My 616 (same film as 116) camera was intended for 2.5" x 4.5" negatives, so the lens should cover 4" x 5".
My dad gave it to me, freshly refurbished, in 1967. I doubt he paid more than $25.00 for it at the time. Can we use the "cost per year" to determine whether it is cheap enough?
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2
Monthly Shooting Assignment - Jan/Feb 2014 - Cheap camera challenge!
Cool, yea I have the 2a, it's the earlier model and only has one element to my understanding (but I can't quite tell, sometimes two together can look like one, anyway shooting my submission tonight, I'm going to compare by using a modern 150mm lens to see how different they are, I hope this one has really interesting characteristics that make it worth the effort. It certainly has more coverage than I could ever have expected (though probably not sharp).
Originally Posted by NedL
EDIT: the camera itself cost me like $10 on eBay a while back, the seller said it was usable, and when I got it, it had holes in the bellows the size of a pencil, and the front standard was bent at an angle, and it smelled like cigars. But I kept it cause it cost more in shipping to send back! Lol
(Ok enough talking, on to the pictures!)
Hmmm, guess I could join in. My Nikomat bodies both originally cost me about $15 each. The FT2 is already loaded up with a partially finished roll of CHS 25... I could pair it with the $20 28/3.5 Nikkor-H...
APUG: F4, F3P, F2AS, Nikomat FT2
Nikkors: 18-55/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX (f/D2x), 20/3.5 UD, 24/2 AI, 50/2 H, 50/1.4 S, 85/1.8 K, 105/4 Micro AIS, 180/2.8 PC
- My flickr stream
OK!!!! I had to run a control on this... just to know how different it would be, so here is the control.
CONTROL: Graflex Holder Image #5
TOYO45a, Schneider 150mm f/5.6 Symmar-S f/16@1 second.
TMY-2 in Rodinal 1:50
NOW the actual image submission...
Shot with this lens...
Graflex Holder Image #4
TOYO45a, (Kodinar? still confirming) 122mm f7.8 shot at "#2" stop (f/16? still confirming) @ "1 Mississippi".
TMY-2 in Rodinal 1:50 "Tea Time"
If you look at the difference between the two images up close you can see degradation in the edges as far as sharpness, and even at the sharpest part near the top of the kettle, the Schneider does better, however for a lens that was made in the late 1910's for a 116 brownie folder, not 4x5, I'd say it did fairly well.
The second submission I took outside, it was misting and I was in a hurry, I'm fairly certain that the edge falloff is due to the aperture closing down and not simply from the lens being farther from the film plane. I checked the edge and they were all very bright before I stopped down. (but I learned something, to check twice after the aperture is stopped down).
TOYO45a, (Kodinar? still confirming) 122mm f7.8 shot at "#4" Stop (f/32? still confirming...) @ 1/25th (assuming the shutter is at all accurate)
HP5+ in Rodinal 1:50 "My stream and Neighbors back yard"
I'm really excited about this lens, it's a lot of fun, and all the LF guys told me it wouldn't work, I can't wait to post this on LFF too.
Last edited by StoneNYC; 01-05-2014 at 08:13 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I already know my entry is going to have been shot with my soviet half-frame Agat 18K, now I just gotta choose a picture...
An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.
f/64 and be there.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Great stuff Stone and first out of the gate as always. I'm blown away by the images from an old folder lens. Now I really want to get a roll of 127 to try out my old Kodak folder.
I'm pretty stoked by some of the ideas and cameras that people are going to use. Really look forward to seeing the pictures.
Like I said I'm not going to be really fussy about what constitutes cheap. If your beater camera is a Leica or you picked up a Hasselblad at the thrift store then by all means go for it but hopefully people can find some ways to challenge themselves to do more with less. If all you shoot is Portra maybe try some drugstore film or something. I'll really leave it as wide open as possible, mostly I just want to see people have fun and be creative.
Stories and pictures about the camera itself to go along with your entry would be awesome.
I'm not sure which camera I'll use to make a submission, but maybe I'll upload some pictures of cameras over the next couple months. I guess about 1/2 of the photographs I make are pinhole or paper negatives or from homemade cameras -- and all combinations of those! To me it's almost a separate hobby from making photos with a film camera and printing them under an enlarger. Both are for fun, but there is something more lighthearted and playful about leaving the house with a coffee can pinhole camera compared to going out with the nikon F3. A different frame of mind!
Go for the homemade pinhole camera wit paper negatives in this MSA and save the F3 for the next MSA.
I'll do the same.
Bert from Holland
Originally Posted by NedL
"Have fun and catch that light beam!"
Bert from Holland
my blog: http://thetoadmen.blogspot.nl
my Linkedin pinhole group: http://tinyurl.com/pinholegroup
* I'm an analogue enthusiast, trying not to fall into the digital abyss.
* My favorite cameras: Mamiya C330f, Nikon S2, Hasselblad SWC, Leica SL, Leica M7, Russian FKD 18x24, Bronica SQ-B and RF645, Rolleiflex T, Nikon F4s, Olympus Pen FT, Agfa Clack and my pinhole cameras.
I may try to join in on this one. My mom gave me her old Ansco Sureshot over christmas. Hard to think of a simpler camera than that. Aught to be fun to see what can come out of it!
First post in this tread!
It happened that just a couple of weeks ago I shot this:
Sheet of sun print paper (cyanotype paper) in a recycled USPS cardboard box using a magnifier I found laying around in my apartment as the taking lens. Just 1 hour of exposure time!
Image intensified with hydrogen peroxide
It doesn't get much cheaper than this!
Technically this is a negative but, since the sky is burned in blue, the image works nicely this way!