The soviets answer to the panaramic camera.

I have a twitter feed, Photomi7ch, during the middle part of last year. I
started to see references in my feed to a camera call FT2. My first thought was
they were talking about Nikon's Nikkormat FT2 as it was the only camera I knew of by this designation but the tweets did not make sense. I had some
how missed part of the plot.

 It was a wired sensation to note that the internet search suggested what I
stated above. In among all the Nikon references was a single mention of a
Russian camera call the FT2 panoramic things were starting to make sense.

On further investigation there is a whole world of soviet cameras that I was not
aware of. Obviously I knew that the eastern block produced cameras but not
such a plethora, the most well known being Zenit, Zorky and Prakticar The
dismisive way people treat these cameras from the soviet era in general is
unfounded. They are well made in what could be called an agricultural way and
do the job simply in comparison to the finesse of western offerings. I think
we spend to much time comparing and not enough time using them to there
best. It is a hang up of an art form that requires tech to produce the art work.
Loosing sight of what is important. The photograph.

The FT2 was produced between 1958 and 65 producing 16,000 of them during
that time. They made two main models series 1 and 2 the difference between
them was a leaver on the base plate that allow you to adjust a spring that
calibrated the shutter speed.

 The FT2 is a swing lens panorama camera with a fixed length 50mm f/5
industar. The turret moves from right to left traversing the image across a
curved film plan. The shutter speeds are set by the positioning of two brake
leavers on the top of the body. This allows the lens to swing at 1/60,
1/100,1/200 and 1/400 of a second. These are set independently of the film
advance. Uses 35mm film set for use with 36 exposure canister's. This gives
the user twelve exposures of 110 mm long.

 

Now we know what the box does, what is it like? It has a substantial feel to it
weighing in at 643 grams empty. It is a flattened cube measuring approx
120mm long, 85mm wide and 50mm deep with a simple fold up view finder.
When you are looking down at the top of the camera in both hands it reminds
me of those wind up cine cameras . A definite feel of purpose when being used.

The camera has been sitting around for sometime waiting for me to come up
with a plan of action. It is not straight forward to use film wise. It comes with
four special film containers that you have to load with film. That cannot be
loaded from a bulk film loader. As the canisters have a different wind on
connection.

 

 

I decided to play it safe and unreel a loaded film. I say safe it was a very out
dated roll of Agfa APX 100. I came at it from the point of view that if I balls it
up completely it would not matter so much as if it had been fresh film stock. In
a blacked out darkroom I transferred the film into the FT2 film canister's. It

went surprisingly well including the loading of them into the camera still in
complete black out. By doing this you dont not loose a frame to daylight which
would suggest thriteen frames insead of tweleve.

With the camerachallenge fast approching I was ready to take part camera
check, black and white film check, topic season.
It was a birght early morning with the sun not that high off the top of the ridge
at south common with some wonderful mottle cloud against a blue sky. As
suggested I used the camera hand held, pointed it in the direction of scene I
wanted to capture and pressed the shutter button. In the blink of an eye the
lens had traversed a 120 degrees of view clonk I don't know what I was
expecting but was a little disapointed with the action.

It takes three and a half turns of the winder to pull the next frame into place. I
noticed straght away that it felt like the film was slipping, that maybe the spool
was not holding the film firmly enough? Now't I can do so carried on.

 
Before I new it the film was finished.

To the darkroom, it was a little bit of a struggle to relice the back from the
body of the camera. Apart from that the rest went smoothly. Three quaters of an hour later the wet film was hanging up drying.

 I had nine good looking negatives I think that maybe the three and a half turns
was to much and the slipping did not help. Next time I will allow for it. Under
the cercumstances it was a good result.

 I have always enjoyed the panoramic format of image making. It is more in
tune with the way we see the world but more detailed.

 

Techinal data:

Agfa APX 100 developed at box speed in HC110 for 6 mins 1+37. 

Pictures and article are the Copyright Mitch Fusco 2023 

 

 

 
 

 

The Camera from Dresden part one.

 

This camera was almost an impulse buy, when I saw it in the window of a camera shop at a giveaway price. However, I did not have the cash on me. As I carried on walking down the street I thought it would be snapped up by some lucky individual embarking on a film camera odyssey.

At the time, I did not realize it would be me six weeks later. On inspecting the MTL 3, the body was in mint condition - not a single mark on it that I could see. However it did have some issues, the most obvious one being that it had no lens, the light meter did not work and the foam on the film door had perished. Shouldn’t be too difficult to put right, I thought.

When I got the Praktica home, I tried to remove the battery cover, but it was locked solid. I did not have time to go any further with it at that point and thought that I could always use a hand held meter. With that, I put the camera in the cupboard. 

Some weeks later I found myself going to the camera cupboard and picking up the Praktica. I had it in mind to get to the bottom of the stuck battery cover. I found a set of micro screwdrivers and undid the four screws that held the base plate on. I had no idea what I would find once the cover was removed. Fortunately, there were no springs that pinged out across the room when the base plate was lifted. I picked the battery housing off the base of the camera, only to be presented with a leaking battery - mystery solved.

Removing the aluminium battery cover from the metal insert was going to be a challenge. The battery had leaked into the threads, sticking the two parts together like super glue would. I don’t know what I was thinking when I squirted freeing oil on the thread and left it to sink in. I tried and failed to shift it using a fifty pence piece and a large adjustable spanner. There was no other course of action left to me but the brutality of fire and heat in a blow torch. I wondered if just heat would work?

As I walked across the room to the log stove, it was like walking into the sun. I left the battery housing on top of the log stove for five minutes or so and returned to the tropical room suitably dressed in shorts and, with heat resistant gloves, picked the battery cover off the stove. I placed the housing in the spanner and used the fifty pence piece in the cover and applied increasing amounts of pressure. With the sweat running down my face, it gave all of a sudden flicking the coin out of my fingers across the room. After I found the coin I placed it back in the slot and undid it as normal.

One issue down, three to go. The hunt was on to find a lens, battery and foam. I had forgotten what a waste of time looking for stuff on the net is. Some hours later, I had found a lens and battery (the modern number for it is LR9XP625G - the last three numbers are the most important). From the same place, I bought a Sigma 80-200 zoom lens. Thanks go to Bristol Cameras for their prompt and friendly service. The lens when it arrived was brand new and was the same price as the camera body.

I tracked down the foam to eBay and what a pain the seller was, to put it mildly. In the end I went down to a craft shop and picked up a sheet of foam for a pound - four times cheaper than the eBay seller!

With the light meter now working, the lens attached and the foam in place, it was time to load the camera with some film. I had an out of date roll of Fomapan 200, which is of a similar age to the camera, so that would do nicely.

Let the escapade begin.......It took a bit of time to get the film to wind on properly as I could now work out how the film lead picked up the wind on the cylinder. The sound and vibration from firing the shutter almost shocked it out of my hands. Must remember to grip it more firmly and use ear defenders.

To be fair, I had forgotten how basic the manufacture of this camera is and the sound of the shutter is quite reassuring. I don’t think I will be using it for candid street shots, but then again... It will take me a little time to get used to the way the camera is set up. It is a little chunky when making adjustments, but I will not let that put me off.

In case you missed part two here is the link part two

Using the camera from Dresden part 2

The camera from Dresden has been a joy to use. A little quirky at first as my fingers got used to the placement of the controls. But, once mastered, it became intuitive when using the light meter and shutter. It is obvious that the controls lack the finesse of its Western counterparts, but that is part of its character.

CLICK! As the last frame on the Fomapan 200 is exposed - with this camera more than others I have used, you need to hold it correctly with your left hand supporting the body and lens, while the right grips the body and actuates the meter and shutter. With the camera turned upside down, I press the button that releases the wind on and slowly rewind the film back into the canister.

Now, to develop the film, it was always going to be HC 110 as it is the new kid in the darkroom. The more I use it, the better my understanding of what to expect from it with different film manufacturers.

The technical bit: Dilution 1:31 in 300 mls which equates to 9.7 mls of developer. The film was exposed at 200 ISO box speed, which means a time of 3 1/2 mins, but I extended it to 4. I also prolonged the fix time to 10 minutes after checking the film halfway through, as it still showed signs of fog. 

At first glance, the negatives appear to be on the thin side (under exposed). I think this is due to the built-in light meter. I noticed that if you held the meter on for more than a few seconds, the needle started to fall. I did, on occasion, allow for this - whether I should have or not, I’m not sure.

At the time of writing this, I still have not had the chance to contact print the negatives in the darkroom. This is the real test of how good your negatives are - this point being borne out by a new member of the FADU forum who has switched from scanning his negatives to processing them analogously and is having trouble getting his prints right. This illustrates just how much the scanning process compensates for the differences between the highlights and shadows.

I use the hybrid system myself (analogue to digital) and know it is far easier to get the results you want than in the darkroom, especially if there is a problem with density. But I prefer the wizardry of chemicals on paper to the click of a button on a screen.

Even though I’m not happy with the way these negatives look, I will still print some of them. As I print them, I consider the sense of disappointment I feel. Why should I be disappointed? The negatives are less than technically perfect, but what about creatively? In our pursuit of knowledge on the best way to produce our images, our minds become polluted with other people’s expectations of what constitutes a properly produced picture. Photography is, by its nature, technically based, but should we be sacrificing creativity for technical excellence? That’s my personal view, even though I am not for one minute suggesting sloppy workmanship.

My disappointment with these negatives is because they do not resemble what I have come to recognize as well exposed, but this should not be the whole story. When I started out with the MTL3, it was to be an adventure - some fun with out-of-date film. I, however, ignored the golden rule of not using old film that has been opened and partially used, which is asking for trouble. 

Taking into account all that has gone before, this film is a triumph in that there are images to be printed. In the old days I would have just filed these negatives, never to be seen again. Nowadays, I keep an open mind as to what may be possible. I am pleased that I did.

Technical data: 

All the black and white images were scanned from the contact print.