Re: Stereo Cameras

[P3D Gregory J. Wageman <gjw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Bill S. writes:

>The "Stereo Realist" seems to be the stereo camera of choice and the 
>one most in demand.  I have no doubt it is a great camera but why is it 
>rated above the Revere, Kodak Stereo, StereoGraphic and the other similar 
>cameras from that era?  Is it the quality of the lenses or is it just an 
>oveall better camera?

I think many people view the Realist with affection because it was the
camera most responsible for the stereo boom of the 1950's.  Granted, it
is a well-engineered instrument, but it is not without its problems.

In my opinion, the Kodak Stereo is not in the same league with either
the Revere or the Realist.  The Kodak is made of bakelite plastic,
it has only four shutter speeds (plus bulb), no rangefinder, no hot
shoe, etc.  The optics, as far as I can tell, are uncoated.  On the
other hand, of the three, the Kodak is the only one with a built-in rewind
crank.  It sold new for approximately half the price of a Realist.

The most glaring missing feature on the Realist is the lack of automatic
shutter cocking; even the lowly Kodak has this feature.  On the other hand,
the attached lens cover is very convenient.  The Realist requires you to
adopt a special grip, with thumbs underneath the body and fingers on top,
much like you might hold a large sandwich to take a bite.  This is because
of the position of the split-image rangefinder windows near the ends of
front of the body.  The film advance mechanism requires you to press a
release button to start advancing the fim; if you hold this button in too
long, it is not only possible but easy to skip frames.  The Realist does
not accept any standard filters without an accessory holder, which can
be difficult to find.  There is a set of custom Realist filters, but they
too are difficult to locate.  The Kodak has built-in holders for Series
V filters, and the Revere has built-in holders for Series IV filters.

The Revere requires separate lens caps, which are likely to be missing.
The Kodak has a one-piece lens cap which also is easily lost.  When
put on carelessly, it has a tendency to scratch the black paint from
the front of the filter retaining rings.  Both the Revere and the Kodak have
spirit levels in their viewfinders.  I find the viewfinder in the Revere
difficult to use with eyeglasses; I have to mush the camera against my
face in order to see to the edges of the frame.  The Revere rangefinder
is a super-imposed image type; the window of the superimposed image is
smaller than the field of view of the rangefinder, and may require you
to tilt the camera to get the nearest object in the active area; this
can be annoying when one is using a tripod.

The Kodak is the easies to load in the dark because of the design of the
take-up drum.  Both the Revere and Realist require you to insert the
end of the film in a narrow machined slot in the take-up spool.  This
requires a deft touch in the dark.  (Dark loading can get you 1-2 extra
good exposures on a roll, provided the lab doesn't cut off too much
leader.)

All of these facts mean that there are a lot of little things to like
or dislike about each camera, and therefore personal preferences will
vary..  If you can, I recommend you try them all yourself.

	-Greg
 


------------------------------

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 1308
***************************
***************************
 Trouble? Send e-mail to 
3d-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
***************************