Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,471   Posts: 1,644,189   Online: 984
      
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 74
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,093
    Images
    228

    The best film camera money can buy?

    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    It is the classic 126 camera - square negatives or slides.

    Probably the largest selling camera ever, and just about foolproof to use in almost all typical situations.

    A camera doesn't have to yield images that "blow up very big" in order to create good or even great photographs.

    See this link: http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Kodak_Instamatic_104
    Yes I know but that's like saying Advantix could make nice images...

    PE and I went back and forth on this, I forgot to mention to him that I took a roll and shot it recently to prove myself wrong and him right, let me tell you the images are TERRIBLE but I'm going to take my scanner soon and instead of lab scans I'll scan them myself and see if they are any better, but even the 5x7's from the lab look TERRIBLE and I would never use them for anything. So I can't imagine 110 much different, I had a 110 camera as a kid and I've looked at those too and they look the same, all blotchy and "pixelated" it's just terrible. Haha

    I admit they didn't make as many good films for those systems as they did for 35mm but damn it's bad LOL

    So, I agree to a point but even my 1.2 megapixel digital camera looks better than those advantix shots.


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    193
    Virginia Schau won the pulitzer prize for photography with a photo taken with a Brownie box camera. So...

  3. #53
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    658
    [QUOTE=StoneNYC;1432521]Yes I know but that's like saying Advantix could make nice images...

    PE and I went back and forth on this, I forgot to mention to him that I took a roll and shot it recently to prove myself wrong and him right, let me tell you the images are TERRIBLE but I'm going to take my scanner soon and instead of lab scans I'll scan them myself and see if they are any better, but even the 5x7's from the lab look TERRIBLE and I would never use them for anything. So I can't imagine 110 much different, I had a 110 camera as a kid and I've looked at those too and they look the same, all blotchy and "pixelated" it's just terrible. Haha

    I admit they didn't make as many good films for those systems as they did for 35mm but damn it's bad LOL

    So, I agree to a point but even my 1.2 megapixel digital camera looks better than those advantix shots.



    126 is not in the same catagory as 110 or Advantix, it was about the same size as 135mm just square and Nikon and Kodak made decent 126 SLRs. Kodak made a few higher end fixed lens 126 cameras with good lens. I always though the flaw was the plastic cassesstt which could distort in hot weather.

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    364
    I recall reading that the main problem with 110 film was that the cartridge didn't hold it flat enough? With the usual cheap 110 cameras (anyone else have one which was barely bigger than the cartridge itself? I see the Lomo company have got hold of the tooling for them now) this didn't make a lot of difference. Pentax and Minolta made SLRs for the format though, the 18mm and 50mm lenses for the Pentax apparently stack up very well indeed.

    In all honesty the price of a good 35mm SLR is now so low that the only reason for using cheap old cameras is, well, if you enjoy using them!
    Matt

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,696
    Images
    15
    I notice the Seller hasn't demonstrated or qualified is airy remarks with examples.
    These novelty cameras using film that is all but extinct can be found in flea markets for about $20, dumped by owners who don't quite know of or appreciate the early pedigree.

  6. #56
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,037
    Images
    345
    I must admit that although I own about 10 beautiful cameras, their are two I would still like to own, but would probably not use very much. One is a Reid & Sigrist and the other is a Zeiss Bulls Eye.
    Last edited by cliveh; 12-13-2012 at 05:46 PM. Click to view previous post history.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by PDH View Post


    126 is not in the same catagory as 110 or Advantix, it was about the same size as 135mm just square and Nikon and Kodak made decent 126 SLRs. Kodak made a few higher end fixed lens 126 cameras with good lens. I always though the flaw was the plastic cassesstt which could distort in hot weather.
    Nikon made a 126 SLR? I know Ricoh did, and so did Zeiss Ikon and Rollei.

  8. #58
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,666
    Images
    60
    126 had the same problem with film flatness as 110.

    But folks, it isn't the camera that makes good photographs!

    I have seen an absolutely fabulous poster sized (30" x 40"?) print from disk film and a basic Kodak disk camera.
    Matt

    “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

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    I have seen an absolutely fabulous poster sized (30" x 40"?) print from disk film and a basic Kodak disk camera.
    Of what? Grain and blur?

  10. #60
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,666
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Yashinoff View Post
    Of what? Grain and blur?
    Of someone who worked for Kodak Canada. It had been taken a couple of years previously when he was clowning around with some friends. It was presented to a crowd of several hundred at his surprise retirement party - after he had worked for almost 50 years for Kodak Canada.

    For many years early in his career, he was known as "Mr. Kodak" in Western Canada, because he was the only Kodak representative in the western half of our country.

    It was presented to the room by the president of the company, who did acknowledge that the print had required some fairly careful work at Eastman Kodak's labs in Rochester. The image information was there though in the negative and was retrievable with reasonably skilful and careful work.

    This was all before digital.
    Matt

    “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

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin