Vintage Cameras

[John 2]

Despite what many people believe, the use of film is still widespread. I know of two professional photographers that still use 4x5 sheet film for architectural and technical photography. ................................

So do serious pro landscape photographers. I still have a number of film cameras ( see below) one or two of which used to get the occasional outing just for the enjoyments of doing something different but no more. There is a difference between using film and being able to wet process the end result. I long since gave up my darkroom and associated kit and the number of commercial labs in the UK capable of developing film, particularly B/W, has dwindled to the point where they are hard to find. In addition, the last one that I used a couple of years ago, returned negs that were so dirty that had I still been hand spotting rather than digital PPing, I wouldn't have bothered. Sad because sometimes doing something different adds interest to the hobby.

[miatab]

I love film cameras, old or contemporary, though I don't do film any more, despite having 12 rolls of Fuji X-Tra in the fridge, and an as -new Bessa R2 and three lenses in a bag in the study, and my F2SB under my desk, where it is likely to stay. I have its ten lenses on call for my Df, and the 50mm f1.4 is currently on duty, so I'm sort of using half a film camera When I look at the latest two old 120 roll film camera pictured, I think of my mother's old 120 "folding "camera, circa 1925, probably a Kodak, which had a unique feature. On the back of the camera was a little door almost film width and about 1/2" wide, held shut by a stylus, which could be popped out to free the door, and which then revealed a section of the roll film /backing, and on which could be scratched info re the exposure, e.g., "Sydney Harbour Bridge, April, 19--" My mother (born 1903) said it was a special kind of film for cameras so equipped, but was no longer available even in the 1940s. There was also an older Kodak 120 developing tank, about 18 inches long, like a teeter-totter, with a crank and a corked orifice for filling with developer and fixer after loading, I assume in the dark, where the film backing would have been removed. Finally, there was a printing frame like a picture frame, complete with glass, which was loaded with a sheet of printing paper and the negative, and which was duly exposed to sunlight to make a contact print, developed in the dark! Photography has come a long way.. . . Thanks for the memories.

[GrahamS]

When I look at the latest two old 120 roll film camera pictured, I think of my mother's old 120 "folding "camera, circa 1925, probably a Kodak, which had a unique feature. On the back of the camera was a little door almost film width and about 1/2" wide, held shut by a stylus, which could be popped out to free the door, and which then revealed a section of the roll film /backing, and on which could be scratched info re the exposure, e.g., "Sydney Harbour Bridge, April, 19--" My mother (born 1903) said it was a special kind of film for cameras so equipped, but was no longer available even in the 1940s.

Ken, the film you refer to was Kodak Autographic No.130 (A116 or A122) and was used in the Kodak Autographic 2C camera. The film was in fact manufactured from 1916 until 1961 although the cameras were discontinued by 1924. There was a small section of carbon paper between the film and the backing paper in the memo area (the margin) that transferred the writing to the film base.

[RBSinTo]

"Everybody does what they do. I do what I do. You do what you do and He does what he does."
RBSinTo's Law
I shoot film and only film (essentially all colour slide) with laughably old, horribly technologically backward Nikon rangefinder and manual focus film SLR cameras from the previous century.
I dislike the Super-Duper Whiz-Bang Digital gear and it's completely non-intuitive controls, and am very content to continue muddling along with my equipment. What everyone else does is their business and that is just fine with me.
Robert

[Tronhard]

I think the current resurgence of interest in film and its resultant increase in industry support for the medium is a great thing. There is no doubt a particular feeling taking images using film and the equipment that handles it. Good on you Robert!

"Everybody does what they do. I do what I do. You do what you do and He does what he does."
RBSinTo's Law
I shoot film and only film (essentially all colour slide) with laughably old, horribly technologically backward Nikon rangefinder and manual focus film SLR cameras from the previous century.
I dislike the Super-Duper Whiz-Bang Digital gear and it's completely non-intuitive controls, and am very content to continue muddling along with my equipment. What everyone else does is their business and that is just fine with me.
Robert

[LePetomane]

My first camera was a Minolta XG-7 with a 50mm lens and I added a Vivitar Series 1 70mm to 200mm lens. 30 years later I gave it to a friend who was teaching a film photography class at a local high school. I save my "retro" thing for fly fishing as I still fish bamboo rods.

[xpatUSA]

My first camera was a Minolta XG-7 with a 50mm lens and I added a Vivitar Series 1 70mm to 200mm lens. 30 years later I gave it to a friend who was teaching a film photography class at a local high school. I save my "retro" thing for fly fishing as I still fish bamboo rods.

I've recently gone a bit retro, but not as far as film:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59158657

Back to raw-only on the SD10 and smaller file sizes on the SD14 which I also shoot raw. And back to 1GB CF cards and big fat USB cam connections. Back to SPP 3.5.2 - which runs like hot snot on my 4-core Dell.

[RBSinTo]

I've recently gone a bit retro, but not as far as film:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59158657

Back to raw-only on the SD10 and smaller file sizes on the SD14 which I also shoot raw. And back to 1GB CF cards and big fat USB cam connections. Back to SPP 3.5.2 - which runs like hot snot on my 4-core Dell.

Ted,
I ran this through Google Translate to try and read it in English, but to no avail. It didn't know what you were saying either
Robert

[tao2]

I've recently gone a bit retro, but not as far as film:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59158657

Back to raw-only on the SD10 and smaller file sizes on the SD14 which I also shoot raw. And back to 1GB CF cards and big fat USB cam connections. Back to SPP 3.5.2 - which runs like hot snot on my 4-core Dell.

S'OK Ted,,

Ah get ye, and empathise. There are several 10 step programmes which'll help ye recover from the plague that was known as Foveon fever...Ah'd suggest a thaumaturgic Minolta/Sony conversion (not necessarily a Damascene one ) Something like this ...




or this...






and in the spirit of perestroika, glasnost, and this thread - old Soviet lens meets new(ish) Japanese/Western body...

[John 2]

Ted,
I ran this through Google Translate to try and read it in English, but to no avail. It didn't know what you were saying either
Robert

Bit aggressive Robert. Necessary?

[Manfred M]

And still working beautifully after decades of use. The body was my gift to my wife when she earned her MA. The R4 had just come out so it sold at a pretty reasonable discount. It got its first serious use a few months later on a trip to South Africa; our first major trip and where we caught the travel bug.

My R3 (all black chrome) can be seen in the background.

I find the image a bit interesting because the camera and each of the lenses was built in a different country:

R3 body - Portugal
f/2 50mm Summicron-R lens - Canada
f/2.8 135 mm Elmarit-R lens - Germany
f/4.5 80-200mm Vario-Elmar-R lens - Japan

[John 2]

And still working beautifully after decades of use. The body was my gift to her when she earned her MA. The R4 had just come out so it sold at a pretty reasonable discount. It got its first serious use a few months later on a trip to South Africa; our first major trip and where we caught the travel bug.

Oh how I lusted after one - nearly as much as I lusted after an M4, but I had to make do with an Olympus OM2.

[xpatUSA]

Back to raw-only on the SD10 and smaller file sizes on the SD14 which I also shoot raw. And back to 1GB CF cards and big fat USB cam connections. Back to SPP 3.5.2 - which runs like hot snot on my 4-core Dell.

Ted,
I ran this through Google Translate to try and read it in English, but to no avail. It didn't know what you were saying either
Robert

Yes Robert, for one who lives in the warm, comfortable of Canikon where everyone knows the difference between a D50 and a 50D, understanding "SD14" must be quite difficult.

Try Googling "SD14" - that might help . .

[RBSinTo]

Yes Robert, for one who lives in the warm, comfortable of Canikon where everyone knows the difference between a D50 and a 50D, understanding "SD14" must be quite difficult.

Try Googling "SD14" - that might help . .

Ted,
Not at all.
I live in the world of S3, SP, F, F2, F3, FA, FM-2, FG, R2S, so, I don't know what the difference is between a D50 and a 50D either. Or care for that matter.
Robert

[xpatUSA]

Ted,
Not at all.
I live in the world of S3, SP, F, F2, F3, FA, FM-2, FG, R2S, so, I don't know what the difference is between a D50 and a 50D either. Or care for that matter.
Robert

Got me beat there! Off to see if Google will translate it . . .

[GrahamS]

Sigh........

[RBSinTo]

Got me beat there! Off to see if Google will translate it . . .

Good luck!
Robert

[miatab]

GrahamS, thank you for solving this long-standing mystery! Yes, I'd say she owned one of the late production cameras if they were not produced after 1924. Kodak Autographic film, eh. I wonder what happened to that old camera, and hope somebody cared enough to save it from a dumpster. My mom left us almost fifty years ago, but that camera would have been passed on to my sister, who passed from us about twenty years ago. I will ask her husband if he knows anything. Thank you.

[tao2]

Ah was given this around 35 years ago. It was a few years old then. It, near as dammit, matches the readings from my Sony a700...something satisfying about using it. Like all my film cameras and lenses...




Don't ye just love that foosty, old leather and metal smell...




With the plucky British guarding the rear...




This was cutting edge in its time, as it had an "I for Instantaneous" shutter setting. True sunny 16...f11 or f16 only and around 1/40th sec. shutter. No ASA/ISO indication , so 1/50th. sec. gives about 100 ISO at f11 and 200 at f16. Lost skills indeed...

[tao2]

And still working beautifully after decades of use. The body was my gift to my wife when she earned her MA. The R4 had just come out so it sold at a pretty reasonable discount. It got its first serious use a few months later on a trip to South Africa; our first major trip and where we caught the travel bug.

My R3 (all black chrome) can be seen in the background.

I find the image a bit interesting because the camera and each of the lenses was built in a different country:

R3 body - Portugal
f/2 50mm Summicron-R lens - Canada
f/2.8 135 mm Elmarit-R lens - Germany
f/4.5 80-200mm Vario-Elmar-R lens - Japan

Hi Manfred,

Still a beautiful camera. Very quiet shutter (by Leica standards) and easily the best Leica SLR meter. It used the Minolta metering (CLC) but added its own selective metering cell, which IMO improved on the Minolta. Often wished that Minolta had gotten a deal for the Leica's selective cell. Ah found that with a 50mm lens, the heft, balance and handling between the Minolta and Leica was virtually indistinguishable.