Digitalesque: The Kodak Advantix Preview

It's 2018 - Picture your typical consumer taking snapshot photos today on both their every day outings and special moments. In the vast majority of cases, their tool of choice is a smartphone, and the typical post-photo tendency is often to look at the screen of the phone to see how the image came out, should it need to be taken again.

Now let's dial the clock back a bit shall we?  Nine years to be exact to 2009.  The Smartphone is certainly present, but its still largely in its infancy, while the more common flip phones are often used for taking rudimentary digital snap shots in a pinch.  However, a more established tool of choice is the digital consumer camera, often offering up a healthy zoom and an inflated megapixel count.  These are typically the tag along of many a consumer who wants to be able to take photos that may be worthy of printing.  And, just as today, the typical post-photo tendency is often to look at the screen on the back of the camera to see how the image came out, should it need to be taken again.

Now let's dial the clock back just ONE more time. Going back another nine years brings us to the year 2000. The consumer smartphone is little more than a dream in its designer's mind, while the digital consumer camera prevalent in 2009 is largely in its own infancy, with 2 or 3 megapixel sensors offering up paltry image quality hardly suitable for keepsake printing or enlarging.  In this era, just 18 years removed from our present landscape, film is still king, offered readily across a range of retail outlets. Minilabs are found in nearly every shopping center and general big box store, and the majority of the photos taken by your every day consumers are done on a variety of compact film cameras.

However, unlike 2009 and 2018, the typical post-photo tendency is NOT to look at the screen on the back of the camera to see how the image came out since no such screen existed, leaving the consumer to wait until the film was developed to see how an image came out.

But for one very odd exception...

From the front, the Advantix Preview looks largely in line with many similar compact cameras of the era, offering a modest zoom on a rather slow lens primarily for taking snapshots. 

Released in the year 2000, the Kodak Advantix Preview can be described as many things: a digital camera that wasn't, a bizarre bridge of two worlds, or a poorly executed hybrid concept for which demand never really existed.  For a handful of us film-happy dreamers, it can be considered as a foundation for a future which could have conceivably existed, but which never came to be.

Wet Weather Warrior: Pentax Zoom 90WR

Oh Pentax Zoom 90-WR, it wasn't supposed to lead to anything...

In my mind, you were supposed to be a one time thing, a flight of fancy, a spontaneous "sure why not" amid a flurry of other priorities that were more in line with my typical tastes. 

To my way of thinking, you were a consolation prize, as the second-best item of a half-hearted pity bid on a multi-piece lot that I snapped up at a low opening bid simply because I could, and since the main item of interest, the Pentax SF-1 SLR, was to be nothing more than a spare to me. 

Small Format Size, Big Format Results: One Ten Camera Guide to 110 Cameras!

...or maybe 11 or more, depending on how you count.  

Could one of this band of misfits be coming to a pocket near you soon? 

It's that one day of the year when our collective cynicism abounds more than any other, particularly online, as websites and blogs get into the spirit of April Fools Day, unleashing a wide array of spoof or parody articles, done tongue-in-cheek, in the hopes of generating some chuckles, while ultimately managing to confound and bewilder the unsuspecting reader who has yet to check the date, or whose morning coffee has yet to really kick in.

I flirted with the idea of doing such a post in the spirit of April Fools Day (as I once did a bit of a fantasy piece one Halloween), either lavishing enormous praise upon a pretty terrible camera, or going through the effort to write a review that  might "trash" a very capable camera.  I could have tried spurring speculation about the re-release of a once beloved film like Kodachrome, but felt that would be a bit cliche.  I even thought of doing a sappy parody of an opinion post in which I go to great lengths to opine that every self-respecting person should carry a 3A box camera in the primary interest of making a statement to others.

But instead of doing a post that ultimately isn't to be believed, I thought I'd instead post about something that something that I myself find difficult to believe, specifically that one can use the terms "110 camera" and "shallow depth of field" in the same sentence.  Heresy you say?  Read on! 

Triple Take Thursday 3: Plates, Film, and Digital

Variety is the slice of life.  While I continue to shoot traditional film stocks lately, I've been dabbling in some other mediums at the same time.  I've become increasingly involved in the use of dry plates coated by Jason Lane, that have allowed me to use a number of cameras designed for such plates, while also improvising their use into a many other roll film cameras as well. 

I'm also doing a little bit more with digital cameras, between early models with decent specifications and more recent ones with more bells and whistles.  While it's no replacement for a film camera, it does make a pretty easy tag along on my film (and now plate) photo outings.  

Here and there, as I shoot some plates, I'll be supplementing them with the same scene shot on both film and digital to allow for an interesting comparison between the blue sensitive media of the plates, the panchromatic, ortho, or color media of the film, and one or more settings on a digital camera that may mimic or differ from that of the non-digital media.  

Following are three takes of another scene in Baltimore.  Today's trip makes a stop at the Union Soldiers and Sailors Monument, and was taken the day after last week's shot along Linden Avenue.  Unlike the previous day, this Sunday emerged vivid and sunny, with remnants of the snow of the evening before still lingering.  The 109 year old monument has stood at this spot since 1959, after a relocation from nearby Druid Hill Park necessitated by highway construction.  The site near the Wyman Park Dell works well for this monument, and it has since seen its surroundings changed in ways more befitting it, as the southbound lanes of nearby Charles Street that used to curve into 29th Street encroached more upon this monument than they do today.  The change in traffic pattern has made this site more pleasant and relaxing as a result, and its a periodic stopping point for me to do for some quick photographic wanderings.  

With a few hours to burn as a loved one was at a medical appointment, I elected to make the stop past this monument to do my "triple take" as it glimmered resplendent in the noon day sun.  My plate camera was a 6.5 x 9 Zeh Zeca which has been something of a guinea pig among my plate cameras.  It came to me in a bulk auction sporting a basic lens mounted on a worn out shutter that was salvaged from a Univex TLR.  I'd tried a couple of "transplant" lenses upon this camera before electing to give the Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 10.5cm f/4.5 from my Balda Pontina an indefinite home upon this platform. Supplementing this was the same rediscovered Yashica 35MC stocked with Eastman Double-X film that was featured on last week's entry, and the same Nikon J1 that I'd recently snapped up.  I fired off shots of the bright scene using all three cameras, with only the Zeca tripod mounted to accommodate the slow speed of the dry plates.     

Zeh Zeca 6.5 x 9 cm plate camera with Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 10.5cm: J. Lane Dry Plate (Sixth Plate) shot at ISO 2, f/8 at 1/10 seconds, developed in HC-110 and scanned.

Triple Take Thursday 2: Plates, Film, and Digital.

Variety is the slice of life.  While I continue to shoot traditional film stocks lately, I've been dabbling in some other mediums at the same time.  I've become increasingly involved in the use of dry plates coated by Jason Lane, that have allowed me to use a number of cameras designed for such plates, while also improvising their use into a many other roll film cameras as well. 

I'm also doing a little bit more with digital cameras, between early models with decent specifications and more recent ones with more bells and whistles.  While it's no replacement for a film camera, it does make a pretty easy tag along on my film (and now plate) photo outings.  

Here and there, as I shoot some plates, I'll be supplementing them with the same scene shot on both film and digital to allow for an interesting comparison between the blue sensitive media of the plates, the panchromatic, ortho, or color media of the film, and one or more settings on a digital camera that may mimic or differ from that of the non-digital media.  

Following are three takes of another scene in Baltimore, this time on a fascinating remnant of Linden Avenue, once a pretty vital arterial street that was almost entirely swallowed up to redevelopment beginning in the mid-1950's.  The 1700 block has managed to survive, complete with streetcar tracks that have been dormant since 1955.  Since the block is punctuated with an island in the middle, the east side of the street acts as auto parking, and the streetcar track remnants abruptly end, the vintage photo possibilities are somewhat limited in composition, but with careful cropping, an image of nostalgic nature is entirely possible with this scene.  

As a wet snow began to fall, I stopped past this favorite haunt one Saturday afternoon with three cameras in tow.  Instead of using a "proper" plate camera for plates, I was using the Kodak Bantam f/4.5 that I'd inherited from my father, with a pre-seated J. Lane "35mm" size plate as a recording medium.  Supplementing this was my newly rediscovered Yashica Electro 35MC stocked with Eastman Double-X film, and the Nikon J1 that I'd recently snapped up.  I fired off close focus shots of the scene using all three cameras, with the Bantam tripod mounted to accommodate the slow speed of the dry plates.     

Kodak Bantam 4.5: 36x50mm J. Lane Dry Plate shot at ISO 2, f/8 at 5 seconds, developed in HC-110 and scanned.

Triple Take Thursday 1: Plates, Film, and Digital

Variety is the slice of life.  While I continue to shoot traditional film stocks lately, I've been dabbling in some other mediums at the same time.  I've become increasingly involved in the use of dry plates coated by Jason Lane, that have allowed me to use a number of cameras designed for such plates, while also improvising their use into a many other roll film cameras as well. 

I'm also doing a little bit more with digital cameras, between early models with decent specifications and more recent ones with more bells and whistles.  While it's no replacement for a film camera, it does make a pretty easy tag along on my film (and now plate) photo outings.  

Here and there, as I shoot some plates, I'll be supplementing them with the same scene shot on both film and digital to allow for an interesting comparison between the blue sensitive media of the plates, the panchromatic or color media of the film, and one or more settings on a digital camera that may mimic or differ from that of the non-digital media.  

First up in a scene taken in Patterson Park in Baltimore.  I'd known for some time that there was a small lake there, but had never taken the time to visit it until earlier this week.  Along with me for my visit were a Kodak Recomar 33 plate camera that shoots 9x12cm size plates, a Kodak Signet 35 kindly lent to me by Mike Eckman, and a Nikon J1 that I recently picked up.  As a gentle drizzle began to threaten, I managed to shoot a closely focused scene along the banks of this small pond on all three cameras to compare.  

Kodak Recomar 33: 9x12 J. Lane Dry Plate developed in HC-110 and printed on Ilford Multigrade IV RC paper.  Shot at f/8 for 4 seconds

Film Hacking: Instaxperiments with the Polaroid J66

I'm stubborn.

There's just no other way of putting it.  One would think that after several less than successful tries of trying to use Fuji FP-100C pack film in a handsome but otherwise obsolete Polaroid J66 camera, I'd simply toss in the towel and be content to hand this camera over to my wife to strictly be a display item for the house. 

"Not I" said the rabbit.

If nothing else, my increasingly frustrating experiments with this forlorn folder proved one thing: that film placed into its chambers was exposed in proper focus.  The main issue with the pack film was the film speed combined with an apparent reciprocity failure that left repeated exposures of the same scene to have little effect on the exposure.  After 14 repeated exposures of a sunny scene that still came out dark, it was apparent that 100 speed film was ill fitted for a camera whose design called for the use of 3000 speed film. 

But what about 800 speed? 

It was this thought that dawned upon me one bitter morning as I began to embark on a few different "Instaxperiments" as I like to call them. I'd managed to make Instax Wide film work properly in a Kodak Brownie 2C, but had to do some work to throttle down the higher speed Instax film.  As I had a decent supply of this medium, I figured I'd give the J66 one last try, and carefully placed a single sheet of Instax wide (puffy side to the front) into the film chamber under the veil of darkness. 

With bright sunny skies in seeming contrast to the frigid temps, I set out on an errand, and in the midst of it, made a quick stop Downtown to attempt this last ditch effort to salvage a decent image from the J66.  I set the focus to the "portrait" setting, found a close subject well bathed in sunlight, opened the aperture fully by using the lighten-darken dial fully to lighten, and fired away.  Scurrying home and returning to my fully darkened room, I then removed the film from the camera and gently fit it into an empty Instax film cartridge, inserting it into an Instax 210 camera I picked up a while back with a faulty lens but working film ejector, and fired away to see how the J66 fared.

Expecting little after all of the previous trials and tribulations with this camera, I approached this last ditch try with almost no fanfare or anticipation, so I was pretty much speechless to see this image develop before my eyes! 

My first try at using Instax Wide in the Polaroid J66 was actually a last ditch try to see if I could salvage an image from this camera.  I was in utter shock to see this develop before my eyes. 

Film Hacking: Not Your Typical Polaroid

A number of months ago, I snapped a photo on Fuji FP-100C Instant Peel Apart Film, and was particularly pleased with the results that I obtained.  

Would you care to guess which camera model shot the photo?

Dutch Date - Part 6: The Minolta Autopak 700 and the GAF Anscomatic 726

Every so often, I'll get really frugal and ask a couple of cameras to share a roll of film.  Though there are problems here and there, they'll usually agree.  I call these "Dutch Dates" and usually try to pair cameras with something more than simply the film format in common.  Below is a look at just one such pairing...

So would the two early Gen X'ers find that their classic American staple tasted like a finely aged Bourbon or stale beer?  Read on to find out!

Camera Models: Minolta Autopak 700 (ca 1966) and GAF Anscomatic 726 (ca 1969)

Similarities: Both are Japanese made 126 format auto-exposure rangefinders of early 1970's vintage with the capability of full manual control.  

Differences: The GAF has a higher top speed (1/500) than the Minolta (1/250) and, from limited previous experience, is much more accomodating to use of 35mm film spooled into a 126 cartridge. 

Film Shared: Expired Kodak Gold 200-126 expired in January 1992. 

It was just last May when I first elected to pick up and use a camera in the favorite format of my mom: none other than 126 cartridge.  Though it seemed my initial tries with this film and format encountered more challenges than conquests, I ultimately discovered a new love and respect for this largely forgotten film format, and some of the machines designed to utilize it.  With cameras in 126 format available for next to nothing, I snapped up a small sampling of various "Instamatic" type cameras to get a better feel of all that the 126 format once was. 

Dutch Date - Part 5: Ricoh Singlex TLS and Ricoh 35 Flex

Every so often, I'll get really frugal and ask a couple of cameras to share a roll of film.  Though there are problems here and there, they'll usually agree.  I call these "Dutch Dates" and usually try to pair cameras with something more than simply the film format in common.  Below is a look at just one such pairing...

As they settled in to enjoy an English delicacy, the 35 Flex asked the Singlex if the battle wounds were real or self-inflicted. 

Camera Models: Ricoh Singlex TLS (1967) and Ricoh 35 Flex (1963)

Similarities: Both are 1960's Ricoh SLR cameras under their own brand name.

Differences: The Singlex is a conventional focal plane shutter SLR with interchangeable lenses, while the 35 Flex is a leaf shutter SLR with a fixed lens. 

Film Shared: Ilford FP4+, Fresh Dated 

The 1960's might be considered to be the prime period for Ricoh's camera models.  Though the Japanese camera maker certainly had a pretty lengthy run of producing some very capable, and often quite unique film cameras, the Sixties seem to be when Ricoh made a name for itself in a pretty crowded industry.  Though the maker continued creating some excellent cameras in the decades to follow, it seemed to be increasingly marginalized, at least in the US, as Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Minolta, and Olympus took the top spots in the remaining field.

Innovation Station: Medium Format Macros for the Frugal

Shooters of the 35mm format seem to get all the perks cheaply.  For under $20, one can easily pickup any of a wide number of choices for a competent used shooter taking 135 stock that will pretty much do about all that one can expect, including a wide range of shutter speeds and the ability to close focus on even some of the most basic of cameras, allowing for some great shots with wonderful separation of field.

In the world of medium format however, this wide array of choices quickly vanishes.  For those of us who love working with the larger negative sizes that 120 film offers, securing a decent 120 camera for anywhere under $100 often seems like something of a challenge.  And whether one's 120 camera of choice is ultimately is a TLR, a guess focus folder, or a something more along the lines of the "Texas Leica," the ability to get close can be especially elusive on medium format altogether. 

However, with a little bit of ingenuity and some stubborn determination, one can pretty readily be up and about shooting macros in medium format after having spent less than $20 in equipment for camera and accessories, while having a tremendous amount of fun and involvement in the process! This is the hobby of photography at its most enjoyable and affordable. 

So let's start with a shot taken on Ilford HP5 with focus around infinity.  Pretty decent stuff, though this gate in foreground is completely out of focus.  It'd be great to pull the focus a bit closer...

Hey, now we're getting somewhere, though the ornament is still a bit shy of the sweet spot...

Now that's better!  Any chance focus can be pulled in even further?...

Now this is closer than one typically sees from medium format cameras.  Just how close can we pull in focus?

All the way to the nearest bar in the gate!  By now that once crisp backdrop has been wonderfully muted in the distance.

The camera used to produce these images cost me just $15 in a second hand shop, and is readily found in antique stores or online auction sites at around the same price in ready to use condition.  So what did I use for these medium format macro photos?  This! 

A simple Kodak Brownie Number 2 was used to create all of the images above, by means of a pretty simple technique.

Dutch Date - Part 4: The Minolta 460Tx and the Minolta-16 MG

Every so often, I'll get really frugal and ask a couple of cameras to share a roll of film.  Though there are problems here and there, they'll usually agree.  I call these "Dutch Dates" and usually try to pair cameras with something more than simply the film format in common.  Below is a look at just one such pairing...

As they devoured their Chinese fare, the lively discussion between the two often turned into heated exchanges, as both tried to best each other. 

Camera Models: Minolta Autopak 460Tx (1979) and Minolta-16 MG (1966)

Similarities: Both are Minolta made products that shoot a 16mm wide film stock, albeit using different cartridges.

Differences: The 460Tx uses perforated 110 film, has adjustable focus and aperture, but a seemingly constant shutter speed.  The 16 MG offers fixed focus, with an integrated sliding filter for closer focus.  Aperture and shutter on the 16 MG are both adjustable, albeit on a scale resembling a program exposure.

Film Shared: Lomography Orca 110BW, fresh dated. 

As the popularity of film photography increased, and the capabilities of photographic film improved, the decades from the 1930's onward increasingly sought ways to improve on the portability of cameras while still providing versatility and good image quality.  The miniaturization of cameras hit a certain stride in the later part of the 20th century, with many cameras easily fitting into pockets to have at the ready at any time.  

Dutch Date - Part 3: Minolta Freedom Dual C and Minolta Freedom Zoom Explorer

Every so often, I'll get really frugal and ask a couple of cameras to share a roll of film.  Though there are problems here and there, they'll usually agree.  I call these "Dutch Dates" and usually try to pair cameras with something more than simply the film format in common.  Below is a look at just one such pairing...

They scarfed down their British fare with reckless abandon, and remarked, how of their contemporaries coming up in the 90's, they were some of the few who could really see the "big picture."

Camera Models: Minolta Freedom Dual C (1991) and Minolta Freedom Zoom Explorer (1999)

Similarities: Both are Minolta made point and shoot models with multiple focal lengths that have the fairly rare ability to shoot at the 28mm focal length on the wide end of their focal length range.

Differences: The Freedom Dual C, an earlier model, is actually a dual lens camera rather than a zoom like the Freedom Zoom Explorer.  It offers special buttons only to turn off flash or to use a self timer.  The Explorer however has a burst mode, night portrait mode, red-eye reduction flash, and macro mode among its options. 

Film Shared: Ilford Delta 400, fresh dated, developed in TFX-2. 

As the 1990's progressed, point and shoot cameras continued to try to reach new and impractical levels of focal length, as the typical 35-70mm range began to expand ever upwards with each successive year.  As the decade closed, and a consumer digital era crept imminently close, the longest of these super zooms stretched to a 200mm focal length! 

Far fewer camera models in this age of length inadequacy crept inward, typically leaving 35mm (or more often 38mm) as the widest focal length offered, and in effect leaving snapshooters in close quarters with few comparative choices.  Minolta was one of the few makers to crack the semi-wide ceiling on some of their models, with a couple of models reaching inward to be operable at a wide 28mm focal length.  

Darkroom Diaries: Ilford Pan F+ 50 and Photographers Formulary TFX 2

Challenging one's comfort zone admittedly is a good thing.  As big of a fan of HC-110 as I am, I did have to wonder what else was out there in black and white developers that might work well to give me.  As my supply of the syrup was winding down, I began to explore what other options might be out there, and was wondering what I might find to vary my stable of developers.

Ultimately I selected Photographer's Formulary TFX-2.

The desire to try a new developer actually goes a bit beyond simple caprice as I imply.  As much as I love HC-110 as a general purpose developer, I wanted to see what I might be able to find that might be a lower contrast developer, particularly for use on microfilm as well as Ferrania P30, both of which tended to have higher contrast in HC-110.  I'd seen some results of P30 in the Metol based Beutler formula, which really looked promising, and was about to pull the trigger on the needed powders when, on perusing the wide array of options from Photographer's Formulary, elected that TFX-2 was the perfect choice.  Similar in makeup to the Beutler formula, but in a 2 part liquid formula that could be used as a one-shot developer, TFX-2 also had some at least one follower who was using it as a stand developing solution!  It was just like taking my existing practices and just changing the ingredients! 

Rather than jump directly into microfilm developing with TFX-2, I elected to do my first tries of stand developing of this developer using a couple of rolls of Ilford's Pan F+ film, a 50 speed emulsion known for being a bit heavy on contrast.  Using 12.5ml of both solution A and B in the 400ml tank for a 30 minute stand, I was quite curious to see what I'd get.  My first roll was a roll of 120 shot in a newly acquired Zeiss Ikonta 515/2, and my second roll was a cut down roll of 127 taken in my newly beloved Zeh Goldi.  

My results show a mix of promise and concern.  Some are simply wonderful, while I find there are a few challenges that can result when using this developer, at least on the somewhat temperamental Pan F film...

From the Zeiss folder, I'm instantly impressed by the first frame developed in TFX-2.  Though the sky shows some rather odd developer artifacts around the steeple, the tonality in the statue is nothing short of wonderful to me.

Dutch Date - Part 2: The Detrola Model HW and the Falcon Model F

Every so often, I'll get really frugal and ask a couple of cameras to share a roll of film.  Though there are problems here and there, they'll usually agree.  I call these "Dutch Dates" and usually try to pair cameras with something more than simply the film format in common.  Below is a look at just one such pairing...

The two Seniors noshed on some Japanese fare, while recalling the days when their format wasn't at all obscure!

Camera Models: Detrola Model HW (1939) and Falcon Model F (1937)

Similarities: It's as if someone built the shell of this camera for both makers to utilize in putting their own finishing touches and features on their version, as they are that similar.  Both are Art Deco era American Viewfinder collapsible 127 cameras whose design is rich in Art Deco lettering and design work, and as it so happens, both have tended to have a particular dislike of "homemade" 127 film, from previous experience.  Both also have Wollensak 2 inch Velostigmat lenses that have unit focusing instead of front element focusing. 

Differences: The models come from different manufacturers, and have slight differences in top shutter speed, as well as expected differences in trim. 

Film Shared: Rerapan 100 in 127 format, fresh dated. 

If you have read more than a few of my posts, you'll soon note that I'm a bit of a sucker for what are often known as "obsolete" formats.  After successfully cutting down 120 film to feed old 828 format cameras, my attention later turned to 127 format models, and I began to expand my film cutting adventures to this format as well.  However, I discovered some 127 cameras weren't the most enthusiastic about using this custom slit film, often slipping in the film advance, or simply having many issues with film plane flatness.  

Dutch Date - Part 1: The Nikon N75 and the Maxxum HTSi

Every so often, I'll get really frugal and ask a couple of cameras to share a roll of film.  Though there are problems here and there, they'll usually agree.  I call these "Dutch Dates" and usually try to pair cameras with something more than simply the film format in common.  Below is a look at just one such pairing...

The two Japanese millennials sat and reminisced on their youth as they partook in a shared roll of a newer American classic: Kodak's TMAX 100.

Camera Models: Minolta Maxxum HTSi (1997) and Nikon N75 (2002)

Similarities: Both are "mid-entry level" SLR cameras dating from the last 10 years of film's dominance that are largely overlooked today by film enthusiasts, who instead opt for higher end models of the era.  Both were acquired as an extra of a multi-camera lot, and happened to function perfectly.

Differences: The models come from different makers, and have different button locations for some similar functions.  The Minolta allows for manual setting of ISO speeds and has a faster top shutter speed of 1/4000 second.  The Nikon has five illuminated focus points that can be easily selected using a pad on the back of the camera.

Film Shared: Kodak TMax 100, fresh dated. 


In a world of camera collecting and shooting, you're bound to acquire a few extras you'd never intended to snap up.  Typically, these come in the form of an extra camera body bundled in with a multi camera lot that contains something else of interest.  All too often, these extra pieces are either something broken, something that you already have, or something that is just not terribly interesting.

Of the last of those classifications, there is often room for a slight change of heart, one that happens when you pick up that camera, load it with batteries (if it requires them), and fire off a few test shots, only to realize "You know what?!?  I don't hate this!"

Inst-amour! The Kodak Instamatic 700-800 Series

In most cases, I'm a terrible "Collector."

Though I may pick up vintage film cameras to a large degree, there have been few if any genres at which I've collected the entire set.  I don't need to have every Univex AF folding model.  Nor am I pressed to have the all black variant of the Pentax ME Super as well as the "SE" edition with diagonal split prism to round out my arsenal of that model.  And I'm never about to try to collect every lens offered for even the most meager SLR camera models.

But yet, I took an odd departure from my historical tendencies to snap up an example of each in one of the most endearing camera series that I've happened across this year...

In formation is the entirety of the 700/800 numbered series of Kodak Instamatic cameras. At the top of the stack are the 700 and 800, with the 704 and 804 in the middle, and the 714 and 814 making the foundation for this heavy stack of American cameras.

The Kodak Instamatic 700 and 800 series stood at the top spot of the American-made Kodak 126 cameras, and embody a remarkable sense of quirk and flair packaged in a durable housing with a surprisingly usable feature set.

Darkroom Diaries: Mastering Microfilm with HC-110

Looking to shoot film on a budget?  How about this "All You Can Eat Buffet" deal of the film world! For the cost of about 2 rolls of film, you are supplied with enough film to make about 20 or more rolls of film! This film has a nice slow speed and fine grain to allow you to open the lens up on most cameras in full sun, and it comes free of perforations, making an ideal candidate to stock 828 cameras with film! 

So what's the downside?  Well, there's lots of contrast that needs to be tamed in order to get an image with a more pictorial feel.  And the lack of sprockets that makes this a great 828 film also makes it very difficult to use in 35mm cameras, with some models needing some degree of modification, with some other cameras entirely unable to use the stock.  

This bargain film stock is microfilm, a long established medium of Archivists for the preservation of print media. Though never manufactured for pictorial use, this fine grained stock can be adapted for use in 828 and many 35mm cameras with a few caveats.

The most inhibiting of these caveats is the lack of perforations (sprockets) in most microfilm stocks.  This is film that was designed to be fed through a viewer with direct wheel contact, rather than fed through a camera with sprocket gearing and teeth.  This works fine in an 828 camera, but will slip when fed through manual advance 35mm cameras.  Many of the more modern 35mm film cameras with auto advance use an IR sensor that counts the film sprockets in 35mm stock as it advances.  With non-perforated microfilm, these cameras have no sprockets to count, and will simply give up and return the film to the 35mm cassette after attempting to load it.

For manual advance cameras that use a toothed wheel to pull film onto the take up spool, an improvised solution is to apply a layer or two of painters tape to the this wheel to increase adhesion and avoid the slippage that would otherwise result.  Within two minutes of trying this with a Ricoh KR30SP that I have, I had a camera that readily accepted the Microfilm stock.

Two 35mm cameras that will accept microfilm without any modification are the Canon 10S and the original Voigtlander Vito.  Both of these use a contact wheel that lacks teeth to advance film onto the take up spool.

So this all established, what are the rest of the challenges to using this medium?  The first would be supply.  Microfilm isn't typically found in the same places that those of us shooting conventional film pick up our supply.  Neither B&H nor Freestyle sells it, but it can typically be found on eBay.  If lucky, one can find single (100 foot long) roll sales for under $20.  It may take some patience and scouring, but it is out there.

Somewhat less challenging is the process of preparing a length of microfilm for use in a camera.  With 35mm, this involves taking a reusable cartridge, and either loading it with a length of film in the dark, or using a daylight bulk film loader.  Either method should work, but I used the former method, limiting the length of film to about an 18 shot roll.

I also loaded some 828 rolls by simply doing the same process above, but instead interleaving it with 828 backing paper (that the film was taped to on its beginning side) as I wound it onto an 828 spool. It wasn't long before I had three rolls of film ready to use in a variety of cameras.

Shooting this film involves some additional challenges.  I found that rating the Kodak Imagelink 1461 film at about ISO 20 seemed to give the best results.  

I knew I would encounter the potential for a lot of contrast when developing, and elected to scale back my typical stand development time (using Kodak's HC-110 developer at a 1:99 dilution) from 30 minutes to only 16 minutes.  This resulted in some pretty thin negatives, but these scanned with no issues whatsoever.

Below are some samples from my first three rolls of microfilm - the "All You can Eat Buffet" of the photographic world. 

On a very sunny day, I ran a short roll of Microfilm through a Bantam f/8 828 camera.  This wound up working perfectly with the slow shutter of the camera, and delivered some particularly good images given the very limited capabilities of this basic camera. Contrast is a bit high still, but not in an overwhelming way.

Zeh, not Meh - The Zeca Zeh Goldi Camera

For the classic camera collector, picking a handful of favorites can not only be a huge challenge, but it can also be something that largely defies strict logical thought.  

Consider one of my recent acquisitions that has quickly catapulted itself into "Top 10" camera status among my varied collection.  This is a camera that lacks any focusing aids whatsoever, has a top shutter speed of a "whopping" 1/125 of a second, and uses a film format that is especially difficult to find.  

So why would I be so enamored with a camera with such a limited feature set and usability? Because what I have is a camera compact enough to fit in a shirt pocket featuring a sharp, fast f/2.9 lens capable of focusing down to a mere 18", and giving an image size nearly 40% larger than the frame of 35mm film, all in an extremely well made housing indicative of a quality standard that has been abandoned for decades.  This little favorite of mine is the Zeh Goldi.

The diminutive and delightful little Zeh Goldi.

Though marked as "Zeca," the brand of this little known camera is actually known as "Zeh." This German camera maker released the Goldi in 1930, primarily as a half frame shooter of 127 film, though some less common full frame examples are also known to exist.  Zeh also made versions of this camera body for Rodenstock, which sold it as the Ysella.  Thus, while many various lenses can be found on Goldi cameras, it seems that Rodenstock Trinars are among the more common variants.  My particular version has a "Zecanar" branded lens, which may be of Rodenstock make, though it has a particular "hidden" talent that the Trinar variant lacks.  More on that later. 

Trying to Get Instant Kicks: The Polaroid J66

Stubbornness is considered an inherited trait, and is one to which I can readily admit having. I show it at work and in my family life, but my stubbornness is pervasive enough to affect my hobby as well. Where most sane people in the hobby of film photography would not bother with trying to get an image from a piece of equipment that is functionally obsolete, I push forward with a "Can-Do" spirit that is admittedly a bit over the top at times...

To the point where I have to wonder when I should stop beating a dead horse.

The tale begins in the height of my Polaroid pack film enthusiasm.  Still psyched to have a new toy to play with in the form of the Colorpack II, while preparing to purchase yet another in the form of the Polaroid 440 from Strawberry Fields, I'm somewhat intrigued by the sight of another interesting Polaroid camera sitting before me pleading me to add it to my collection.  It's called the Polaroid J66.

Knowing nothing whatsoever about this camera, with just 15 minutes on the meter outside, and my youngest son sitting on my neck as I sweat in the small store trying to keep him from breaking any of the multitude of interesting items, I take a quick look online, and without finding much in the way of information, elect to just simply toss it into my purchase for good measure.