Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,219   Posts: 1,532,254   Online: 816
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11
    Hatchetman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    587
    Images
    6
    Delayed response on this: yes, I had a hood. pretty sure that lens was made in USA. Paul didn't really charge for advanced lens repair ($95 incl shipping) and he told me before he did the work what the limitations would be. I told him to go ahead anyway. I guess the issue has to do with a tiny retaining ring without those notches for removal. He didn't want to break the ring or lens element trying to get it off. If he did then I could come on here raising all hell that he destroyed my priceless camera. I don't blame him.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    261

    828

    I seem to remember being told that 828 film is in the 126 instamatic cartrige: you might have success hunting them down

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Someonenameddavid View Post
    I seem to remember being told that 828 film is in the 126 instamatic cartrige: you might have success hunting them down
    While 126 film has similarities and was certainly inspired by 828, there are differences that make 126 film unsuitable for use in an 828 camera.

    126 and 828 film have, in common: Roll film 35mm wide, with a paper backing, 28mm of the film being used for image, and a single perforation on only ONE edge of the film, widely spaced, with only one perforation for each exposure (in comparison, a regular 35mm camera uses eight perforations per exposure).

    However: 828 film yields rectangular exposures of 28x40mm (10:7 ratio, slightly closer to square than the 3:2 ratio of full-frame still 35mm), whereas 126 film yields truly square (1:1) exposures of 28x28mm. Worse, 126 film is actually pre-exposed with a vertical border between each exposure (what purpose this served escapes me).

    Thus, using respooled 126 film in an 828 camera would produce white vertical beams across your pictures, in a pseudo-random pattern (if you were to use such film in an 828 camera that actually stopped the wind at every perforation [e.g., Bantam RF], the pattern would cease to be random, but each image would have one white beam followed by about 9mm of overlap with the following image).
    Last edited by 1L6E6VHF; 06-11-2014 at 11:12 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: changed film format unit of measure from nanonewtons to millimeters!

  4. #14
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,240
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by 1L6E6VHF View Post
    While 126 film has similarities and was certainly inspired by 828, there are differences that make 126 film unsuitable for use in an 828 camera.

    126 and 828 film have, in common: Roll film 35mm wide, with a paper backing, 28mm of the film being used for image, and a single perforation on only ONE edge of the film, widely spaced, with only one perforation for each exposure (in comparison, a regular 35mm camera uses eight perforations per exposure).

    However: 828 film yields rectangular exposures of 28x40mm (10:7 ratio, slightly closer to square than the 3:2 ratio of full-frame still 35mm), whereas 126 film yields truly square (1:1) exposures of 28x28mm. Worse, 126 film is actually pre-exposed with a vertical border between each exposure (what purpose this served escapes me).

    Thus, using respooled 126 film in an 828 camera would produce white vertical beams across your pictures, in a pseudo-random pattern (if you were to use such film in an 828 camera that actually stopped the wind at every perforation [e.g., Bantam RF], the pattern would cease to be random, but each image would have one white beam followed by about 9mm of overlap with the following image).
    With respect to the pre-exposed border between the frames, I would hazard a guess that this innovation made automatic photofinishing printers way more easy to design.
    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

  5. #15

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    Ponder the manufacturing complexity in mass fabrication of 126 cartridges for market. Film notching, border exposing, all in registration. Any flaw would cause the notch to trip the camera-wind to stop, with the border running right through the picture. Then the taping of the backing paper, once again in-register. Then coiling the roll for insertion to the smaller left-hand cartridge reservoir, then the insertion of the paper leader to the take-up reel, the mating of the cartridge portions. 126 must have had a finishing building of its own after the film stock was received on the dock. Mind Boggling.

  6. #16
    Hatchetman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    587
    Images
    6
    I just bought a 126 negative carrier and intend to file it to 828 size.

  7. #17
    Hatchetman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    587
    Images
    6
    Just printed a few. Here is an example and a crop to show the level of detail. Pretty good I'd say!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails IMG_0003.jpg   IMG_0004.jpg  

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    111
    Said it before and I'll say it again-- any lens that says "Ektar" on it punches way above its weight in dollar terms.

    --nosmok

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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