I have a plan... a Domiplan

 Back to the Beginning and fixing a Meyer-Optik Domiplan lens

  My very first SLR was an Exa 1A with a Meyer-Optik 50mmf/2.8 Domiplan lens. It’s the only lens that I used with that camera, which I had for about a decade.  As a beginner, I was just happy to have a real camera, and that Domiplan lens served me well - and I had no reason nor the resources to acquire another lens.  I’ve written here before about my early years with the Exa 1a.  It’s not a camera that I would ever recommend to anyone, let alone a beginner.  But in 1973, it is what I had.   I’m sure that if a Pentax Spotmatic been my first SLR, I would have been really over the moon with it.  

If you have been following along for the past couple of years, you would know that I am working on a book about M42 cameras and lenses with emphasis on the Pentax Spotmatic series. I previously shot a Domiplan lens with an M42 body in 2013. Over the years, I have acquired a number of M42 mount Meyer-Optik Domiplan lenses and wanted to use them, but every single one of them had a non-working aperture, forever stuck wide-open at the very modest f/2.8.  That seems to be the major problem with that lens.  I found that I still had two examples of the lens, and I really wanted to see how it performed for me now, over 50 years since I received the Exa 1a.  

Two Domiplan lenses apart. Both were fixed.

So, I did what everyone else does, and looked for repair videos on YouTube! I have two lenses, so at least one of them should be repairable, right? Some of the “repair” videos made me cringe, but two sources stood out as being excellent (this one and this video).  After about 4 hours of working on it, I now have a fully functional Domiplan lens.  The two most frustrating aspects of the reassembly are obviously reattaching the six aperture blades, and the part that controls the aperture pin.  Once I got that done, I was really happy.  The problem with the Domiplan lenses are that over time, oil and grease cause the aperture blades to stick together, and the focus helical also becomes harder to turn.  So, using lighter fluid to degrease the aperture blades the the surrounding parts was an essential part of the fix.

Are Domiplan lenses THAT special?  Not necessarily, but the lens is a Cooke triplet based on a 1883 design by Taylor in the UK.  It is 3 elements in three groups, an inexpensive, yet very workable design also in other lenses.  Meyer-Optik Gorlitz produced the Domiplan and the Trioplan lenses with that formula.  

The Domiplan was the very basic, cheapest lens used on Exakta and Praktika cameras, all in East Germany.  Noted for its “bubble bokeh”, the Domiplan is not a fast lens at a maximum f/2.8 aperture, though it does stop down to f/22.  The complaint with this lens is the “automatic aperture”  design where the aperture actuation pin is depressed only when the lever inside the camera pushes against it at the time of the exposure.  The lens remains wide-open , no matter what aperture has been selected, until the moment of exposure. That makes focusing easier, of course.  It also makes it very difficult to adapt the lens to any other camera that does not have a way to depress the aperture pin, so you digital folks adapting the lens are generally stuck at shooting it wide-open.  Most lenses from that period have an Auto/Manual switch at the base of the lens so you can use them in stop-down mode.   Not this lens, though. 

However, since I am using an M-42 SLR body with this lens, it’s not a problem.  I can use the stop-down metering function that will activate the aperture pin, and allow me to meter the scene, and then just focus wide-open and make the exposure. Right now, I am using a Chinon CS-4 SLR that works well with this lens.  And that’s my goal - to shoot with this lens and see how it performs in a much better camera than that Exa 1a. 

Well, I shot a roll of Lucky 400 color film, and while doing so, I realized that I messed the alignment of the helicoid up and could not focus at infinity, which was one of the warnings in taking the lens apart.  However, I simply shot at f/16 or f/22 to address that when necessary. 

I still have a second Domiplan lens, and after cleaning THAT one, I reassembled the lens, and the aperture blades and focus helical work perfectly.  I’ll try shooting with that one at a later date. Anyhow, this post is about the results from lens #1.  I dropped off my roll of the exposed Lucy 400 at Ball Photo, and they developed the film.  I scanned the film with my Epson V700.

Here are some examples from that roll of film:

I'll try the second lens with b&w film and will post those later.

All photos below taken at the Asheville Botanical Gardens

A good example of the "bubble bokeh"

not as sharp at wider apertures, less infinity focus

When stopped down, no "bubbles"

A Developing Story

Film from the Arizona trip

Over the past few months, I have shot quite a bit of film.  Thirty-seven rolls on my October Arizona trip, and another 13 rolls during my November Ohio-Virginia trip.  That’s 50 rolls, and really raises my count for the year. Of course, the chickens come home to roost, which means that I have had to do a lot of film developing. The black and white film always gets done first - and while I tend to shoot a lot of different b&w films, there are some that I use more than others. Using only one b&w film does make the developing end simpler, but no, I am not that type. Therefore, the b&w developing takes longer since I have to work out the developer and time for each different emulsion.  The Massive Development Chart is what I use as a reference, as well as my developing notebook - which I’ve been keeping for almost 25 years. Lately, I have been using a lot of D-76, followed by Black White and Green, D-96, and HC110.  

On my recent trips I did shoot a lot of color film, even in medium format.  I used my Pentax 6x7 quite often during the Arizona trip, and I think the addition of a 3D printed right hand grip really makes the camera easier to hand hold.  I confess that I have not used the Pentax 6x7 very often over the past few years, and the Arizona trip was the most use it’s had in a long while. Most of the color shot on that trip was with my 35mm K-mount bodies, the Vivitar V3800 and the Pentax KX, and then the Pentax 17. As I was getting ready to leave for Ohio in mid-November,  I sent in the E-6 films to Dwayne’s Photo in Parsons, KS, and the 120 C-41 to Reformed Film Lab in Florida.  The developed film returned shortly after I got home from the November trip. 

I developed the 35mm color film at home using the FPP Color kit for ECN-2 and C-41 films.  I use a sous-vide in a 5 gallon tote to keep the chemistry at 42°C.  I have 7 Jobo tanks that take 2 rolls of 35mm, so what I do is this: 

Number each tank and record what rolls are in each. Work from Tank 1 -7, hanging the film to dry in the same order.  Since everything gets the same development, it doesn’t matter what rolls are together, except that I do keep ECN-2 films separate from C-41, since I don’t want remjet particles polluting the non-remjet in the same tank.

For a developing session like this, I mix a fresh batch of developer.  The kits are said to be able to develop up to 25 rolls, but after 18-20 rolls, I mix up a fresh batch. At $20 for a kit, it’s still a HUGE savings over sending the film out for development. 

In looking over the lists of what I shot, here is the breakdown from the two trips:

Here’s the actual number of rolls:

1 Amber T800

2 Eastman 250D 

3 Fomapan 200

1 Fomapan 400

1 FPP Derevpan 100

1 FPP Retrochrome 400

1 FPP Svema FN64

1 FPP Xray

4 Fuji Acros 100

2 Fuji Color 200

1 Harman Phoenix 200 II

1 Ilfocolor 400

4 Kentmere 200

7 Kentmere 400

2 Kodacolor 100

1 Kodacolor 200

1 Kodak Color Plus 200

1 Kodak Ektar 100

3 Kodak Gold 200

1 Kodak Max 400

1 Kodak Tmax 100

2 Kodak Tmax 400

1 Kodak Tri-X

1 Lomo Color 100

1 Lomo Color 92

2 Lomochrome Purple

2 Lomochrome Turquoise

3 Rollei Retro 400S

The Lomochrome films were used in a Holga and my Rollei 35TE.  The Holga gave me some wonderfully wacky images, and the sharp lens on the Rollei definitely gave me some nice images, and with those color shifts from the Lomochrome - very surreal imagery.  Most of the 35mm films were shot in K-mount bodies - Vivitar V2000 for the b&w, and Vivitar V3800 and Pentax KX for color.  My Leica M2 shot a roll of b&w and two in color, my Pentax 17 1 b&w and 1 color, and my Pentax 6x7 for 120, with a few b&w rolls in my Lomo LCA 120, and of course, the Holga.

Now that I’m done scanning all of the negatives, the editing and deciding which ones are the “keepers” come next.  B&W definitely requires less editing. With color films, there’s typically a lot more that needs to be done until I have something that I am satisfied with.  Spotting, adjustments to the color and so on, takes more time. In the end, I’ll have several hundred images on film that I will have to evaluate.  Still, film gives me something that seems “organic” and despite the work that’s required, I enjoy the process.  I have plenty of digital images from those trips, too, and while they require much less work, I don’t have the same feeling about most of them.  There is something about seeing an image on a piece of thin acetate that has a tangible bit of reality about it.  

Here are a few examples from the film I shot.  I’ll go into more detail in the captions.

On the Lewis and Clark Trail in Missouri.  Vivitar V3800, Ilfocolor 400. Oct. 12.

Coolidge, KS. What appears to be an old bank building. Vivitar V2000, Kentmere 400

Offerle, KS.  10/13/25.  Vivitar V3800, Kodak Max 400

Grants, NM, Route 66. 10/15/25. Vivitar V3800, Fujicolor 200.

Just past the Arizona Welcome Center, I-40. Oct. 15.  V2000, Kentmere 400, red filter

The oft-photographed GANO abandoned grain elevator near Kinsley, KS. Oct. 13, Pentax 6x7, Kentmere 400

Saguaro National Park, 10/18/25. Holga, Lomochrome Purple

Pima Air and Space Museum, 10/18/25. FPP X-Ray film, V2000, 85b filter

Lowell ghost town, S of Bisbee, AZ.  Pentax KX, FPP Retrochrome 400. A perfect film for this vintage scene.  10/17/25.

Chiricahua National Monument, Rollei Retro 400S, V2000, red filter.  10/19/25.

Bisbee, AZ.  Lomochrome Turquoise, Rollei 35 TE.  10/17/25.

Pipe Organ formation, Chiricahua Nat. Mon., Lomo Color '92, Pentax 6x7. 10/19/25

Shell and Chevy. Lowell ghost town. Pentax KX, Kodak Gold 200

I still have a ton of editing to do on these hundreds of images, and I'll be sharing more on my Flickr pages (mfophotos).

Grants, NM, Route 66.  Pentax 17, Kentmere 200.

FIRST LOOK AT HARMAN PHOENIX II FILM

The new Harman Phoenix II

In 2023, we had the experience of seeing a truly new color film, and from all possible companies, no one would have expected Harman, best known for producing Ilford B&W films. But in anticipation of that new film, we were given teasers from Harman, as the slow burn began and Phoenix rose into the photographic world.  Initial reactions to the Phoenix color film were mixed, with many finding fault of its narrow latitude, and the lack of a traditional orange mask.  I found that if it was shot in overcast conditions, it was better behaved.  I also figured out that it was better to scan the negatives as transparencies (positives) and then invert the images to get better color rendition.  That eliminated the possible problem with the lack of an orange mask.  I do my scanning with an Epson Perfection V700 Photo scanner, not rephotographing with a digital camera. I do know that my results were better with my second roll, since I was more careful in choosing the lighting situation.

Well, here we are in July, 2025, and Harman has introduced Phoenix II.  It's rated at ISO 200, and is DX-coded on the cassette. I shot it at box speed with my Nikon FM3A and a 35mm f/2 Nikkor.  I mostly shot on a sunny morning in West Asheville, because it's full of colorful murals and signs, and what better way to test color film?

I developed the roll myself, and used my FPP Universal Color kit, which I have used for other C-41 films with success, although it was designed for ECN-2 films.

I was a little apprehensive when I opened the developing tank -- hoping that I got decent results.  I had images, alright, but the negatives were "thin" and very purplish.  I hung the film up to dry, and they looked a bit better when I was about to put them on the scanner.  Still, they looked underexposed or underdeveloped, and maybe it was due to the developer already having done 14 rolls of film.  Maybe not. 

 

the sheet of negatives

I scanned the negatives as "positives" like before, because when I tried scanning as negatives, they were green mud.  After the scan was complete I opened the images in Paint Shop Pro on my Dell, and selected "negative image" which gave them a positive, albeit a very green images.  I then selected fade correction, and voila! They looked almost normal.  I did tweak them further for a bit brighter image in some cases.  In the end, they had very punchy colors, especially the greens.

 

positive image scan

 

inverted to a real positive

after applying "fade correction"

While the colors are quite vibrant, the film definitely has a bias towards greens.  Perhaps it was my developing in ECN-2 chemistry that was getting weak. Next roll, I'll send off for development if just to compare. Roll 2 is currently in my Nikon F75, and I'll update later if the results are different.

Scanning technique and post-processing is definitely important, and in the end, I was fairly happy with the results.  This is not a simple film to work with.  There is a definite improvement in shadow detail over the initial version of Phoenix.  The punchy colors are really something, and I like them a lot.  This is not your Gold 200.

There is some halation blooming in pinpoint reflections, as you can see in several frames. Definitely green dominant, but other colors are quite saturated, too.  Who will this film appeal to?  I think that anyone wanting something a bit different - and this is still an experimental film - will find Phoenix II attractive.  I'll need to shoot roll 2 and get it professionally processed to better evaluate it.  If you are looking for a film that has punchy colors and a different look from the typical C-41 films, you should give Phoenix II a try.

I congratulate Harman on sticking with this and not binning the project.  We need more film choices, and not just rebranding existing film stocks. Phoenix II is certainly not perfect, and I hope that Harman keeps making it better.  Making color film is not an easy task, and the fact that Harman is doing so is deserving of your support.

Here are some of the shots from this first roll.  

Overall, despite the developing/scanning steps, this is a very likable film.