Kids Film Camera

Hello! I've just started playing around with film photography. I have a beautiful old Yashica 635. I also recently bought a cheap, gimmicky little Japanese kids camera. It takes 35 mm film and the package says "Use the camera outdoors or under good lighting conditions," and the subject of the photos should be 1.5-3.5 m (5-11.5 ft) away, but doesn't have any information about aperture or shutter speed. Any guesses to what these values might be or what film I should use? (ISO 400? 100?) What is the most 'forgiving' black and white 35 mm film?

I'm not looking to take incredible shots, just thought it might be fun to mess around with (and maybe I'll get a few interesting shots).

Thanks!

A tried and true --- shutter speed setting for outdoor in sunlight -- shutter speed is 1/ISO. Therefor if you load this cameras with 200 ISO film, the shutter setting is 1/200 of a second, OK if camera only has 1/125 meaning use the closes setting to 1/ISO. Set the aperature to f/16. For 400 ISO film -- settings are 1/400 shutter speed aperature f/16. I suggest using 200 ISO film.

Also, likely a simple camera will not feature user settings for shutter and aperature. In this case load with 200 ISO and shoot pictures in bright sunlight.

I've had a few of these cameras over the years. I've called them "reloadable disposable cameras" since they're usually pretty similar in terms of lens/shutter set up, but are designed to be reloaded. I even used one a fair bit when I was in middle school(and a 4x6 from it looked better than my dad's 640x480 digital camera he used at the time).

I seem to recall the one I used them-which I still had-tests out at around 1/250 and the aperture is fixed to f/8. Those parameters mostly free you from camera shake and gives decent DOF. That will allow you to expose expose ISO 100 or 200 in full sun, and 400 in somewhat overcast conditions.

From shooting a decent amount with one of these, although not for a while, I'd suggest using ISO 400 color. It has enough latitude that it won't really care in full sun, but will let you get away with less than that.

I love 'low end' film cameras - well, some of them! I think you can get a decent zoom compact with some basic manual controls for not much money. Try garage sales, charity shops etc. You know the deal. Some of them have a decent wide end, i.e. 28mm. Some have a decent long end, too, going up to 170mm or so, without being too large.

Anyway... as for the most forgiving b&w film, I will give you my opinions based on observations from what others have done: Ilford Delta 400, HP-5; Kodak T-Max 400, Tri-X. For colour, I really like the look of Lomo 800. There are a few 1600 ISO emulsions out there, too, so give them a try if they're not too expensive. Some disposable 'wedding' cameras are loaded with 1600 ISO film.

If you want an example of what Lomography 800 can look like, here's a post from a blog I follow:

Link: That Autumn Photo

aperture or shutter speed. Any guesses

Looking at Soviet DOF scales, a 35mm lens would have to be f6.4, a 55mm lens f13; so let's guess f8 (which was usual for single element lenses in box cameras). Shutterspeeds should be measurable; I'd again guess in the 1/125sec range.

What is the most 'forgiving' black and white 35 mm film?

For whom or "which intended workflow"?

Home processing & wet darkroom printing? - Stick to your usual choices of silver films.

If you want to either use commercial labs or scan (at home?) go for C41 film, like XP2.

Please keep in mind that the forgivingness of film was intended for optical printing and folks or algorythms that knew their job. The further you push it the further it will push you in the darkroom! A mighty overexposed silver neg might be too dense to (not-drum)scan. Maybe you can digitize it with a camera.

Yes, the most forgiving black and white film is XP2, which uses C41 processing chemistry,

the same as most color negative films. Easiest to find labs doing it, and for a reasonable price.

A side effect of being forgiving in exposure is that it is less forgiving when printing.

But scanners should figure it out and scan fine, though sometimes you should tell them

that it is color negative film.

The ISO 100 films will do fine in bright daylight, as the instructions suggest.

Most ISO 400 films will do fine overexposed, and will also work for less than bright

daylight, such as bright cloudy. Maybe not for darker cloudy days.

What is the most 'forgiving' black and white 35 mm film?

XP2 Super, and it can be processed in any (remaining) minilab.

Expect results slightly worse than what you'd get converting an average phone-camera shot to black & white.

I've had a few of these cameras over the years. I've called them "reloadable disposable cameras" since they're usually pretty similar in terms of lens/shutter set up, but are designed to be reloaded. I even used one a fair bit when I was in middle school(and a 4x6 from it looked better than my dad's 640x480 digital camera he used at the time).

 

I seem to recall the one I used them-which I still had-tests out at around 1/250 and the aperture is fixed to f/8. Those parameters mostly free you from camera shake and gives decent DOF. That will allow you to expose expose ISO 100 or 200 in full sun, and 400 in somewhat overcast conditions.

 

From shooting a decent amount with one of these, although not for a while, I'd suggest using ISO 400 color. It has enough latitude that it won't really care in full sun, but will let you get away with less than that.

I think you're right and if you use those with ISO200 at full sun it overexposes by about 2 stops which is fine for color negative film and it allows you to go down to a cloudy condition.

Expect results slightly worse than what you'd get converting an average phone-camera shot to black & white.

Not my experience at all. The exposure on XP2 hardly matters, and the chromogenic (C41 processing) character results in beautiful dye clouds rather than grain. It has become my favorite B&W film, although there's a lot ot be said for shooting color film if you're digitizing it, since the conversion to B&W gives you so many potentially controllable variables.

Here's a full image and a 100% crop from it on XP2 [roughly 15"x23" enlargement at 240ppi]

Nikon 2020 on XP2 film

When I was young, cameras like Diana were considered kid cameras. They were fairly cheap, and discount film was available.

They would often survive dropping, and if not, replacement wasn't all that expensive.

Sometime later, the Diana started to be used by artists, and the price went up.

But yes, for many years what we now see as simple cameras were fairly expensive. Film and processing were fairly expensive, inflation adjusted.

there were no 35mm cameras in 1900 - or film

Well, I just read that 35mm film was introduced in 1889, although one amongst various other sizes, and became the standard for movies in the early 1900's.

May I point out that the OP visited once, almost three months ago. Also, @tommarcus, there were no 35mm cameras in 1900 - or film.

In 1900, unless you were using a recently introduced Brownie, you probably had a view camera with full movements, control over the shutter speed and aperture(even if by clumsy Waterhouse stops), and a decent 3 element lens.

Not only that, but a Brownie 1 with 2 1/4 square 117 film gave you a lot more area to work with than 35mm but also at least most of these gave you the option of a fixed shutter speed and a "bulb" setting.