JL slitter vs Minox Acmel slitter

Discussion in 'Minox' started by mtc photography, May 29, 2015.

  1. [​IMG]
    [​IMG]Compare with Minox/Acmel slitter, the JL slitters have clear advantage:
    Minox/Acmel slitter has too many plastic parts
    The turning crank, turning knob, turn spindle, take up spool , the two guard rails and the knife assembly
    except the turning knob, are all essential parts, yet all made of plastic. Plastic parts may crack due to age.
    One the other hand, the turning crank, turning knob, turn spindle, take up spool , and the knife assembly of JL slitter are all made of metal; only three screw knobs are plastic, which are non-essential parts, and easily replaceable with common parts from hardware store.
    The Minox/Acmel slitter's film bed measured 44mm, with a 35mm film there is a 9mm empty space
    between the film edge and the slitter wall. In other words, a 35mm wide "film channel" does not exist
    in the Minox/Acmel design, as can be seen from the attached photo, the white space at the bottom is the
    such an empty spa,ce
    The JL slitter has an exact 35mm "film channel" machined into the body, there is no empty room between the film edge and the slitter film channel
    The Minox /Amcel slitter's knife assembly has a 0.5mm play on the slitter. the JL slitter's knife
    assembly is tightly fitted, not even 0.1mm play.
    JL slitter was made from numeric controlled machine, Minox slitter was made from stamping machine.
    3)Ease of blade replacement
    Minox slitter's blade assembly has non-changeable knives. The knives of JL slitter is easily user
    4) Much cheaper--Minox Acmel slitter is far more expensive then JL slitter "The Minox price of the slitter was 399DEM (about 203EURO) in 2000, or the same as 30 factory loaded Minox films. MPL quoted 365USD in December 1996. The price in October 2005 rose to 229EU" http://www.submin.com/8x11/collection/minox/accessories/slitter_minox_acmel.htm
    In summary, Minox/Acmel slitter is made of cheaper material, slopy fit and low durability The JL slitter is a superior design by a wide margin, it will outlast Minox slitter, last but not the least, JL slitter is far more CHEAPER than Minox slitter
  2. [​IMG]
    Nothing better to demonstrate the ultra precision engineering than the output from Jimmy Li's 16mm+9.2mm knife block slitter.
    16mm+9mm already =25mm, outside a standard 24x36mm frame, Jimmy has to claim
    extra mm from the sprocket hole, leaving literally a hair on the sprockets, see attach photo.
    This is an engineering feat, with the wobbly Minox knife assembly, Acmel could not do
    it, nor I believe any one can cut a 35mm film leaving only a hair on both side of sprockets,
    a little wobbling will certain cause a tear of the film.
    I do not believe any pull thru slitter can cut such hairline precision like the JL slitter If you remove the take up spool from JL slitter, use your hand to pull thru the film, inspite of the precision knife assembly, I bet you cannot keep two side of sprocket with hairline thin margin and unbroken from beginning to the end The precision take up spool is indispensible
  3. Martin
    I am already 'sold' on the JL. My problem is how to get one. This thread is "only" a year old so it may still be possible?
  4. Charles

    You can contact JL at
    His website
  5. Bless you Martin...
  6. Although I agree that the JL splitter may be better than the Minox one, mine has worked for over 20 years, hard work, splitting lots and lots 35mm cassettes of film for me and friends of mine. No failure and it is still in excellent working condition. The nice thing about the JL splitter is that it is available BUT extremely expensive. Perhaps is worth it due to the fact that it is custom made.
  7. The original Minox slitter I ordered from Germany cost me more than $300, far more expensive than
    JL slitter.
    In 1996, Minox processing lab quoted Minox slitter at $396
    Minox slitter is EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE, by comparision, JL slitter is EXTREMELY CHEAP
  8. [​IMG]
    My three JL slitters
    1 9.4mm roller slitter
    2 9.4+15.2mm roller slitter
    3 Knife blade slitter with one 9.2mm block and 1 9.2mm +15.2mm knife block
  9. Perhaps you're right, Martin. But what I don't justify is speaking bad about the Minox slitter. as stated before, mine has worked flawlessly for several years and hundreds of rolls of film. And speaking about prices, don't forget that Germany is perhaps the richest country in Europe. This means everything there is expensive. Just check Leica cameras, Mercedes, BMW etc. etc. All with excellent quality, of course. That is why the Minox slitter was expensive.
  10. You are wrong, the Minox slitter is only a rebadged Japanese made Acmel slitter, not a screw made in Germany
  11. Hello Martin, I never said it was "made in Germany". I know this apparatus was made in Japan. Also the beautiful Minox MX camera. Perhaps I didn't explain myself clear enough. The Acmel products, I mean the slitter and the MX were sold as Minox products. Any product sold under Minox brand must comply with Minox strict quality, therefore, it must be expensive because Minox is German and German products and intrinsically expensive. My cellphone is a Nokia E72. As you know, Nokia brand is Finnish. But my cellphone was made in China under strict Nokia quality control.
    Best wishes!!
  12. I have replaced the knife blade assembly of Minox slitter, now the second knife blade is also getting dull,
    very hard to get replacement now.
    Hence I switch over to JL roller cutter, which does not scratch the soft film such as Agfa Copex. Minox slitter gave me massive scratches on Copex
  13. Hello Hello!!!! Anyone still out there??? Looking for a JL cutter, any advice? Have one to sell? I'm a pop music producer in LA, got into analog photography a couple years ago, it's so amazing. Recently acquired a Minox BL, but the rolls of film are $20 / each!!!! Too much…
  14. I recently was in contact with Jimmy Li and he told me he is no longer making the 16mm/Minox slitter as the demand was zero.
  15. I made my own "pull through" slitter for 35mm film. It involves fully dry hobby plywood, 2 double edge razor blades, two 6-32 machine screws, and a lot of cutting, drilling and sanding to get precise fits. Each blade has four tips and so can be repositioned four times for new cutting edges. To the limit of my measurement my slitter produces 9.2mm strips with smooth edges. There is a bit more waste as I have about 1.5 inches of film to discard for each pull through. I've thought about a 'gripper block' (my home made invention) that would reduce that to 1/2 inch of discard. The plywood was stock sheets, 6X12inchs, and 3/8in, 1/4in, and 1/8in, thick. Tools were an accurate table saw, drill press, clamps (for alignment while drilling) sandpaper in 100, 220, and 600 grit, and a caliper mike for measuring the slitting width blocks.

    There is a lot tedious work involved with making this but the results have been good with no scratching of the film and accurate edges.
  16. During the last 20 yrs, film slitter wise, have used some good models, and then I have used some not so good ones. Zipslit (if anyone remembers it) was a marvel. Doyle's one was a disaster.

    Now, having said that, all things considered, at the end of the day Jimmy's contraption wins hands down. Why? Because I honestly believe it solves more problems than it creates, at least for me. Expensive? I guess it could be, but then again it does not bother me.

    Without any modesty, this slitter (first model anyways) was designed by Jimmy, while I was discussing how's and why's of this concept with him, and acting as an adviser of sorts. And I know his main and foremost concern was to have a machine way better than anything existent on the market. And I firmly believe he has done it.

    More on this slitter, and Jimmy's other products here, on my own blog.

    Me and Jimmy, discussing Minox stuff, among other things :)

    Last edited: Dec 3, 2017
  17. I must have bought one of the very last Minox-16mm slitters from Jimmy. I also have his Minox slitter. Great quality and easy to use. My subminiature cameras are Minox and Minolta 16. My favorite Minox is the III. My favorite Minolta is the Minolta 16II.
  18. I wonder how Blue Moon Camera is cutting down film to fill Minox cartridges. They are the Minox 8X11 film distributor for No. America but told me all they get are the empty cartridges. They have to apply felt and load them.
  19. I very much doubt that BMC is re-felting all the empties they get, perhaps only those with the felt / light trap damaged or missing altogether, which should be very rare. If I correctly recall, they get empties used just once, and in this case the cartridges should be almost new. Anyways, this is what would the norm be.

    The cutting is done probably by means of a machine, if not by hand. Proper film cutter put to use, a skilled technician could cut and package a good number of negatives in a shortest of time. It would be a matter of cutting at a certain length, in a controlled environment, dust-free, static, light conditions, etc.

    However, this would not necessarily ensure the same quality of negatives every time. That is why I believe they employed the use of automatic cut and pack machine of some sort. Such machines do exist, and probably scarce now as hen teeth, but it can be done of course.

    I have in my collection a piece of such machinery, which was obviously used to cut 9.2mm strips out of 35mm stock. No idea regarding its provenience or type of machine, but this contraption is clearly a piece of a larger machine, for automatic film cutting. It still cuts negatives of course, but one has to roll the knob manually.



Share This Page