back to my film system after a brief foray into digital. My Olympus equipment takes far better pictures I think and is much more familiar and therefore easy to use.
A digital back for my SLRs would allow me to use all my lenses and accessories, without having to buy a whole new system. Would be the best of both worlds. |
M_currie
Tinkerer
Username: M_currie
Post Number: 72
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 07:01 pm: |
|
One good place to start might be seeing what films or sensors you could stuff into an old polaroid, since they are big and plentiful, relatively simple, and worth almost nothing. |
Dgillette4
Tinkerer
Username: Dgillette4
Post Number: 77
Registered: 04-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 31, 2007 - 10:43 am: |
|
While working in a camera store in the 60,s my partner and I removed the 50 mm from an argus -model A , and cemented a juice can cut to length and mounted a press lens and shutter on it. We then proceded to send it into the repair shop for an extimate to do a cla. Unfortunatly they caught on and sent it back for lack of parts..Don |
Dmax
Tinkerer
Username: Dmax
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, November 10, 2007 - 03:50 am: |
|
I have designed and constructed several 6x9 cameras using parts from different sources. The bodies are basically from 6x9 Agfa folders from the 1940s or so. I strip out the entire folding apparatus and the bellows, and in their place I construct a tapered lightweight but rigid wood "box" to hold the shutter and lens at the correct distance from the film plane. Lenses and shutters are more contemporary, from the '60s and '70s, mounted on a focusing helical adapted from a 35mm accessory. I prefer to mount wide angle lenses (65mm, 75mm)to take full advantage of the relatively wide 6x9 format. Takes a lot of work and on-film calibration, but the results are more than worthwhile. |
Frankl
Tinkerer
Username: Frankl
Post Number: 20
Registered: 09-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, November 10, 2007 - 06:18 am: |
|
Now you have me "going".....
I just came across a Kodak No. 2-A Folding
Cartridge Premo. It's a "basket case". The bellows is shot, the covering is a mess, there's fungus on the lens and the shutter leaves are mangled. I am in the process of just cleaning it up to sit on a shelf but, do you think it would be a good project for a little 6X9 view camera?..... Re-build the bellows, put a decent lens and shutter in, create a nice little wood case around the "cartridge box", a piece of ground glass and a film back..... viola! At the very least, it would be a conversation piece  .....
Frank... |
Dgillette4
Tinkerer
Username: Dgillette4
Post Number: 116
Registered: 04-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, November 10, 2007 - 12:53 pm: |
|
It might be easier and better ruggedness to buy a 6x9 cm graphic. And then mount different lenses and shutters on a lense board. I have done this and I mounted an ektar from a broken beatup medallist ,used the shutter lens combo and made a few mods on the shutter to make it easier to use. Ektar was an excellent lense. Don |
Olly_ympus
Tinkerer
Username: Olly_ympus
Post Number: 58
Registered: 08-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, November 10, 2007 - 11:57 pm: |
|
The possibilities are endless,...no? One could build almost any kind of camera one wanted out of old busted parts and new innovations. :-) |
Krafty5260
Tinkerer
Username: Krafty5260
Post Number: 37
Registered: 02-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 08, 2008 - 01:27 pm: |
|
This sounds quite a bit like Johnny Cash's Cadillac. But, instead of a 1952,3,4,5,6,7,8 Cadillac, we're talking about a KodaYashiRollAiresflex. |
Norman
Tinkerer
Username: Norman
Post Number: 10
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 03:29 pm: |
|
I am in the process of building/modifying a Nikon F into a non-viewfinder Leica screw camera to be used with a Heliar 15mm lens. The Nikon shutter is pretty quiet without the mirror flapping around and it is a lot lighter and smaller. I hope to have it in use by christmas. PS. It will be able to focus on infinity. |
M_currie
Tinkerer
Username: M_currie
Post Number: 150
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 05:08 pm: |
|
Just curious on above, are you simply going to recess the Leica mount into the larger Nikon hole, or are you going to modify the body more substantially? |
Glenn
Tinkerer
Username: Glenn
Post Number: 462
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 05:43 pm: |
|
As the modified body is stated to be a lot lighter and smaller, I suggest that Norman has milled the front of the mirror box off. The Heliar 15mm is an interesting optic. However I use mine on a Leica MD, as this application needs no butchery. |
Norman
Tinkerer
Username: Norman
Post Number: 11
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 07:07 pm: |
|
I have removed the front casting, self timer and mirror box and made a new front plate out of sheet brass. The new lens mount has to protrude approx .8mm in front of this front plate to get the correct register. I will be doing the final machining this weekend and am awaiting delivery of the lens.  |
M_currie
Tinkerer
Username: M_currie
Post Number: 152
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 10:16 pm: |
|
It makes sense with a picture. I had sort of forgotten how much the mirror box protrudes. |
Glenn
Tinkerer
Username: Glenn
Post Number: 464
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, December 14, 2008 - 02:22 pm: |
|
Norman,
Nice piece of work. Of all the period slr cameras, the basic Nikon F body does offer fantastic opportunities for special production. |
Norman
Tinkerer
Username: Norman
Post Number: 12
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 15, 2008 - 09:16 am: |
|
Yes Glenn, you are right about the Nikon F as a basis for home mods. I am looking for another one to play with, it is addictive! |
Gez
Tinkerer
Username: Gez
Post Number: 49
Registered: 09-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 14, 2009 - 04:31 am: |
|
Norman, your Nikon F modification is an impressive piece of work. What tools did you use to measure the lens mount to film rail distance? Also did you encounter any difficulty in keeping the new front panel parallel with the back plate / body chassis? |
Norman
Tinkerer
Username: Norman
Post Number: 15
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 14, 2009 - 06:26 am: |
|
Thanks Gez,
I used a vernier caliper to make the measurements. The body has a number of machined surfaces where the original mounting screws were located they are at the same level. I have only put one film through it and it seems ok but it is difficult to judge as there is so much depth of field with the extreme wide angle lens that I am using. I could buy a longer lens to check it out but it might be better to live in ignorance! I've attached a pic of it with an almost standard Nikon F  |
Glenn
Tinkerer
Username: Glenn
Post Number: 491
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 14, 2009 - 10:37 am: |
|
Norman,
Now that is one nice piece of kit, bet it sits and feels good in the hands - So much better than the lightweight Bessa L that one sees the Heliar 15mm normally hung from.
On the subject of measuring mount/film plane distances, I originally used a micrometer depth gauge. However with the advent of the cheap but accurate digital vernier caliper, I soon modified a set by replacing the jaws with a foot and depth rod. A couple of evenings work on the milling machine gave me an accurate tool and saved me a packet into the bargain - the original caliper was only £15. The traditional micrometer depth gauge is a pain to use when you have to take multiple readings across the film gate, with digital readout you just drop the depth rod and read the value in situ - no lifting off the micrometer to read the value.
The answer to Gez's question about keeping things parallel is very simple, once you have actually had a stripped down body casting in your hands. All manufactures of quality cameras machine the critical film plane/lens mount registers from one reference point. This means that the body castings have a number of milled 'pads' - on both the front and back of the casting - that locate the casting in the various machining jigs. I am more familiar with the Canon F1 body castings than the Nikon, but the 'pads' and their function are self evident once you have stripped the body down far enough, and obviously their function demands that they are all parallel to the film plane. I don't know about Nikon, but all the machining on a Canon body casting originates from one reference plane. This is why Canon replacement F1 body castings were always supplied as a matched, machined set. If you mix and match, trying to build one good body from a couple of damaged ones, there is a very real chance that the mount to film plane dimension will not be correct or at the very least not be within the original specification limits. |
Gez
Tinkerer
Username: Gez
Post Number: 50
Registered: 09-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 14, 2009 - 01:21 pm: |
|
Thanks Norman, your mod now looks like a very serious picture-taking instrument!
Glenn, your digital vernier approach sounds interesting. I suspect you are referring to the ones sold by Maplin?? I have 2 junk Konica T2's that I'd like to make one working camera but both bodies have received the attentions of 'repairers' and the mount shims have been removed.
Although Konica has the body pads as you describe, 4 of them that the front panel rest on, there do not appear to be any obvious reference points elsewhere in the body. It seems that Konica fine tune the parallelism with shims similar to early Leicas. |
Glenn
Tinkerer
Username: Glenn
Post Number: 495
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 14, 2009 - 05:00 pm: |
|
Gez,
Maplin's verniers are similar/the same. Not familiar with the T2, but in some cheaper cameras the reference points on the rear of the casting are the film/pressure point rails. Whilst shims can fine tune parallelism, they are more likely just used for attaining the correct dimension. It is very easy to machine the main body casting so that the front and back faces/reference pads are parallel, what is more difficult is to produce a constant casting thickness over a production run. This requires constant tool replacement/sharpening and machine resetting. This requires skill and higher spec machine tools. Hence it is cheaper in the long run to always machine to a dimension less than that required and shim up to the actual correct value. |
Norman
Tinkerer
Username: Norman
Post Number: 16
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, January 15, 2009 - 03:01 am: |
|
What I did with my Nikon was to assemble it with the lens flange oversize, check the measurement and then machine the flange to the correct thickness. The actual register is approx. .5mm below the front panel. |
Draganflame
Tinkerer
Username: Draganflame
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - 07:22 am: |
|
i make my camera like a Nikon d90 package but in pinhole corcas |
Norman
Tinkerer
Username: Norman
Post Number: 36
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - 05:36 pm: |
|
Hi Draganflame, I also made a pinhole lens for my Nikon F conversion but have never actually tried it. I started on a rangefinder coupled Nikon F but have been distracted by, firstly a 5" x 7" camera and now a 10" x 8" camera. ( I like making bellows) The rangefinder Nikon sits behind my computer screen challenging me to continue. So far I don't have the courage.
Norman |
Norman
Tinkerer
Username: Norman
Post Number: 37
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - 05:39 pm: |
|
Glenn, I chickened out and bought a Bessa L for my Heliar 15mm. It's a very good camera. Lighter but noisier than my Nikon version.
Norman |
Norman Valentine (Normanv)
Tinkerer
Username: Normanv
Post Number: 1
Registered: 06-2021
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, June 15, 2021 - 07:24 am: |
|
I am resurrecting this old thread as I cannot see how to start a new thread but what I have to ask relates to the above. In this thread I talked about my forays into modifying Nikon F cameras. My latest project is to fit a contax/kiev lens mount to a Nikon. I have the donor Kiev 4 and have removed the front cover. After extracting the four screws that appear to hold the lens mount in position I find that it is loose but is prevented from coming away by an obstruction at the top left corner. I do not want to force it, can anyone advise me how to get it off? Thanks, Norman |
