Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi Jim, from looking at the Helicopter and Steeple shots I'd say that is a pretty sharp 35mm lens on the Mercury! I shoot a lot of single-frame, or half-frame as I commonly (though inaccurately) refer to it - I love it! All of my half-frame cameras are Olympus: from the SLR style Pen FT to the fast-lens Pen ED and the custom OM-2000 converted to half frame and taking OM lenses. I particularly like the vertical framing, the small size, and the often surprising diptychs and triptychs. It was nice to see the Mercury and to read your explanation of the camera. I think I will look for one to play with. I really like the look of the camera with the 'dome' top and the dials on the front - very cool. BTW: I have found that many minilabs have the ability to handle half-frame film. I mention that the pictures are half frame and they print them one image per 4 X 6 print. I have never asked for CDs though... I know that the Fuji Frontier machine does half-frames, and I think many others do too - just ask. One place looked it up in their users manual and found the software menu command to enable it ;-) I was very surprised. Ok - last thing, I use 12 exposure rolls almost all the time, particularly nice is the Reala Trial pack with a 12 exp roll for $1.39 Cheers! - marc On Oct 28, 2004, at 2:49 PM, Jim Nichols wrote: > A week or so back, someone asked about the suitable focal length for a > standard lens for a single-frame 35mm camera. I responded that, based > on the diagonal of the film image, a 35mm lens is appropriate, and > included that I have a Mercury II single-frame camera which is > equipped with a 35mm f/2.7 lens. Sonny C. saw my comment and said he > also has such a camera, and wondered if I ever shot any pictures with > it. It has been sitting in a box in a closet for at least 25 years, > but I thought I would give it a try. > > There was a pre-war version of the Mercury that used a special film. > In 1945, the Mercury II was produced, incorporating standard 35mm film > cartridges and a hot shoe for flash. The unique shutter is of rotary > construction, of steel, and moves a window across the single-frame > opening in 1/20th of a second. Exposure is varied from 1/20th to > 1/1000th of a second by varying the slot width of the shutter as it > crosses the film opening. The semi-circular enclosure on top of the > camera is necessary to accommodate the movement of the shutter. The > camera body is of cast aluminum, with very close tolerances, but the > bare aluminum is subject to corrosion, and many of the remaining > examples are too corroded to be useful. With the single-frame > format, one can get 65 exposures on a 36-exposure roll of film. > > It should be noted that the camera has no rangefinder, and no exposure > meter. Focusing is by scale setting, and the camera includes > detailled depth-of-field tables on the front and back plates. > > I loaded it up with Kodak B&W400 C-41 film and tried my hand at using > it. For a guy like me with tri-focals, the viewfinder is a real pain. > After guessing at some exposures, I reverted to a small, clip-on > meter to help. > > Not wanting to take the time to shoot the full roll, I pulled the film > after about 30 exposures and took it to Wal-Mart 1-Hour Photo, > explaining that the images would be different from what they normally > see, but asked for developing and transfer to CD. When I picked up > the film and CD today, I found that my exposure guesses and the lab's > transfer to CD both had problems. The unusual spacing of the images > will not convert easily to two images per normal frame, so I got some > chopped up files. However, there were some useful images that serve > to demonstrate the camera's capability. > > I mention the lab problems not as criticism, but to point out the > problems that are encountered when one leaves the "beaten path" of > photography, whether it be the Mercury II or the Leica single-frame > version that was mentioned on the LUG a few weeks ago. > > Photos of the Mercury II and examples of its photos are posted in my > gallery, as given below. I realize this is OT, but other comments > will be welcomed. Have a look. > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/Musings/Mercury21 > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/Musings/Mercury20 > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/Musings/100_Hour_Inspection > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/Musings/Helicopter9 > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/Musings/Helicopter10 > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/Musings/Steeple12 > > > > Jim Nichols > nicholsj@edge.net > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >