Question about brownie iwht 120 film

[stacey_gardner]

When loading my brownie camera with 120 film, no number shows up in the red

lens. How am I to know what number i am on? also how do I know how far to

advance it? Is this just a problem with my film because no one else seems to

be having this problem. thanks!

[stacey_gardner]

also, it's a brownie hawkeye from 1955

[kevin h. y. lui.]

Do you mean this one?

http://www.brownie-camera.com/27.shtml

[gdw]

Does it take 120 or 620????

[stacey_gardner]

the camera is made to take 620, but like many others I have put a roll of 120 into it

[stacey_gardner]

oh and Kevin, yes it is that camera

[kevin h. y. lui.]

there is a maul for this camera :

http://www.brownie-camera.com/manuals/bhawkeyeflashmod/index.shtml

 

the manual said it has red window at the back. You should be able to see it. Is it because you are using 120 but not 620 so that you can not see the film number?

[stacey_gardner]

I guess although most people I've read about who do that don't seem to have any problems with it? The manuel was also great to read. thanks!

[connealy]

The numbers are the same on 120 and 620 film. If you can't see them through the ruby window, either you have loaded the film upside down so that the film rather than the backing paper is facing the window, or you have just not advanced the film far enough to start seeing the numbers.

[mark_medin]

Mike is correct, the numbers should show exactly as if it was 620 film. There could also be a problem with interference as well, inasmuch as you could be turning the winder but because of interference between the 120 spool and chamber the film & backing may not be advancing at all and the tongue came out of the empty winding spool. This happened to me on my Junior Six-20 until I learned I needed to trim some plastic off the 120 spool ends.

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

Sometimes even trimmed 120 spools will not work correctly in a camera designed for 620 spools. The coupling piece which goes into the slot on the flange of the spool is much smaller for 620 spools, and sometimes may not turn the 120 spools correctly. There is a work-around: cut a piece of thin metal sheet to the width of the slot of a 120 spool, and fold it over. Then insert it into the slot of the 120 spool approx. 1/4 inch (6mm) deep, and fold the ends outward flat ont the flange such that you will have two "wings" to be able to remove the "adaptor". Cut the "wings" to 1/8 inch (3 mm) approx., reinsert into the 120 spool slot and see how nicely this works.

[charles_stobbs3]

Yhe red windows were meant for (Verichrome) orthochromatic film which had a red paper backing. You are probably using film with a different color backing and it may be difficult to see the numbers. When you take the back off is the window relatively easy to se through? Try a small flahlight to see the numbers.

[Dustin McAmera]

Have you used 120 roll film before? Apologies in advance if I'm stating the obvious, but it may be worth saying that the front end of the paper <i>is</i> quite long; I remember being doubtful and discouraged at seeing no numbers the first time I loaded my first 120 size camera. I just hadn't gone far enough.

[john_shriver]

The red window is perfectly suitable for current Kodak films with yellow backing paper, and for Ilford films with white backing paper. Orthochromatic Verichrome was made with yellow backing paper in the later years, anyways.

 

Yes, the choice of red was to minimize the risk of fogging Orthochromatic Verichrome and other earlier orthochromatic films. But plenty of cameras were made after 1956 (Verichrome Pan introduced) with red windows as well.

 

The number printing on 120 and 620 film is identical.

 

This is a camera that it's fairly easy to inadvertently load with the film inside out.

[stacey_gardner]

Thanks everyone for your responses. Turns out it was the film. When I shined a flashlight on the red lens I could see the number really faintly. I finished the roll, put in a new brand and now everything is A OK. thanks guys!

[walter_degroot]

i was interested as my wife's camera ( pre-1960) was a brownie hawkeye

we still have the camera and manual.

according to what I read there were two versions. the earler one would take a 120 spool in the supplu side.

and the later model had " bumps" pressed into the metal so a 120 spool would not fit.

the author suggested flattening the bumps with pliers after removing the metal frpom the plastic body.

there were instructions on how to reset the synch for an electonic flash. and tap the posts so a ef could be used.

[connealy]

I can fit a 120 film roll into any of my three Hawkeye Flash cameras, but the advance is very stiff in one of them. The problem seems to be that the film chamber is just a bit too small to accomodate the diameter of the 120 reels. The easy solution for me is to use a stout pair of nail scissors to trim the end rims down flush with the paper backing.<br>     I have <a href="http://www.zianet.com/connealy/vintagecameras/hawkeyeflash/index.html" target="new"><b>a long page on my web site</b></a> about the Hawkeye Flash with sample photos to show the surprising resolving power of the simple lens. There is also a link to illustrated instructions by Diwan Bhathal for adding a cable release and a tripod mount to the camera. Even without those additions, it is a great shooter as long as you exercise some care in keeping it very steady as you shoot. Filters and accessory lenses are not too hard to find, and they can add greatly to the camera's versatility. I particulary like using the Kodak No. 13 accessory close-up lens.

[pete_c__uk_]

There has been a problem in recent years with Ilford films when used in cameras that use a red window. The ink used on the backing papers is more grey than black and can be difficult to read through the window.