Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > Half Frames / Subminiatures

Half Frames / Subminiatures This forum is for all half frame 35mm cameras, including the very popular Olympus Pens and their SLR cousins, the Pen F and Pen FT, as well as all smaller than half frame subminiature film cameras.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

110 camera and film discussion
Old 06-18-2018   #1
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
110 camera and film discussion

Hello all.

I thought it may be a good idea to get a proper 110 camera and film discussion thread going. It'll probably not be the most popular thread, but at least there'll be single a place people can ask questions about 110 stuff so they don't have to go hunting all over the shop.

I'd better start:

As some will know, I recently found a load of expired 110 colour film and sold it to a camera shop on behalf of the charity shop I found it in, after having offered it here first.

Between finding the film and selling it, I began to think about getting a 110 camera to have a go on.

After a little research I decided to get a Minolta Auto Zoom 110 SLR MK2 as it has a zoom lens that goes from 25mm (=50mm) to 67mm (=135mm) which can be focused, the apertures go from f3.5 to f16 and can be adjusted in half-steps, the shutter speeds are stepless between 1/1000 and 1/4, it has exposure compensation which goes in half-steps, it has a viewfinder with diopter correction, a split-image rangefinder and shows each shutter speed from 1/1000 to 1/125 by single LED's.

The main niggle with it is that the speeds from 1/60 to 1/4 are shown by one single LED that is a bit longer than the other speed LEDs.

I think I'll be able to tell if the meter is using 1/60 at the f-No. I've chosen if close down 1 stop and the meter chooses 1/125.

I've not actually received the camera yet, but from what is in the listing's photos it includes the lens hood (which I'll change for a metal one), a lens cap (which I may change for a metal one) a Hoya UV filter, the leather(ette?) never-ready case, the 'action grip', the box and the manual all for £29.95 inc. p+p.

Let's hope it works.

I believe it can only work with 100 asa and 400 asa film, so if I put a 200 asa film in, I'll have to set the exposure compensation to -1.

However, I'll be using film that expired in '94, which is over 2 decades ago and I read on the web that I should increase exposure by 1 stop for every decade that it's been expired so that would mean I set the exposure compensation to +1.

I also read that 200 asa film counts as 'slow' film and so doesn't need quite so much compensation as 400 asa film if it's all be stored the same way, so I may only need to get to '0' on the dial, but then again I may not need to compensate at all...

Bah! Ruddy interwebnet telling me a dozen different answers to any ruddy question I ask.

Lucky I've got five rolls of the expired film. All I have to do now is decide whether to the different compensating for each photo on the same film or just do each film at one compensation value and see what happens.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-18-2018   #2
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
I've just read that 400 asa cartridges have a slight 'bump' on the right hand side (with the label facing the user) which has to be trimmed off so that cameras that auto-set the film speed can do so properly.

Does anyone know if this is true?
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-18-2018   #3
jbrubaker
Registered User
 
jbrubaker's Avatar
 
jbrubaker is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 107
The Minolta zoom 110 mk II is a great camera - I have 2 of them. However, do yourself a favor and get some fresh film. I don't believe you will get acceptable results from 1994 Color film. Lomography sells fresh film in 110 cartridges. The Minolta mark II does require actual 110 film because it needs the index holes for the film advance to work, so no reloaded film unfortunately.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-18-2018   #4
farlymac
PF McFarland
 
farlymac's Avatar
 
farlymac is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Roanoke, VA
Posts: 5,851
I had a Mark II many years ago, and it could have just been my camera, but it seemed the focus was not quite on, and the lens had a tendency to flare.


Other than that it was a neat little camera to use. The Kodak Model 60 rangefinder though was my favorite 110 camera.


PF
__________________
Waiting for the light
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-18-2018   #5
Contarama
Registered User
 
Contarama is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,033
I have a Pentax kit. I have to pay a premium to get it processed. It is not worth it to me.
__________________
Art is the ability to make something...even if it is a big mess...
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-19-2018   #6
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,700
That format had potential but in all the years it was made not a single model by any company was fully manual. By that I mean you had a fast lens (f2.8 or faster) a full range of shutter speeds, and complete independent control over both. And yes, I know the cartridge had no pressure plate but I’ve seen some nice 8x10 made from the Pentax SLR that were really quite good for a thumbnail size neg.
Now days if I want to shoot 16mm film I use my Mamiya 16 Super.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-19-2018   #7
Timmyjoe
Registered User
 
Timmyjoe's Avatar
 
Timmyjoe is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,552
If you want to shoot 110 film, I'd like to recommend the Canon 110 ED 20 film camera. It's not an SLR, but it does have rangefinder focusing, and when they work, they make really nice images. They take a readily available battery, unlike some of the other 110 cameras from the 1970's, and you can reload the 110 cartridges with the Canon because the camera does not rely on the sprocket holes in the film to cock the shutter. I reload mine with 16mm motion picture film.

Full disclosure, after making a diopter for mine, and shooting numerous rolls of Lomography and hand rolled black & white film, one day the camera just quit working. Couldn't figure out what was wrong with it. Then a few months later I was playing around with it and a weird shaped spring fell out, and now it works again like a charm. Go figure.



Best,
-Tim
__________________
http://www.timcarrollphotography.com

New Photo Books
Sturgis Stories
& Scenes From Sturgis
now available
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-19-2018   #8
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,710
I use the Rollei A110. Scale focus (with display in VF), with a crazy sharp lens and excellent auto exposure. I think at the time it was the most expensive 110 camera made, and it feels like it. It also takes a readily available battery, unlike it's cheaper E110 brother.



Using Lomo Tiger film:



And crop from above showing how great the lens is:

  Reply With Quote

Old 06-19-2018   #9
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
Thanks to all for the replies.

@jbrubaker: Once I'e found that the mk2 actually works, I will be using lomo 110 film, partly 'cos it's new and partly to support the lomography company. I think I've read a tiny bit about laoding different film into 110 cassettes, but I wouldn't even consider it, partly 'cos I'm a clumsy clot and partly 'cos I'm a lazy little git.

@farlymac: I've been looking at some photos taken with mk1's and mk2's. Some of them do look a little 'not quite in focus'. I'm hoping the users were even thicker and less talented than I am.

@Contarama: How much does it cost you to get 110 dev'd and printed?


@zuiko85: I know what you mean. A lack of full Manual is a little disappointing, but at least there is more control with the mk1/2 than with most other 110's.

@[email protected] I don't think I'll be getting any more 110's. I have looked at some canons, Fujicas and kodaks etc. but none really appeal that much.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-19-2018   #10
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
Huss, yup, it is a very good lens, although the focus has to be close enough to take advantage.

I'm hoping the fact that the mk2's lens is a zoom and has lots of elements doesn't detract too much, but I will be rather careful with the focusing and holding the camera steady.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-19-2018   #11
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrubaker View Post
The Minolta mark II does require actual 110 film because it needs the index holes for the film advance to work, so no reloaded film unfortunately.

Hmmmm, I wonder if the same is true of the Pentax 110 SLR? I'd be more inclined to roll an emulsion of my own choosing than otherwise but the need for sprocket holes might put a stop to that.
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-19-2018   #12
jbrubaker
Registered User
 
jbrubaker's Avatar
 
jbrubaker is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by css9450 View Post
Hmmmm, I wonder if the same is true of the Pentax 110 SLR? I'd be more inclined to roll an emulsion of my own choosing than otherwise but the need for sprocket holes might put a stop to that.
The Pentax 110 will work with reloaded 16mm film - I've done it!
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2018   #13
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
My zoom 110 slr mk2 arrived earlier today. I was going to use some pics from the listing but ebay have de-listed the ruddy thing so I can't, and as I haven't taken any pics of it yet I'll have to post pics later.

The whole thing seems to be in nearly new condition and seems to work well. It came with a strap, a lens hood, a hoya sky 1b filter (single coated, as there's no 'HMC' written on it and the reflection seems a little blue?), a lens cap, the hand grip and a never-ready case.

I don't know what the case is made of, but it's come up all "shinier than new" after using a bit of brown shoe polish on it.

It's now got a film in it.

So I now have four cameras that will have to share the same bag, which can only fit one camera at a time- a Super Silette, a Super Solinette an Ansco Super Regent (if it turns out there's no 'framing' issue) and the 110 zoom slr mk2.

I've got no idea where I'll put the camera once the bookshelf that it's on has been filled with books.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2018   #14
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,898
That's a very funny photo of the Rollei camera on top of the Fuji. At first I thought it was some sort of aux viewfinder or flash!
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2018   #15
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
 
JoeV's Avatar
 
JoeV is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Posts: 1,678
Pocket Fujica 350 Zoom with Fujicolor Strobo P flash. Has manual scale focus and zoom. 3-position exposure switch (bright sun, normal sun, cloudy + flash). Has tripod socket.

Pocket Fujica 350 Zoom with Fujicolor Strobo P Flash by Joe Van Cleave, on Flickr
__________________
"If your eye is clear, your whole body will be full of light"

Inventor of the Light Pipe Array
My Blog
My latest book
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2018   #16
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
Finally got around to taking a pic of my minolta kit:





Does anyone know if Lomo 110 tiger film is slightly warm or slightly cool?

I think I'll be getting a multicoated sky 1b or a uv filter, so if the film is already slightly warm I'll get a uv filter or of it's slightly cool I'll get a sky 1b filter.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2018   #17
lxmike
Cat, coffee, camera:Check
 
lxmike's Avatar
 
lxmike is offline
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Co Durham NE England
Age: 52
Posts: 2,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by seany65 View Post
I've just read that 400 asa cartridges have a slight 'bump' on the right hand side (with the label facing the user) which has to be trimmed off so that cameras that auto-set the film speed can do so properly.

Does anyone know if this is true?
a set on nail clippers are perfect fro trimming down the tab, its what l have used over the years, (as l have dabbled with a pentax auto 110 super).
__________________
Currently loaded: Leica IIIc. IIIg and Bronica ERTS.

Arriving soon: Leica III black and nickel

myblog:lifefromawindow
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2018   #18
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
@Ixmike: Thanks for the info. So you think it's true that we should trim 400 asa cartridges so auto-setting cameras can set the correct speed?

Mind you, I don't know of any new 400 asa films being available, so I suppose for that speed I'll have to use expired film.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2018   #19
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by seany65 View Post


Does anyone know if Lomo 110 tiger film is slightly warm or slightly cool?

I think I'll be getting a multicoated sky 1b or a uv filter, so if the film is already slightly warm I'll get a uv filter or of it's slightly cool I'll get a sky 1b filter.
Slightly cool.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2018   #20
Spavinaw
Registered User
 
Spavinaw is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Rocket City
Posts: 552
I'm somewhat confused with the above information on ASA100 and ASA400 cartridges. Hold a 110 cartridge with the label facing you. On the right hand end of the cartridge there is a ridge about two millimeters high that runs from the top of the cartridge almost to the bottom. This is an ASA100 cartridge. If the ridge only runs half way down the cartridge, that is from the top of the cartridge to the middle, it is an ASA400 cartridge. How does this work? Cameras built for both ASA100 and ASA400 film have a pin that senses whether the bottom half of the ridge is present or absent and programs the camera accordingly.
__________________
Are we having fun yet?
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2018   #21
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
@spavinaw: From what I've read on the internet, 110 cameras that autoset the film speed for their meters (Don't they all?) have trouble reading the tab for the 400 asa speed so you have to trim it, (I don't know if that means cutting it all off or what) for the camera to sett the speed for the meter to 400.

I don't know if any of it's true.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2018   #22
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
@Huss: So Lomo Tiger 110 has a slightly cool caste?

Thanks for the info. Although it may now be redundant info.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Lomo may stop 110 tiger film!
Old 06-22-2018   #23
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
Lomo may stop 110 tiger film!

Yesterday I sent Lomography an email asking about when they expect new stocks of Tiger 110 film.

From the reply I've just received from Ja Lim of Lomography, they have no definite plans to re-stock 110 tiger film.

So unless we can all keep asking for it to persuade them to keep producing it, it looks like this is the end for 110 film!

Which is rather annoying.

I have asked them about their Lobster and Peacock films and whether they plan to continue with those films. I also said that I think they should keep up with the Tiger film and drop the Lobster and Peacock films as I can scan a Tiger print and manipulate the scan to make it look like it's from either a Lobster or Peacock print scan.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2018   #24
Contarama
Registered User
 
Contarama is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,033
@seany65

Last roll of 110 I shot was about 2 years ago. Processing only plus a cd was not quite $20. As I recall it is a little bit more of a pain to set up their machine for processing hence the extra charge. I dont use my Pentax system any more.
__________________
Art is the ability to make something...even if it is a big mess...
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2018   #25
farlymac
PF McFarland
 
farlymac's Avatar
 
farlymac is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Roanoke, VA
Posts: 5,851
If you go to Camera-Wiki.org, and look up Sedic cameras, you'll see a photo on the front page of the very model I used to have. I think it predates the Pentax 110. The winder had a coffee grinder noise when operated, and the coverings were peeling everywhere. I remember running one cartridge through it, as I really only got it for the novelty of the thing. The best thing about it was the mini potato masher flash.



http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Sedic


PF
__________________
Waiting for the light
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-23-2018   #26
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
@Contarama: I see. While I presume $20 isn't really all that much for you, I can see why it may seem a bit expensive when all you're getting is a cd with scans that may not be very good.

I took the first film (which was mono) I put through my Ricoh 500GX to a shop called 'Jessops' in Manchester. They wanted £18 for processing and printing to 6x4, so I just got the pics scanned to a cd. I think they are rather poorly scanned.

Luckily there is a branch of Max Speilmann near me who only charge £10 for processing and printing to 6x4.

They'll only be charging £12.99 for any 110 film I take, though I don't know what size they'll print to.

@farlymac: Was the model you owned an XF-33? Is the motordrive the black T-shaped thing or does it include the black box thing behind it?
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-27-2018   #27
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
I was wondering if anyone can tell me if the Depth of Field is different for 110 film compared to 135 film, if all other things are exactly the same?
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2018   #28
skucera
Registered User
 
skucera's Avatar
 
skucera is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Harrisburg, Oregon, USA
Posts: 230
Smaller lenses and smaller aperture openings both make for greater depth of field. If you're into "bokeh" then smaller lenses may not interest you. However, 110 lenses of small size and f4.5 or greater often don't need much focusing adjustment to have every depth in acceptable focus. This is why so many 110 cameras are focus free.

However, there were some 110 cameras with quality optics and quality focusing mechanisms. My first camera, the Pentax Auto 110, can resolve very well and can be focused very precisely with all of its lenses... well, except for the one pan-focus lens offered. I never bothered buying that lens. The maximum aperture is f2.8 for all its lenses, so low light will require a flash.

The Kodak Pocket Instamatic 60 also offers great optics and a fairly easy-to-use rangefinder. It too has good resolving power and can be focused precisely. Its f2.7 lens also isn't the best for low light photography, so a flash is handy.

My Minolta Weathermatic-A is a view camera with lower resolving power and only five zones for the focus... all selectable with icons. Aperture is f3.5, so it it relies a built-in flash, and has a fairly broad depth of field. There's no discernible bokeh with this camera.

My Canon 110ED 20 has a fairly fast f2.0 lens and an excellent rangefinder. It has pretty good resolving power and works fairly well in low light. I've actually gotten some good bokeh on bright days when focusing up close.

My Voigtländer Vitoret 110 (my second one because the first broke when shooting its first roll) has a fairly small aperture of f5.6 so it is effectively an infinitely variable zone focus view camera. Its viewfinder shows only three depth icons, and depth of field is very great... almost pan-focus. I've never seen any bokeh with this camera. It is only useful in bright sunlight, and even a living room in daylight gets the low exposure warning lit.

My Rollei E110 uses a moderate f2.8 aperture, so low light photography requires a flash or a tripod. I haven't seen any bokeh with this camera, and focusing is very forgiving... which means that it has pretty good depth of field. I also have a Rollei A110, but its film advance broke halfway through my first roll of film, which was a real disappointment.

So, that's my experience with 110. Comparatively, 35mm cameras have much less depth of field, especially at larger aperture openings.


Scott
__________________
1940 Kodak 35 Rangefinder
1955 Leica M3
1969 Canon New Canonet QL17-L
1976 Konica Autoreflex T3n
1977 Canon 110ED 20
1979 Minox 35 GL
1979 Olympus XA
1980 Pentax Auto 110
1987 Polaroid Spectra
1996 Canon EOS Elan IIe

Last edited by skucera : 06-29-2018 at 20:55. Reason: Spacing came out really odd, so I corrected that
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2018   #29
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
Thanks for the info skucera.

That's quite a collection of 110s. Never wanted a minolta 110 slr?
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-01-2018   #30
skucera
Registered User
 
skucera's Avatar
 
skucera is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Harrisburg, Oregon, USA
Posts: 230
No, I bought one about two months ago, but I was busy at work and haven’t gotten through the test roll yet. I can add an opinion about it after I develop the roll.

Oh, I learned yesterday why my local film developer suddenly charges much more to develop and print 110 film lately... the mini-lab that did 110 natively broke down and there are no repair parts available, so they develop 110 film by hand, scan it, and make digital prints. I’ve got to find a new developer for 110... maybe Blue Moon in Portland.

Scott
__________________
1940 Kodak 35 Rangefinder
1955 Leica M3
1969 Canon New Canonet QL17-L
1976 Konica Autoreflex T3n
1977 Canon 110ED 20
1979 Minox 35 GL
1979 Olympus XA
1980 Pentax Auto 110
1987 Polaroid Spectra
1996 Canon EOS Elan IIe
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-01-2018   #31
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
Did you get a mk1 or mk2?

Please let us know what happens with the test roll.

Shame about their 110 mini-lab. On the other hand I don't suppose they'd do special processing for you, like pushing?
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-01-2018   #32
skucera
Registered User
 
skucera's Avatar
 
skucera is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Harrisburg, Oregon, USA
Posts: 230
Sean, I got a Mk. 1. It was really dirty when I bought it, and it took quite a bit of cleaning to get the nicotine smoke off of it. Luckily, the main lens had its lens cover on it, and it was clean.

As you can guess, I have always had an interest in small, gadgety cameras. The Minolta Zoom SLR is the latest 110 to enter my little collection. I'm also most interested in cameras that caught my eye years ago that are now a bargain now that they're being donated to thrift shops. I rarely spend more than $15 on a camera, especially for a 110.

My local film developer will happily do custom darkroom work, but at a price. However, their scanner is fairly low resolution, about 5 megapixel for 35mm or 2.3 megapixel for 110. That makes the prints from scanned 110 film really unsharp compared to their old analog photo printing. It may be the impetus I need to finally get my darkroom set up, because I have a 110 negative holder for my Beseler enlarger. I just need the trays and chemicals... simple to get.

However, we digress from the theme of this thread....


Scott
__________________
1940 Kodak 35 Rangefinder
1955 Leica M3
1969 Canon New Canonet QL17-L
1976 Konica Autoreflex T3n
1977 Canon 110ED 20
1979 Minox 35 GL
1979 Olympus XA
1980 Pentax Auto 110
1987 Polaroid Spectra
1996 Canon EOS Elan IIe

Last edited by skucera : 07-01-2018 at 20:38. Reason: Odd paragraph spacing again....
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-02-2018   #33
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
skucera,

Eeewww, nicotine stains (and probably stink too)! I suppose you didn't just shove it in a sink full of hot water and soap? lol.

Is a thrift shop the same as a charity shop, where people donate old stuff so that the shop can raise money for a particular charity?

I don't think you've digressed, you're still talking about 110 film even though what you wrote is about processing and scanning/printing it.

This thread is meant to be about anything to do with 110 cameras and film.
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-02-2018   #34
K14
Registered User
 
K14's Avatar
 
K14 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Washington State
Posts: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by skucera View Post
I’ve got to find a new developer for 110... maybe Blue Moon in Portland.
Just got a batch of photos from Blue Moon Camera in today. They are stellar for 110 development. Getting prints is a little more money but well worth it.

I shoot with the Pentax auto110 24mm lens the cult lens. Let me tell you this lens is the king of 110, gives you the frame of the human eye. You can take pictures of things through microscopes and telescopes.

Here are some pics of the moon and a snowball bloom taken through a cheap 60mm Meade refactor telescope.




  Reply With Quote

Old 07-02-2018   #35
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by skucera View Post
My local film developer will happily do custom darkroom work, but at a price. However, their scanner is fairly low resolution, about 5 megapixel for 35mm or 2.3 megapixel for 110. That makes the prints from scanned 110 film really unsharp compared to their old analog photo printing.

Do what I do, scan 110 film w a Nikon D850 and get 47mp files..

Quote:
Originally Posted by K14 View Post
Just got a batch of photos from Blue Moon Camera in today. They are stellar for 110 development. Getting prints is a little more money but well worth it.

I shoot with the Pentax auto110 24mm lens the cult lens. Let me tell you this lens is the king of 110, gives you the frame of the human eye. You can take pictures of things through microscopes and telescopes.

Here are some pics of the moon and a snowball bloom taken through a cheap 60mm Meade refactor telescope.




Love the moon shot! The flower one seems to have a blue scan line about 1/8 way up going across the entire image?
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-03-2018   #36
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
k14: I Hope you don't mind me saying this, but the flower pic looks out of focus to me.

The moon pic does seem sharper even with the earth's atmosphere affecting the 'seeing'/sharpness.


While I'm here, I was wondering what print size gives a full frame print without cropping, beyond that of the negative carrier that is?


Edit: k14: At the time the pentax auto 110 came out I thought it would have the best lenses, mainly because I thought they wouldn't design a new camera with interchangeable lenses and make them crap lenses. About the time the minolta 110 slr mk2 came out I'd been reading "What Camera Weekly" for a while (IIRC), and had been given a mental bias against zooms lenses by them, and i presume also by other magazines, so again I thought the pentax lenses would be the best.

I never did any research regarding either camera as I was only interested in 'proper' cameras like nikon fm's etc. but I always thought that if I went 110 I'd get a pentax auto 110. I now know that if I'd ever gone into a shop to try one I would not have bought it as it's too small and there's no control over the exposure.

I've never understood the idea behind their pan-focus lens. There you have a camera which only gives you control of the focusing and framing and they produce a lens that stops you being able to focus it, and thus they turn it into a glorified keystone/boots/no-name no control, box?
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-04-2018   #37
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
Does anyone know who makes the Lomo Tiger film?

Does anyone know if it's just re-badged film that is actually expired or if it's a copy of an old film? If it is a copy, what's it a copy of?

It does seem rather grainy in the pics on the web that I've seen, so I'm presuming it's an old film. Well, there ain't much incentive for the makers to make a modern emulsion is there?
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-04-2018   #38
K14
Registered User
 
K14's Avatar
 
K14 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Washington State
Posts: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by seany65 View Post
Does anyone know who makes the Lomo Tiger film?

Does anyone know if it's just re-badged film that is actually expired or if it's a copy of an old film? If it is a copy, what's it a copy of?
From what I read it is a fresh emulsion film. My pictures above that everyone is criticizing is shot with Tiger ISO 200. I doubt that it's expired especially with a 2020 expiration date.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-04-2018   #39
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by K14 View Post
From what I read it is a fresh emulsion film. My pictures above that everyone is criticizing is shot with Tiger ISO 200. I doubt that it's expired especially with a 2020 expiration date.
Do you think they are criticisms or observations? I don't think anyone meant to offend here. You don't see the blue line on the flower shot ? The blue line is a scanning issue from your lab. It's good to notice these things and mention it to the lab so they either redo it (it's happened to me too) or pay more attention next time.
As I mentioned, I think the moon shot is very nice.

As for the film, mine shows (by date) that it is fresh and it behaves that way shooting/processing it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-04-2018   #40
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 810
k14, Thanks for the info about the emulsion being a fresh one. Though I am wondering if the 'design' of the emulsion isn't quite as up-to-date as one would get with a 'new emulsion' for a 35mm film, if you see what I mean.

I fully understand that the pics above were done on Tiger 200 and am pleased to see some examples from it, thanks. I wasn't so much 'criticising' it as 'critique-ing' it (there is a difference, honest!) and making an observation. I got myself into a slight bit of trouble o in another thread yonks ago by mentioning sharpness in a photo, but it seems it was more the scanner and monitor as the poster said the photo itself was sharp.

One thing that is puzzling me about Tiger 200, though is: why the ruddy-blink is it a 200 asa film, when probably most 110 cameras could only read 100 and 400 asa speeds? Could it be the makers decided that most colour print film benefits from a bit of over exposure?

I've also noticed a couple of bright 'dots' and 3 red 'dots' on your flower photo, k14. I've seen a thread somewhere in the interwebnet which showed a few examples of photos with a lot of these dots and other people saying they had similar dots but not so many. Someone even mentioned that Lomo/the makers of the Orca film do something to the end of that film to give some 'random' results! Dunno if that's true though.

Do I take that those dots are not usual?

Does anyone use much of their Orca film, if so, what do you think of it?
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:39.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.