The Earl GOLZ 1978 Dallas Morning News article and Mr. Lohn on MINOX snr. 27259

[Guest]

And there always is that one question nobody asked (and they should have...) :

"Mr. Rose, how did you come to the conclusion there was apparently exposed film in the camera? ".

I mean.. he had to open it by a special function (push and use your nail etc, not so easy the first time you have to do it without somebody explaining how it works). Next you have to uncover it like a little door, and there is the film cassette.

Now, did he look at the very small film counter before opening it, and again afterwards ?

Did the film counter re-set or not ?  Did you see a serial number ?

The thing is, I have opened a bunch of Minox that had a cassette in it, but once opened without looking at the counter there is no way in telling the film (or part) was exposed.  The counter doesn't alwyas say so, especially if you don't know how much exp. the film has (it is not always printed on the cassette...

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

Next, a little of topic, when collecting Minox you often find cameras that still have some ole film in it dating from the 1950's - 1960's..., or there's some negatives in a small old box etc...   quality of course is terrible after 60 or 70 years....

But sometimes you can get "something" out of it, like this one, only recently I could trace it back to the Congo crisis in the early 1960's (a lot of Belgians left the Congo).  To my surprise it showed a buch of soldiers (probably UNO)... Pictured is a first result, I am working on enhancing it.

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 8, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[Guest]

On 7/4/2022 at 8:50 PM, Pete Mellor said:

However, the nagging question is, was LHO a spy in  the Soviet Union?  When & where did LHO obtain the camera (if he did) & was it used in Russia?    The DPD claim that the Minox was found at the Paine garage and found in Oswald's sea bag.  Yet, as with most aspects of this case, where one item points in one direction, there are other facets that then point in the opposite way.  While in Minsk Pavel Golovachev states that he didn't think that Oswald was a spy.  He said that in Minsk he bought a very basic camera, a Smena-2, "which even a Soviet schoolchild could use, but he couldn't."  Doesn't sound like a James Bond to me.  If Lee had the Minox in Russia, why buy this cheap Smena-p2?

 

I really doubt Oswald would have used the nr 27259-Minox in Russia. 

In 1959 the Minox A (I up to III and IIIs) were pretty much outdated as a model.  It was still being made, but in 1958 they had introduced the Minox B that had a built-in lightmeter, a big step forward.   

The Minox made it's reputation during WW II (and the 5 years following it up to 1950).  By 1959 it's heydays as a spycamera were pretty much gone, it had become an expensive "gadget" and they were definitaly trying to appeal the rich and famous.  Also the gold-plated versions became an item...   

And by 1959 you had a lot of other brands that made mini camera's. They were equally as good, e.g. the Japanese Minolta 16 since 1955 (available in the USA, Japan and Europe) and it's Russian copycat the Kiev/Vega.

Those were just as good, also small and a lot cheaper, but did not have the reputation Minox had...

To make decent pictures with the Minox A (I up to III and IIIs) you would need a lot of light..; it would do just fine on a bright and sunny day, but otherwise not really...  If one wanted to make copies of documents you would also need a lot of light o/c, you could have the IIIs with flash sync. (but you would need to carry a bunch of bulb's... pp one bulb... so much for having a mini camera and a bag of bulbs...)  Minox did develop a copy stand to make things a little easier :

https://www.cryptomuseum.com/covert/camera/minox/copy/index.htm 

But again, by 1959 there were better options

 

[Guest]

About the Minox at NARA, all I have it the pictures with evidence DL-3 and D-80.

Both pictures showing the same side (the dials) of that camera.   I have compared DL-3 and D-80 and they are the same.   John Armstrong apparently was the only one that once had access to it (hands-on).  From his notes I remember he said it seemed heavier and filled with some kind of substance, it looked like holes were drilled in and smoothened, anyway the pictures DL-3 and D-80 don't show this.   There are other pictures out there, but those are all examples photo's, nothing that relates them to the one at NARA (I am not talking about the 2nd - and later - model that popped up out of no where...) 

There really isn't much room to fill a Minox, the camera is just packed with metal parts. 

Everybody I handed one over has this first reaction : "wow this is heavy". 

But, anyway, one could fill one of the cassette-locations (the other has a gear in it, making the room a lot smaller..) but to make it heavier that would have to be some kind of metal substance, resin or glue won't make it significantly heavier (i.m.o., I never handled the one at NARA myself, so....)

About the shut holes, seen the pictures they could have been on the side, the earlier camera's showed the remains of the grinded rivets on the side (used in the assembly). Going from Model A I up to the III they became less noticable.   Perhaps these were what Armstrong noticed.  They sure look like a filled hole that was smoothed out.   Again, I never got my hands on it, so it is very hard to say anything conclusive about the one on the photo's, unless we get some more pictures.  

B.t.w. it should also have evidence markings... I'm not going there at this moment