Monte Carlo Folding Camera by Demaria-Lapierre of France in 1948.
- Kamera Ostalgie
- 4 hours ago
- 7 min read
I don't really think of France as a camera producing country, I'm not sure why. Germany, yes, Great Britain, yes, but France ? Off the top of my head only the lovely range of Semflex TLRs come to mind. But France did, especially in the early days produce a lot of very nice cameras, however they did not seem to cross the channel in large numbers. Think about it, before the two world wars that idiot politicians inflicted on Europe, turning Germany from friend to enemy, which in effect caused Europe's current demise, Great Britain was culturally nearer to Germany than any other European country, and did lots of trade with us especially in Textiles (See little Germany posts) and leading up to WWI cameras and photographic goods. Butchers had very close links with Germany, buying and re-badging whole cameras as well as purchasing lenses and shutters. Newman and Guardia, who at that time produced the best cameras in the world, bought lenses made in Germany. But very little came over from France.
But there are always exceptions, and the cameras from Demaria-Lapierre are notable exceptions! They seemed to be able to break into both the British and the North American markets. What did it for them, was their range of Monte Carlo folding cameras, so as I have one here sat on my desk, lets take a look at them.
On the face of it they are fairly typical of what were being produced in Germany from the late 1930's right through untill the early 1950's, but being French you would expect some quirky differences and the Monte Carlo does not disappoint!
Well, that is a fair lens panel and no mistake! What are those little cut out? Brilliant, Dull, Gray and Clear ! Some sort of exposure guide or control ?
Well Demaria-Lapierre called it the Autocal system ! Basically a simple linked exposure guide that is linked to the shutter speed dial. They made a big marketing thing of it too, take a look at this North American advert.
Maybe it can be better described as a mechanical Sunny 16 ? Which in fact it is in a way, only set up for film of the time, which was usually much slower than the films of today. So if you went by what the Autocal told you today with a typical 100 or 200 ASA film you would be vastly over exposing your negatives. I suppose you would need to use a film of 25 or 50 ASA to get results by the Autocal, so the safest way today would be to just disregard the Autocal and expose by Sunny 16 or a light meter.
Sounds like it caused quite a stir in 1948 ! To be fair, it still looks pretty impressive today, so it would be quite a star back then, at the 1948 Paris Photographic Expo ! Especially with the claim of 'automatically guarantees perfect exposure'! Hell, that's quite a claim!
I know what you are going to ask now! Were the importers of the Monte Carlo camera the same outfit who were major New York arms dealers ? Yes it is the same J.L. Galef who dealt in Beretta, Smith and Wesson, Colt and Marlin Arms and many more. So you could in 1948, pop into Galefs at 85 Chambers Street New York and pic up your new Folding camera and a Colt .45 revolver at the same time. Seems bizarre to someone living in the UK !
Lets leave the history behind for a moment and have a close look at the camera. It weighs in at 445 g which is about average for this type of folder. The lens is a 3.5 75mm Manar Anastigmat, which I don't know anything about. The shutter has the A.G.C. logo on it, so it is a German shutter made by Gauthier in Calmbach. After World War II, Calmbach ended up in the French occupied zone, which may be one of the reasons why this shutter appeared on the Monte-Carlo camera. The Gauthier factory resumed production after the war only in 1948, so the Monte Carlo must have been one of its first post war contracts.
The shutter is very well speeded, having B, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 50, 100, and 250th of a second, so a decent range of speeds here. All speeds operate today without hesitation and sound right, not bad for a 78 year old shutter The apertures are 3.5, 4.5, 6.3, 8, 11, 16, and 23! Yep it's not a typo, it is 23 and not the usual 22 for some reason. All this equates to a very good useable specification in its day, and for that matter for today too. This should be very useable today if there are no hidden faults.
So this particular example had a few age related faults when I started looking it over, one of the four rivets that holds the handle / opening catch for the back is a little iffy, allowing the back to open, I have managed to fix it for now, but long term it will need re-riveting. The foot was seized solid, which I carefully freed off, and the shutter release mechanism a little stiff, which again has been freed, and now is working perfectly.
Period adverts make quite a thing of the folding viewfinder on the Monte Carlo, even giving it a name, the 'Alpha Optical Sports Finder' to be exact. To me it looks typical of the period, although it does look smart and is nicely made. On my example I can see very little through it despite giving it a good clean, and have come to the conclusion that there might be a glass missing? There is glass in the first window but none in the second. Either that or my eyes are getting worse. Seriously, it looks like the front glass is missing. Anyone have one !
Going back to the American advert, I noticed they call the camera 'The Monte Carlo Sportsman 120'. Now I have not seen it called that elsewhere, so was this camera just called it in the North American market, or was it marketed as such worldwide. I must admit, I rather like the title Monte Carlo Sportsman 120, it has a nice ring to it! I have noticed quite a few differences in this camera, I won't call them different models or types, that is just modern day collectors having to put things in boxes and making them a rare model. Lets just call them production differences!
Some have this little cut out key instead of a wind on knob.
Others have this and what looks like two red window covers instead of one.
In it's native France there is no mention of the Monte Carlo Sportsman 120, it just seems to be called the Dehel 4 1/2 6!
So here is one in the flesh, same camera as my Monte Carlo, different name, different shutter, but the same camera! this could get interesting, but I'm not going to delve too deeply down this rabbit hole!
Just to prove it is not a one off, here is another slightly different Dehel camera!
We will leave it at that, or this post will become a book! Lets get back to the camera in font of me.
The struts are quite neat and the little Deco detailing being typical of its time.
The back of the camera is again quite a conventional design of it time, quite well made and finished.
Well I suppose I should come to some conclusion about the Monte Carlo / Monte Carlo Sportsman 120 / Dehel cameras.
They are all variations of the same basic camera, Dehel being the original camera name in the home French market. Monte Carlo seems to be the export market name to England, and Monte Carlo Sportsman 120 the export name in North America. Maybe the Monte Carlo name has more to do with the importers in Great Britain and America than the makers in France?
That's not gospel, just my conclusion from the limited information I have found on these nice little cameras. But I don't think I'm that far away from the truth. As mentioned before these camera are a collectors dream with lots of small variations to find if that is your thing.
For me I have a decision to make, this looks like a really good useable camera, I like it a lot, I would like to try it out with film but the missing viewfinder glass puts this camera in the scrap box as far as useable cameras are concerned. So do I try and find a glass or complete viewfinder for it, or do I just right it off ? The roughest camera I can find on e-Bay is over £40, so buying one for just the viewfinder glass does not make economic sense.
Finally, just a little bit of information regarding the blog in general. I'm currently struggling to find time to write the blog, so I have come to the conclusion that to make some time to write posts, I'm no longer going to write detailed replies to all the e-mails I get regarding the blog. This may seem a little strange, but if I reply to all the e-mails I receive after a post is published, it takes up more time than writing a new post! So with that in mind I won't be replying to any e-mails at all in future. It's the only way to make time to write the blog. Having said that, thankyou to all the many people who have e-mailed me with suggestions, comments, pictures and information, it was and is very much appreciated. You can of course still comment on posts in the comment section!
Take care,
Phil
Comments