Jump to content

Square images on 135 film ??


Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

while I really enjoy square images, I don't like the consequences of using 120

format film: Higher processing cost per picture (I'm definitely not a DIY kind of guy)

and problems scanning, since I only have a 35 mm film scanner.

 

So: I've heard about the Robot, but that seems to be a collectible rather than

a "low-cost-user-for-experimenting" that I'm looking for.

 

Any suggestions for cameras taking square images on 135 film ??

 

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Soeren

 

 

 

P.S.: It just occurred to me that 126 format film might fit the scanner, but that

would give me other problems with obtaining (mainly B/W) film and getting it

developed..<div>00PfbC-46427684.jpg.0e27b2f8d22167b4c098fc01e92f8ca4.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote style="margin:15px 60px; font-style:italic;">Any suggestions for cameras taking square images on 135 film ??

</blockquote><p>

 

Zeiss Ikon Tenax/Taxona viewfinder cameras, Zeiss Ikon Tenax II rangefinder, most (but not all) Berning Robot cameras (the ones with a coupled rangefinder are expensive), some Boltavit viewfinder cameras (but these use special film cassettes).

<center>

<img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00P/00PSAZ-43423584.jpg" hspace="5">

<br><b>

ZI Tenax II with CZJ Sonnar 4cm f/2

</b></center><p><br>

I have various Tenax cameras. These are quirky little picture-takers. The rangefinders are a lot more expensive than the pedestrian Tenax/Taxonas and are almost as big as a Contax. They are pre-war and even have interchangeable lenses ($$$!). For trying out the 24×24mm format, the regular Tenax/Taxonas are excellent, some even sport Tessar lenses. Very intricate design, and the post-war models even have flash sync. All give you more than 50 pictures per roll of 135-36 film.

<p>

The Robot cameras are absolute precision instruments with a wind-up motor drive. Unbelieveable high built-quality and not cheap, these cameras keep on shooting. They also have interchangeable lenses, but only the expensive models (Royal) have a rangefinder. They are true miniature cameras for surveillance and spy work (because one does not need to advance the film/cock the shutter once the camera has been wound) and feature excellent, fast and close-focusing lenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that there is ANY commercially available B & W film in 126 size. The only color film I know of is the very last run that Ferrania, an Italian film maker, did of their Solaris film. The Frugal Photographer (www.frugalphotographer.com) bought the entire production run and froze it, so it should be available for a few years. After that, the only way to use a 126 camera will be to load your own, using salvaged cartridges.

 

Why not just use a standard 35mm camera and crop it to a square format? The only advantage I can see to a square format camera is that you would get 36 exposures on a "24 exposure" roll. If you're using an SLR, you might even be able to mask off the viewfinder or at least scribe some lines to show you where the edges will be.

 

Paul Noble

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the Mercury 35mm cameras with a rotary shutter have the square format. The cameras have a distinctive half round dome on top, that is part of the shutter housing. Cameras are usually pretty inexpensive on ebay. They are sturdy all metal construction and pretty easy to service.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a 35mm adapter made for older Rollei's I believe. I see them on that auction site from time to time. Forget what they're called though but some of the people selling them dont know what they are called or what they are anyways.

 

Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to through out an oddball idea here and tell me what you folks think. What if a person just bought a used OM-1, take out the screen (handle carefully) and place two lines, 6mm from each edge. That should give you a marked 24X24mm reference to compose on when looking through the viewfinder. You would gain advantages of SLR viewing, interchangeable lenses, and easy available film in many types. Sure, you would waste some film but on the plus side if you decided the image worked better as a rectangle after all you could still use the extra negative area. The Robot is a collectable and the Zeiss are too whereas the OM's are as common as grass and still fairly cheap. The more common Zuiko lenses are not too expensive either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I second Mr. Robison's suggestion. Find a way to mark your viewscreen, and crop the photos. That'll keep you working while you figure out any other options.

 

After all, you might have to go through a few different square-format cameras before you hit the right one, if you decide to go that route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A somewhat larger suggestion would be to get a Meopta Flexaret Va through VII with 35mm adapter.

 

Although designed as a standard 6x6 TLR using 120 film, the cameras come with an internal mechanism for using 35mm film (24mm x 24mm negatives). With an adapter to hold the 35mm canister (usually extra), the mechanism auto-senses 35mm film, and there is a mask for the viewfinder to match. The film counter also changes to reflect the 35mm film.

 

I have a Flexaret VI and the adapter kit, but I haven't tried it out yet. Other people have reported success with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A handy person could probably modify the gearing on the film advance pole so that the film advanced 6 instead of 8 sprocket holes. This would give approx. square format (well a little more of you do the math but you also have to subtract the space between frames) The it is a matter of masking the opening behind the shutter and marking the focusing screen. I'd recommend asking on kyphoto.com/classics forum as there are many there who could advise on which camera is easier to modify.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, Soeren One camera you might consider is the Minolta 24, a compact little 35mm CRF with sharp f2.8 Rokkor and CDS meter. It looks like all those other Minolta rangefinders from the 60s, but has a 24 X 24mm format.

 

I actually had one for a short while, having bought it sight unseen early on in my collecting days thinking it had the usual 24 X 36mm format. When it arrived and I found it had that unusual square format, I took it along to our next Camera Collectors Club meeting which just happened to have the theme of "Weird And Wonderful". One of the club guys collects Minoltas and had been after one of these for ages, so I went home richer but sans said Minolta 24.

 

FWIW, I don't like square formats. I think it's an unnatural frame size, to be honest. We humans see things approximately in the ratio 2:3 so TVs, computer monitors, cinema screens and so on, usually reflect that ratio. Somewhere I've seen an Ensign advert in a 50s Brit AP magazine pointing out the advantages of masking down to 6 X 4.5 format rather than going 6 X 6 in one of their folders. OK, so it's not a 2:3 ratio but they made a good point about it being closer to reality than what most TLRs produced. (Pete In Perth)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 24 x 24 format in 35mm was the Rapid format. A few camera makers offered this format during the 1960's as an alternative to the 126 cartridge loading cameras. Basically, it is 35mm film in a special cartridge that feeds the film to an identical cartridge on the take-up side. Like the 126 cameras, no need to rewind at end of roll. Not quite as easy to load, but gave the user the choice of any 35mm film whereas 126 had a much more limited selection. I'm guessing that the Minolta mentioned might have been rapid format. I once had a Agfa Rapid of some kind that was a simiple point and shoot. Pictures were about the same as I could get with my Kodak Instamatic 124.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Minolta 24 <i>Rapid</i> takes Rapid cassettes, so you need to respool the film before you can use it in the camera (just like the collectible Photavit/Boltavit cameras).

<p>

There simply is no alternative to the inexpensive <b><a href="http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Tenax_I">Taxona/Tenax I</a></b> if you want a convenient, small and dedicated 24×24mm camera for 35mm film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, I think you're right about that Minolta 24 using Rapid Cassettes, not the usual Kodak ones. Like I said before, I only had the camera for a short time before the Minoltaholic in our Club made me an offer I couldn't refuse. "Time may not weary them", but it sure don't help their ageing memories ...

 

I have had some dealings with those Karat Kassettes as used in their previous AGFA life, when they were used on the original fish-shaped prewar Karat cameras. I've even refilled a Kassette with modern AGFA color film and tried it out in a 1938 Karat f3.5 Solinar, with pleasing results. It certainly wasn't as complicated a process as, say, respooling 120 onto 620 spools. I wonder what the reason was though, for post-war Rapid cameras to be using 24 X 24 fomat when the original Karat system used 24 X 36? Was it purely to compete with 126 cartridge Instamatic stuff?

 

Just getting back to the merits or not of square formats, I've found that 1955 Ensign ad in the AP and scanned it below. OK, so they're referring to 120 film as used in their Selfix 16-20 folders, but their arguments are of interest regarding formats. (Pete In Perth)<div>00Pfv9-46521784.jpg.a656594af1d740fc3dd2ae27be918e68.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, this is nuts. It's not like 35 mm film is that expensive. Since you already have a scanner, isn't it just easier to crop to exactly the shape you want? Any camera that gives 24 x 24 mm square negatives on 35 mm film is old and probably in need of some service at best. At worst you could wind up with something that is about to go, or already has gone, belly up. Old cameras are cool, and I love 'em to death. But I also know that they can be cranky and unreliable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks fo a lot of informative and well-thought-out questions. I know that cropping afterwards is an option, but I'd like to be able to compose square images in the viewfinder, as well.

 

I have a Rolleicord and even had a Rollei 6001 SLR for a couple of years, but the cost of using them put me off - in my part of the word, it costs me about USD 2,10 every time I press the shutter on 6x6 !!

 

I actually did consider getting one of my Nikons "converted" by masking the finder, since that would give me loads of lens options. Or maybe even getting a second digital body and combine VF masking with an automated cropping setup in Photoshop...

 

In any case: The Taxona seems to be quite close to what I was looking for - The Tenax I finder looks to be not well suited for spectacles... I'll keep my eyes open :-)

 

Thanks again, guys.

 

Soeren<div>00Pg9u-46581584.jpg.a95b501d27e92f281f3a053349197954.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 years later...

Thanks for all the pictures.

 

By the way, the Mercury II isn't square, but it is closer that most. I think it is about five perforations per frame, That would be 22.5mm by 24mm, so more square than half frame, but not quite square.

 

Also, old VP126 isn't so hard to find, and usually works fine.

-- glen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
My Robot Star 50 has the 38mm f:2.8 Xenar (as mentioned previously) that I can adapt for use on the Fuji X-Pro1. Another favorite lens from the 1960/70's was the Olympus Pen-F's 25mm f:2.8 lens. I can adapt this to the Fuji X-Pro1, but can it also be adapted to the Robot Star. I know it is designed for 18x24 but are the film registers such that it could focus to infinity with an adapter on the Robot?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...