Who'd a thunk this was a "Classic"?

This past weekend I finally caved in and bought a Polaroid Model 210

I've been looking at in a local second hand store. I was pretty sure

it would need some work, since it had a dead battery still in it and I

could see green corrosion on the contacts, but I finally figured if I

couldn't get it working I could either convert it to pinhole or hack

off all the original shutter and lens bits and mount my spare 13.5 cm

f/4.5 Tessar with its dial-set Compur and probably wind up with a

better camera (assuming I could get the focus to work on the same

scale or adjust the scale setting).

 

However, once I bypassed the corrosion-rotted leaders on the battery

clips, the shutter came to life; a little solder and glue later, and

there's a reasonably professional-looking 2xAA battery holder acting

as an auxiliary grip, which still accomodates folding the camera and

closing the plastic front cover. And a look at the Land List gives

the astonishing news that this model was made from 1967 to 1969 -- I'd

thought it was newer than that.

 

Well, $5 for the camera and battery holder, 45 minutes soldering and

gluing and cleaning the spreader rollers, and about $38 for a box of

film containing a pair of 10-shot packs (that's $1.90 per exposure,

costs as much as cut-rate 8x10 sheet film, but at least the print and

processing is included), and it works!

 

Preliminary results suggest that this camera gets as much mileage out

of a glass double meniscus as my Speedex Jr.; that is, it seems to

produce pretty darned nice images for such cheap glass, and after more

than 35 years the auto-exposure is right on (though I might still

graft a "real" shutter onto this at some point, since it doesn't

support low-light shots with 3000 speed film). Elsewise, I might have

to figure out how to bollix the shutter into giving me manual speed

control. Or, I might just have to see if the genuine rangefinder

model is still in the display case at the other second hand store (but

they wanted $20 for that one, so I don't know).<div></div>

I really like my 250. These cameras are a lot of fun to use!

 

I'd say be patient and wait until you find a glass triplet, rangefinder, iso3000-enabled model for $10 or less. They're really common.

 

You'll have to order a new battery for $10 from B&H (or rig your own, as you did with the 210), but that will also give you the opportunity to buy film at $10 per pack, rather than $19!

 

In color film, 669 gives a very 60's look (25 years of fading, right out of the camera!), while 690 is much better, though it curls badly on me. The Fuji might be better.

 

I like all the black and white films a lot, particularly 664 and 667.

Another test image, stronger light gave a shorter shutter, enough to see the focus is about what shows in the viewfinder. This camera, rather than a proper RF, has a "stadimeter" type rangefinder -- there are a pair of lines in the viewfinder, which you set to the height of a subject's head (taking advantage of the fact that almost all adult humans have a head height within a small percentage of nine inches); there's also an auxiliary distance scale and parallax corrected framing marks. This was focused by scale, since there wasn't a convenient head in the shot...<div></div>

I have to applaud your passion for "classic cameras".

 

I would hesitate to waste my precious funds on expensive film to use on a junk camera.

 

I have a couple of old Polaroid folders with range finders and all. I had been hesitating about the purchase of experimental polaroid film. After seeing your examples, I will not. Thanks for the samples, Donald.

<IMG SRC="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1892728-lg.jpg">

<P>

664 in a 250

<p>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1976217-lg.jpg">

<P>

667 in a 250

Donald

 

Are you able to rig this up to use other film, or even B+W paper?

 

Paul

David, this camera has a 3000 setting, but lacks the "scene selector" that a few of the higher end models had, that allowed use of the larger aperture for indoors, no-flash photography on the 3000 film.

 

You're right, though; had I known the difference, I'd have bought the 690 (same price) instead of the 669. The local shop here doesn't carry the Fujiroid, unfortunately, but I'd rather spend more here and know they'll be around when I need something and can't wait for it to show up in the mail. Next time I buy film, though, I'll certainly try some B&W (they were out this time) -- this camera should just be able to give me good negative from 665 (lighten-darken has two stops of travel, it looks like, so should get me from ISO 80 to ISO 32 with a little to spare), though I doubt the lens is good enough to want to enlarge the 3x4 negative much (though that opinion is subject to change as I get the hang of the camera).

Hey Nancy Bueler! If you are reading this post. This is the same type camera I am sending you. The Battery compartment is clean but no battery. If I read this correctly you can maybe get at B/H or maybe Don can tell you how to wire something up. And I have dropped in some film to boot. Can't wait to see what you can do with the plastic wonder. Don, nice to see something coming out of these cameras. People I know are always wanting to give me these but no film.

Vivek, based on my experience so far and on eBay prices, I'd have to say, don't bother with any models of the "automatic" cameras except the 100, 250, 350, or (too late for "classic" status) 450; those are the ones with glass triplet lens and "scene selector" that lets you use any of the four apertures (f/8.8 to f/42 or f/60, depending on model) with any film. Of course, the 180 and 195 professional cameras, with 4-element Tominon and 1-500+B manual leaf shutter are an entirely different proposition; they're essentially 3x4 RF press cameras that just happen to use Polaroid pack film.

 

David's examples of the images available with even the better quality consumer cameras suggest that if you have one of those, it's worth spending the money on film. If you have the plastic lens (as, it seems, mine has despite what I thought earlier), I wouldn't bother; at almost $2 per frame, I'll probably save the second pack of film from this box for when I can get a better camera, and/or look into converting this one (though the 114 mm focal length is inconvenient, since the focus movement won't be correct with the 13.5 cm lens I had in mind to mount on this camera).

 

Paul, I could probably put a single 3x4 sheet film into an empty film pack and load the pack into the camera in a dark bag, then unload the same way; the 3x4 film I have on hand is ISO 200, but that's close enough I could most likely get acceptable exposures with the lighten/darken control set to maximum "darken" (which is one stop reduction, approximately, like shooting at EI 150-160). Had I thought about it, I might have done that with this camera to test it, rather than spend most of $40 on film, since I have the Classic 200 film on hand and the camera came with an empty film pack in it.

 

As things stand now, I'll keep this as a snapshooter (and I think I can improve a bit as I get used to the focus scale and improve my holding technique, or brace the camera on solid objects, to reduce motion blur). The grass subject above is a worst case, really -- guaranteed to show partially out of focus -- and the bush with flowers was in pretty low light with a shutter speed (which I couldn't predict with certainty) that I wouldn't try to hand hold with my Spotmatic or Rollfilmkamera, both easier to hold steady than this heavy, awkward unit.

 

Still, like many junk cameras, now that I know it's working, it's more a matter of selecting the right conditions and subject matter to get good and interesting images; the above are literally my first peel-apart polaroids since the early 1970s; the last I had were Type 40 roll film that I used in high school (and had trouble finding even then, as the pack films were pushing the older roll version out of the market).

Okay, a few more shots, and I'm seeing where the problem is. Yes, the lens is cheap and cheesy, but no worse than the one in my Speedex Jr., which is one of my favorites. No, the problem is this camera is almost impossible to hold steady. Even though EI 75 (by the camera's speed switch, film is actually ISO 80) and f/8.8 ought to give a shutter speed in full sun of around 1/200, the awkwarness of the camera's body makes it very hard to hold -- and of course the shutter slows down a lot if you get into any kind of shade.

 

However, if you can brace the camera's body directly against something solid (a tree a foot in diameter seems to work very well), you can do better. The motion blur in this image is because the wind was moving the branches, not because the camera was unsteady; some flower clusters and leaves are actually sharp even in the original 600 ppi scan.<div></div>

Donald, Thanks! I checked what I have and one is a "Land Camera 360 Electronic Flash", most likely a plastic triplet lens (no information on the focal length etc). Salient feature on this is a coupled range and view finder made by Zeiss Ikon.

For iris, this has ciculra slots in a wheel that is changed according to the speed selected. Shutter is auto, I think.

 

The pathfinder 110 looks to be in unusable condition and the prontor shutter (has and Ysarex- tessar type lens) may be salvagable for better use.

 

Thanks again, Donald!

I have the 250 model and it has the glass lens, metal body,tripod socket,extended range shutter and Zeiss-Ikon rangefinder.

Picked it up since my local camera shop is closing out its 667 B&W

3000 asa film cheap...No need for flash indoors with this stuff!

Vivek, all of the folding pack-film Polaroids will have lenses within a few mm of the 114 mm Tominon in the 180 and 195; this is close to normal for this format, given that 105 mm is normal for nominal 6x9 cm (actually about 56x83 mm) and these cameras have an image mask of 72x95 mm. The 360 is the same as the 350, etc. in having a glass triplet lens and scene selector; main difference from a 350 appears to be that it's f/60 instead of f/42 in "daylight" selection for 3000 speed, and it came with an electronic flash instead of bulb type or wink light.

 

Short version: it's a good one. Get some film and enjoy it!

Donald,

 

Hey, there. I'm a 'roid junky, too. Polaroid junky, that is!

 

If you decide to get a higher-end Polaroid, allow me to recommend the Model 360 with folding combined Zeiss rangefinder/viewfinder built-in. It tucks neatly into the hinged front flap/case which most of these folding 100/200/300/400 series camera had. There was also a 200 and 400 series camera which came with the Zeiss RF, IIRC, like David said. The site www.landlist.org is a great resouce on that topic.

 

Here is a shot from my Polaroid 360, below.

 

--Micah in NC<div></div>

Donald,

 

One more note on my photo: it shows a common malady of these folding Land cameras, bellows separation. The interior cloth bellows sags down into the image path on my 360. The exterior vinyl bellows do not, however. I intend to try inserting a syringe with glue into the space between the interior & exterior bellows where the sag happened as a remedy...

 

--Micah in NC

Yep, mine has the same thing, Micah. I usually Photoshop it out if it's noticeable. Post again when you've tried the surgery!

Micah, according to the Land List, the only differences between the 350 and 360 are that the 360 has f/60 instead of f/42 for "daylight" setting with 3000 speed film, and came with electronic instead of bulb flash. All of the glass lens models (100, 250, 350, 360, and 450) have the Ziess RF in one version or another (the 100 has separate RF and VF, the others vary only in eyepiece size); they also generally have the "scene selector" that lets you use all apertures with any film.

 

And yes, all of those models, along with the manual shutter 180 and 195, are on my list of cameras I'd like to have -- the 180 and 195, especially, are essentially press cameras with dedicated Polaroid backs, and should convert easily to 3x4 cut film if/when Polaroid and Fuji stop supporting this film format. Of course, the 250/350/360/450 models are relatively inexpensive (like, under the cost of a box of film); the 180/195 seem to run upwards of $150 with their original kit and in nice working condition.

Oh, and the bellows on my 210, at least, is in perfect condition. :) That was what finally prompted me to buy it -- I figured I could pull out the bellows and use it on something else even if I couldn't get any other use out of the camera (or if I wound up converting it to pinhole, which would likely involve building a box body from black-core foamboard)

Great bridge shot Donald, I have wanted a 195 to, but the prices are a little rich for me so I cobbled up a "Koda-roid". Lifted the 105mm f4.5 anaston lens from a Kodak Tourist and gutted the front of a Polaroid Reporter(remember those?). The anaston has front element scale focusing so all I had to do was put a ground glass in an empty poloroid film pack and shim the lens to inifinity. So far I haven't tested it with Poloroid film but a sheet of enlarging paper cut to size and placed in the camera indicates that lens coverage is not too bad. Can't wait to try it with some B&W.

Unfortunately it's not longer an option, but when film packs were available, a 3.25x4.25 film pack fit perfectly into the peel-apart cameras instead of the Polaroid packs. So you got 12 exposures on Plus-X or Super-XX or Tri-X (or the Ansco films). It was a terrific way to shoot B&W.

I too have a 360 with a repaired flash (I used the instructions from the Land List for replacing the Ni-Cd batteries). Very fun and a good lens too. I like the 664 film, and the Fuji 100-speed is even better imo. I had a scan around here somewhere...

In the past, Polaroid sold the batteries directly at a reasonable price. Is that still possible?

Donald,

Believe it or not, I pretty much take all my photos with land cameras. I own 2 auto 100s, a 340, 360, and a converted model 800 on its way from ebay. I bought the last auto 100 for $2.00 at a thrift store, the battery still works! The batteries can be bought from polaroid directly, there is a number at their site. Also they can be ordered from radio shack, the land list gives the equivelent numbers on his site. I buy alot of my film on ebay or ritz photo at the mall. I am going to start experimenting with 665 pos/neg film soon. I enjoy using 667 3000 speed film indoors. I also wanted a 180/195 but could never seem to get one off ebay. I just bought the converted 800 not as many shutter/apeture choices but some. The guy on ebay has a converted 700 for sale right now. I have had no problem hand holding any land camera with 100 speed film outdoors. I also bought Ansel Adams book "Polaroid Land Photography" I figure if it was good enought for him, its good enought for me. If you have any questions email me, I will be glad to help.

Keith

Well, yes, you can get the original batteries, as suggested. In my case, with the original connector lead wires completely corroded, I decided it was both cheaper immediately, and cheaper long term to spend $2 on a battery holder and put $1 worth of AA Duracells in it than to buy a $3 battery plus the parts to replace the original clips -- and the AA will likely outlast the oddball original (I don't know why they didn't use AA originally, there's room for two in the original compartment -- oh, yeah, you wouldn't have had to buy a special Polaroid battery that way; never mind).

 

Bill, I wouldn't doubt that the original film pack dimensions were used intentionally for the 100 series film -- that would let Polaroid test the cameras before the film was ready, and/or let them test the film in other cameras. Of course, it also suggests a potential use for the thousands of cheap film pack adapters out there -- with the addition of a spreader roller mechanism (possibly cannibalized from the cheaper models of used pack-film Polaroids), they might be usable as very inexpensive Polaroid backs for the cameras they fit, even including some of the 9x12 cm plate cameras (and there's no question of the quality of *those* lenses).

I know you're supposed to post answers here but I really didn't know where to go for help. I have a Polaroid 210 Land Camera and I can't find any kind of instruction manual to it. I've read alot of posts on the net but they all lack one thing, how to get the lens to stretch out. I've tried everything I can think of to make it move but it won't. If someone could please be so kind as to e-mail me at njdoss@knology.net with some kind of help I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!<div></div>