Ilford Sportsman

Plain Nev

Plain Nev

Vincent Furnier
Messages
2,032
Name
Neville
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a nice little Sportsman camera. The later, fake rangefinder version. It's not going to win any prizes for the best looker. In fact they seem a bit crudely finished. But, there is something about it. It's mechanically sound and working as it should. I have other cameras, but I am really, really tempted to put a roll of film through this one. Do I need whacking around the back of the head, or should I give it a go? In fact is there anything I should know about this particular camera? If anyone has an experience of using them I'd be glad to hear it.
 
I have a weakness for cameras from the 50s - 60s and have been quite surprised by the IQ given by several of those with the standard three element lens offering. Mainly, Voigtlander, Balda and now an Agfa in my collection. I'd like to see the results you get from the Ilford Sportsman.
 
What is there to lose, except the beginnings of a compulsion to buy more film cameras and film and and and ... enter into FPOTY! Go on, do it, you know you want to!
 
You really need to give it a try , otherwise you'll wonder for ever how well or badley it works ! Make sure you show us your results though !
 
I had one when I was a kid, back in the 60s. It was pretty decent. I'd put a roll of FP4 through it and see how it turns out.

I didn't have access to a meter and just used the suggested exposures that came with the film, but FP4 was very tolerant IIRC.
 
Cluster said:
I have a weakness for cameras from the 50s - 60s and have been quite surprised by the IQ given by several of those with the standard three element lens offering. Mainly, Voigtlander, Balda and now an Agfa in my collection. I'd like to see the results you get from the Ilford Sportsman.
Click to expand...
The Agfa's are well built. I have a Super Silette, which has the best focussing I've come across in a rangefinder camera. Gummy focus though. Apparently that is a well known problem with the Agfa cameras.
lindsay said:
What is there to lose, except the beginnings of a compulsion to buy more film cameras and film and and and ... enter into FPOTY! Go on, do it, you know you want to!
Click to expand...
Compulsion? I've already got about 30 of the darned things. :p
BADGER.BRAD said:
You really need to give it a try , otherwise you'll wonder for ever how well or badley it works ! Make sure you show us your results though !
Click to expand...
Okay, you've twisted my arm. I'll give it a go and let you know how I get on. Quite curious to see how it goes myself. :D
 
Well, that was fun. Two things. If you go out remember to take your glasses. I had a light meter, so that I could adjust my little Sportsman. But it's pot luck if I'm in the ball park. As luck would have it, I also had my digital camera with me and so I eventually twigged and set the ISO to match and copied the readings. Also zone focussing is on a wing and a prayer. Is that two things? On the other hand using the Ilford was an experience, and I didn't have a problem with it. I'm pleased to report that it appears to be all working, at least. I'm optimistic that I will have got something, and really it's not difficult. In my mind it conjures up images of happier days and snapshots taken with the family. It'll certainly be interesting to see the results.
 
If film speed allows, "f/8 and be there" will give a reasonable margin of error in focus distance.
 
Ah, I've heard that saying before. Isn't that a rule press photographers used?

I think I've had more success with it today. Well, I say that, but I won't know for sure until I see the results. A good trick, I find is to take an initial reading and set the aperture accordingly. Then, as the shutter speed and aperture are linked it's a simple matter to alternate between 60 and 125, for instance. Theoretically you should still get the same exposure. Theoretically. ;)
 
Pretty much, yes. Back then, the reproduction process was rather less sharp so any slight softness due to not-quite focussing was absorbed.
 
I was out with it this afternoon. Just got a handful of shots to finish the film now. It's a lot of fun actually. I've got myself a little rangefinder and a light meter and it just gives me a bit of a smile. I'm not really expecting great results though. It was cheap and cheerful then, and if it's in the same spirit I'll be happy.
 
Well, that didn't go so well. These are the best I can do I'm afraid.

0-4.jpg

0-21.jpg

0-32.jpg

0-34.jpg

Actually, they are not that bad, after I salvaged them, and shows that my little Ilford is capable of taking some good pictures. However, I think it was a case of user error on my part. I suspect I hadn't loaded the film correctly and consequently I had a lot of overlapping pictures.
 
Plain Nev said:
Well, that didn't go so well. These are the best I can do I'm afraid.

View attachment 346508

View attachment 346509

View attachment 346510

View attachment 346511

Actually, they are not that bad, after I salvaged them, and shows that my little Ilford is capable of taking some good pictures. However, I think it was a case of user error on my part. I suspect I hadn't loaded the film correctly and consequently I had a lot of overlapping pictures.
Click to expand...
Number 2 fits the bill
 
Thank you. It's a natural for black and white, that one.
 
I recently picked up another Sportsman for £8.00. this one has the Vario lens and is rather more restricted on the shutter speeds. And so, armed with my trusty Sixtino light meter I gave it a go. Other than an issue with framing some shots I think the results are quite respectable.

0-1.jpg

0-10.jpg

0-19.jpg

0-20.jpg

This last one is my favourite. Quite ambitious for a little fixed lens pocket camera. Surprised it came out so well.
 
Thanks Brad. I surprised myself, I think. :p The Sportsman is basic and cheap as chips. Pity they don't get more love really.
 
Plain Nev said:
I recently picked up another Sportsman for £8.00. this one has the Vario lens and is rather more restricted on the shutter speeds. And so, armed with my trusty Sixtino light meter I gave it a go. Other than an issue with framing some shots I think the results are quite respectable.

View attachment 363459

View attachment 363460

View attachment 363461

View attachment 363462

This last one is my favourite. Quite ambitious for a little fixed lens pocket camera. Surprised it came out so well.
Click to expand...

Vario was the make of the shutter not the lens.

The sportsman was a rebadged version of the Dignar Dacora
 
Last edited:
Vario is the shutter - made by Gauthier (the makers of Prontor shutters) - and is a reliable shutter. The lens is probably a Dignar.
 
Yes, you're right. A slip of the tongue. :D
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Vario was the make of the shutter not the lens.

The sportsman was a rebadged version of the Dignar Dacora
Click to expand...
I believe that the maker's name was Dacora. Dignar being a camera model.

The Ilford Sportsman was sold over a number of years and I think this was a rebranded Dacora Dignette. My dad bought one in the early '60's and I last used it in the early '70's. Shot lots of colour slides with it. Mainly Ektachrome and Ferrania with the occasional Kodachrome. I scanned them all about 8 years ago and where the focussing and exposure was correct the camera gave very good results. Sadly the camera succumbed to a lack of use and the last time I remember seeing it about 30 years ago the shutter and wind on were locked up solid
 
MDJ said:
I believe that the maker's name was Dacora. Dignar being a camera model.

The Ilford Sportsman was sold over a number of years and I think this was a rebranded Dacora Dignette. My dad bought one in the early '60's and I last used it in the early '70's. Shot lots of colour slides with it. Mainly Ektachrome and Ferrania with the occasional Kodachrome. I scanned them all about 8 years ago and where the focussing and exposure was correct the camera gave very good results. Sadly the camera succumbed to a lack of use and the last time I remember seeing it about 30 years ago the shutter and wind on were locked up solid
Click to expand...
The sportsman went through various iterations. The dignette was one of them. There were versions with ligh tmeters and one with a coupled range finder. But none of them matched the quality of the Kodak Retina range, made in the Dr Nagel werk.
 
Plain Nev said:
I recently picked up another Sportsman for £8.00. this one has the Vario lens and is rather more restricted on the shutter speeds. And so, armed with my trusty Sixtino light meter I gave it a go. Other than an issue with framing some shots I think the results are quite respectable.

View attachment 363459

View attachment 363460

View attachment 363461

View attachment 363462

This last one is my favourite. Quite ambitious for a little fixed lens pocket camera. Surprised it came out so well.
Click to expand...
Yes I really like the mill picture. All the shots look like they were taken many years ago, which is pretty cool in itself.
 
Which is sort of what I was hoping for. Although, we're probably too modern in our outlook now to capture the spirit of those family and holiday snaps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top