Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Werra 3
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Film Rangefinder / Viewfinder Cameras
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 6:22 pm    Post subject: Werra 3 Reply with quote
Beautiful 'real' retro looking well enginered camera. It has no built-in light meter full manual , battery free camera with built-in range finder. It has three interchangable lens Flektogon 35mm, Tessar 50mm and Cardinar 100mm. All are top quality lenses, produce very sharp , detailed images.
Register distance is enough to make a custom adapter and mount them on most 35mm SLR camera! (longer than M42) . Viewfinder is bright big and marked for all three lenses. Rangefinder looks unique mater of taste you like it or not. I like better 'normal' one with yerllow circle. 100mm Cardinar lens not set RF! Camery is fairly compact easy to use , great walk around cam. I highly recommend it to any film photographer. Pictures comming later in Galleries, taken with this camera. Until that here is Cardinar 100 shoots taken with Sony NEX-3.

http://forum.mflenses.com/cardinar-100mm-f4-carl-zeiss-jena-sony-nex-3-t42874,highlight,%2Bcardinar.html

and related discussion thread about Cardinar 100.
http://forum.mflenses.com/cardinar-100mm-f4-carl-zeiss-jena-werramatic-t37249,highlight,%2Bcardinar.html


PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks very promising!

Doug


PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 11:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote


http://forum.mflenses.com/werra-3-provia-100-diy-e-6-epson-v500-t44130.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/werra-3-provia-100-diy-e-6-epson-v500-2-t44136.html


PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for posting, Attila!

Interesting: way back in the early 80's I was using an Olympus OM-1. I learned myself photography with that camera, but my friend with his Werra (which I considered a strange camera because of its olive drab color and the fact it's not clearly marked with a brand name) took MUCH better and nicely looking pictures. I guess because of the Tessar, which (in my eyes at that time) performed better than the 50mm f/1.8 Zuiko on the OM-1.

But what do I know... I was a teenager back then so possibly I made lots of focusing errors Very Happy


PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Usually most range finder produce sharper, nicer images than SLR cameras on 35mm film. Even if you grab best lenses and a cheap compact RF , RF will be at least good as than SLR. This is my experience after lots of film shoots with different cameras. Perhaps register distance difference is reason.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
perhaps its because lack of 'mirror slap' vibration created less camera shake in rf's...this is why i just traded in my kodak retina reflex iii and iv for a iiiS.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rbelyell wrote:
perhaps its because lack of 'mirror slap' vibration created less camera shake in rf's...this is why i just traded in my kodak retina reflex iii and iv for a iiiS.


I don't know really what is real difference , but significant for sure. Another wild guess is focal length, usually I try SLR cameras with wide lenses, RF used most time with normal lenses.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
There is a real and great difference between both kind of lenses (ranfefinders and SRL lenses). The freedom of design of the RF lenses!!!

The SRL's lenses are designed with limitacions of the distance register, the existence of the mirror, etc. That not occur in the RF lenses.

And this is noted in the IQ-

It's not casuality that if you take a yashica lens of the Electro 35 RF and the same distance focal of the Yashinon for the SRL of the same time, and can see that the first has more contrast and better resolution power. The same with Leica, Voigtlander, and much more brands.

Rino.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm as big a rangefinder fan as you'll find, but I think it's a little unsafe to make assertions that RF lenses are generically "better" than SLR ones. Sometimes, yes, but by no means always. Going back to the 1960s, the 50mm f2 Nikkor-H and the 50mm f2 Summicron-R both represented significant overall improvements on their respective RF predecessors - although the Nikon RF range was by then history and the Leicaflex was so hard to focus you often couldn't get a sharp picture for love or money! Still, it makes some sort of point, even if not overwhelmingly Very Happy

And nearer to the present time, Leica put what was essentially the optical package of the final 90mm Elmarit-R into a rangefinder mounting . . . or so Erwin Puts would have us believe.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:
I'm as big a rangefinder fan as you'll find, but I think it's a little unsafe to make assertions that RF lenses are generically "better" than SLR ones. Sometimes, yes, but by no means always..


Hi Stephen. Nice to see you.

Probably I was something "universalist" and you are right. Simply the good IQ of the RF normals lenses was a great surprise to me.

And I transmit it with too many emphasis. Laughing

scsambrook wrote:
Going back to the 1960s, the 50mm f2 Nikkor-H and the 50mm f2 Summicron-R both represented significant overall improvements on their respective RF predecessors - although the Nikon RF range was by then history and the Leicaflex was so hard to focus you often couldn't get a sharp picture for love or money! Still, it makes some sort of point, even if not overwhelmingly Very Happy


In the case of the Nikon I give my right hand to you, I don't know almost nothing about Nikon.

In the Leica M, I think that the summicron R not beat to the M 7 elements version (perhaps the king of the 50 mm lenses of all the times, I guess), both in 1963/4 when the R version was born to the market. In the summilux 1,4/50 the R version had the formula that the M version had before (1966).

scsambrook wrote:
And nearer to the present time, Leica put what was essentially the optical package of the final 90mm Elmarit-R into a rangefinder mounting . . . or so Erwin Puts would have us believe.


Well, the thema perhaps was the normal lenses, but if you (as Leica M user) did use the Summilux 75 lens, tell me if there is anything near the IQ of that lens in the portrait M/R lenses. Not for me. It's simply magic.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Today I bought a Flektogon 35mm lens , so set is complete Wink I bought a Werra body to cannibalize lens mount to make adapter to NEX.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Film Rangefinder / Viewfinder Cameras
Page 1 of 1