This is really weird.

What was the reasoning for the construction of this camera?  Why build it when there were Rolleidoscops and Stereflektoskops available.  And why are there lugs for a strap?  Were they planning on taking this to some place that has gravity?  In 1974?

Just bizarre...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lomo-Stereo-Sputnik-Prototype-space-camera-/370763497087?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item565339fe7f

Nevermind about the bizarre pricing, it must be a euro->dollar conversion.

On 3/28/2013 6:14 PM, Ted wrote:

>
> This is really weird.
>
> What was the reasoning for the construction of this camera? Why build
> it when there were Rolleidoscops and Stereflektoskops available.

Because the Rolleidoscops and Stereflektoskops use pneumatic
timers on their shutters. I don't think they would work very
well in the vacuum of space.

"Lomo Sputnik Stereo prototype camera, produced in one
exemplar only for space program 1974-1975., camera in full
working condition!"

________________________________________
John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, John Thurston wrote:

>
> Because the Rolleidoscops and Stereflektoskops use pneumatic
> timers on their shutters. I don't think they would work very
> well in the vacuum of space.
>

This camera would have been intended for use in the cabin, where there is air. More likely they would have wanted to control the specifications of the camera. The cost of making hardware for spaceflight is mostly in the certification process. Things like redundancy to avoid failure and off-gas testing are what make these things expensive.

Timo

I believe the Stereflektoskop has a mechanical shutter, and I forgot about the Rolleidoscops pneumatic one.

Other than the viewfinder, I don't see how this is functionally different than a regular Sputnik. I thought maybe the film chambers might be larger to accommodate more than a regular roll of 120, but they don't look like it. And the lenses look the same as well.

I suppose the camera could have been used on a space walk outside the vehicle, and that would make the lugs for a strap make sense.

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "tpuhakka@..." wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, John Thurston wrote:
> >
> > Because the Rolleidoscops and Stereflektoskops use pneumatic
> > timers on their shutters. I don't think they would work very
> > well in the vacuum of space.
> >
>
> This camera would have been intended for use in the cabin, where there is air. More likely they would have wanted to control the specifications of the camera. The cost of making hardware for spaceflight is mostly in the certification process. Things like redundancy to avoid failure and off-gas testing are what make these things expensive.
>
> Timo
>

Stereflektoskops and Rolleidoscops have uncoated lenses. I can't imagine the lens flare they'd be subject to in space. My hunch is that this camera is another fake from the Moscow geniuses who brought us the Sputnik 2. Can you imagine what camera they could build from leftover USSR parts if they put their minds to designing a real camera?
Steve

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "coronet3d" wrote:

>
> Stereflektoskops and Rolleidoscops have uncoated lenses. I can't imagine the lens flare they'd be subject to in space. My hunch is that this camera is another fake from the Moscow geniuses who brought us the Sputnik 2. Can you imagine what camera they could build from leftover USSR parts if they put their minds to designing a real camera?
> Steve

Not so. First of all, there have been several examples of the Sputnik 2 and they all are identical - all have low serial numbers.

As for this prototype, I have seen it before - either that one or an identical one (I have a picture of it). The error here is that the seller put a ludicrous price on it. A prototype of this nature would only be worth a fraction of this and there certainly would be no incentive at all for anyone to make a fake since such a camera would cost more to produce than it could sell for.

Back in the early nineties, I got involved in the design and production of a series of custom-made 6x7 MF stereo cameras. The cost for the cameras (including matched Schneider 47mm lenses and Linhof viewfinders) was over $8000. a piece. Today, it probably could fetch no more than a few grand.

Francois

What bothers me about the claim that this is designned for use in space, is the viewfinder. What's up with that tube viewfinder? It wouldn't work well with a face shield on a spacewalk There would be even more parallax than with the standard viewfinder. And this would only really be usefull withing the confined space of a space capsule or space station. Surely a simple sportfinder would be more usefull, less bulky and lighter.

RS

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" wrote:
>
>
> This is really weird.
>
> What was the reasoning for the construction of this camera? Why build
> it when there were Rolleidoscops and Stereflektoskops available. And
> why are there lugs for a strap? Were they planning on taking this to
> some place that has gravity? In 1974?
>
> Just bizarre...
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lomo-Stereo-Sputnik-Prototype-space-camera-/3707\
> 63497087?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item565339fe7f
> <http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lomo-Stereo-Sputnik-Prototype-space-camera-/370\
> 763497087?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item565339fe7f>
>

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "depthcam" wrote:

> Back in the early nineties, I got involved in the design and production of a series of custom-made 6x7 MF stereo cameras. The cost for the cameras (including matched Schneider 47mm lenses and Linhof viewfinders) was over $8000. a piece. Today, it probably could fetch no more than a few grand.
>
> Francois
>

Hi Froncois,
Is eBay item number:221204352147 one of yours? If so, it fetched $3,650.
Steve

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Medium-Format-3D-Panorama-Stereo-Camera-Made-in-Germany-/221204352147?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT&nma=true&si=gFG1dsgMhqCEFbsxLii1Z%252FgXEPU%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc#ht_1391wt_1051

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "coronet3d" wrote:

>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "depthcam" wrote:
> > Back in the early nineties, I got involved in the design and production of a series of custom-made 6x7 MF stereo cameras. The cost for the cameras (including matched Schneider 47mm lenses and Linhof viewfinders) was over $8000. a piece. Today, it probably could fetch no more than a few grand.
> >
> > Francois
> >
> Hi Francois,
> Is eBay item number:221204352147 one of yours? If so, it fetched $3,650.
> Steve

Hi Steve,

Sorry for the late response as I admit I hadn't visited the MF forum in several months...

To answer your question: No. This is not the same camera although ours has a very similar appearance. The main difference between the two is that the one in the eBay auction has a mechanical linkage while ours is triggered by solenoids. I don't know how well synched that camera was but most mechanically interconnected yet independent shutters cannot sync with electronic flash. Ours had no problem with flash.

I have no plans to sell mine as only seven were made. Also, I am curious to see the viewer Larry comes up with. Maybe it will rekindle my interest...

Francois