Testing your new acquisitions?

[william_roberts4]

<p>I am just starting to get into collecting classic film cameras, and the few I have gotten I have been testing them with 36 exposure color film. I don't know if I am cheap or pessimistic, probably both, but I just worry that I will get a roll of blank exposures and have wasted a roll of film.<br>

What do you guys use? I was looking for 12 exposure rolls of color, but those are few and far between anymore. I may just get a short date roll of 100 ft BW and just roll out 12 exp. rolls and just use that.<br>

I am interested in seeing what everyone does.<br>

Thanks!</p>

[jakenorcross]

I've never bought a 12-exposure roll (though I'm going to stop buying 36-exposures, I've decided), but that might be one

way to go. When buying a camera (typically at antique stores), I fire the shutter and look through the back first- at all

speeds. At least that way, I can see if they fire and avoid getting a blank roll out. This also tests to see if any speeds

(usually the slow ones) are completely off (read: stuck) and if there are any massive defects in the glass. From there, it's

faith that a whole roll of film won't be completely ruined...

[david_pickard]

<p>I have a local store (in Dallas Texas, USA) that has everything for $0.999, roughly $1. They have 24 ex color 200 film that is repackaged Fuji according to the bar code look up I did. The big cost is the developing.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>As long as they keep it up, Walgreens has their own house brand that is sold in 24-exposure units in a package of 4. It seems to be identical with the Fuji 35mm films that are sold one 'spool' at a time in similar loads. There is both ISO 200 and 400.</p>

[craigd]

<p>I'm like Les -- I test without film first, preferably before buying. I check the shutter at all speeds with the back open (not that I can tell the difference between 1/500 and 1/1000, but at all speeds I should at least see a flash of light, and the slow speeds aren't that hard to estimate), check that the aperture opens and closes properly, check the meter (if there is one), check the self-timer (if any), etc. Then, if all looks well, I test with film, being careful to expose at different apertures and in different lighting conditions so as to verify a range of shutter speed and aperture combinations. My test film is usually whatever I feel like shooting (because I'm an optimist) -- typically Tri-X, FP4+, or HP5+ for B&W negatives, or Provia 100F or Velvia 100 for color slides. In two recent posts of mine (<a href="../classic-cameras-forum/00ZIga">here</a> and <a href="../modern-film-cameras-forum/00ZJHy">here</a>) I used long-expired color print film simply because it had been given to me along with the cameras and I figured if the pictures came out well (which they did) it would prove both that the cameras were working and that the expired film was still usable.</p>

[Rick_van_Nooij]

<p>Recently got a back some 35 blurry exposures on a roll that I put through a Signet 35. After taking all that trouble to clean the shutter I should've checked the focus with a ground glass.<br>

I shrug and carry on.</p>

<p>Incidently the only in focus image on the roll was the very first one where I was going through the motions of bringing fresh film in front of the film frame. ...shame only the edge of a table cloth was on the photo though.<br>

The film was Lucky 200 which isn't particularly expensive. Just that developing cost me 5 Euro per roll (doesn't matter if it's 12 or 36 exposures, 135 format film or 120).</p>

<p>When I get a 'new' camera I check the shutter on all speeds, aperture control, check the RF, check light-seals, bellows, check if the double exposure prevention / frame lock mechanism works. <br>

And since the last couple of cameras if possible I check the actual focus with a ground glass too.</p>

<p> </p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>I'd second everything suggested above. I also have a couple of rolls of test film, which I just load into cameras and shoot off in a trial run, just to make sure the wind isn't slipping, and that the passage of the film is activating any component it may need to. This procedure also familarises one with the camera, and brings to light any quirks in the handling. I rewind it and retrieve the leader and use it over and over. And, when you're satisfied that the camera is functioning, the cost of a 24 exposure film for a test run is hardly a bank-breaker, come what may!</p>

[Rick_van_Nooij]

<p>btw, I can hear JDM chuckling about my misfortune with the Signet ;)</p>

[cosmin_saveanu]

<p>I only use 36 position rolls for tests but sometimes distribute the same roll in two or three cameras with at least one of them already known to work properly. This way, I never get back a blank roll!<br>

Assuming that the film advancing mechanism works correctly, as well as the frame counter, I would do a few exposures with one camera, check the approximate number of frames, rewind the film, being careful to keep the leader out, put the film in another camera and advance the frames by taking pictures with the cap of the lens on and at high speeds and f/16 up to the previous numbers (maybe with one more, to be sure). The only problem I encountered with this method was with automatic rewinding cameras, when the film leader gets inside the cassette. For this situation, I bought a plastic film retriever for 5 euros and used it happily since.</p>

[lachaine]

<p>36 exposures is too much. 24 is about right. Why worry about it. Is the difference in cost between 12 and 24 really that much? I don't use 36 only because it takes me too long to finish the roll.</p>

<p>I never take test shots. I take real pictures I intend to use, the same as if I wasn't testing the camera.</p>

[steve_levine]

<p>After you make sure it winds, fires, focuses and meters, you can do the following without need for film.</p>

<p> Shoot with a flash attached with the back open , and watch the curtains. This is a poor man's shutter tester. Start at the maximum sync speed, and go in both directions. At max sync speed, both curtains should be out of the way when the flash fires. Any sign of a late or dragging curtain will rear it's head.<br>

The "too fast to sync" speeds will show the curtains freezing within the frame. These should appear uniform and increasing speed should show the "slit" of an opening narrowing. All of the slow ones shouldn't show any shutter either, if it's functioning properly.</p>

<p>The speed of the flash allows us to see what the naked eye cannot. A camera that passes this test,, should shoot just fine. (unless it has winding issues or light leaks)</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>The film is the cheapest part of photography.</p>

[cosmin_saveanu]

<blockquote>

<p>I never take test shots. I take real pictures I intend to use</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Agree. But you can call them test shots if it is the first time you're using a previously untested camera. It is better to take pictures in various conditions of light to assess also the behaviour of the lens. An old TLR I was testing the other day was perfectly good indoors and perfectly bad on high contrast scenes outside.</p>

[SCL]

<p>I do pretty much what the other do. However, years ago I purchased a shutter tester, and I use it primarily to identify any shutter speeds which are off by more than 20% or so - and record those findings in a notebook. I make sure everything moves smoothly, and is clean. That may involve lightly cleaning the lenses, rangefinder or focusing screen, eyepieces, etc. If there is a meter I check that against my known handheld one. THEN I run a test roll. Once spooled, I check the rewind knob to see that I have the film properly attached (having blown that one several times in my career). I typically put the camera on a tripod and run a series of test exposures to see if there is a sweet spot of the lens, or a stop which produces particularly unacceptable results. I either use an inexpensive roll of 24 exposure color film, or run a hand loaded roll of B&W which I process myself. I examine the negatives for light leaks at this stage, and if they pop up, I can usually replace most seals within an hour. If the camera needs professional help...it usually goes onto the shelf for a while until I firmly decide whether to commit funds. As to the shots I take to test it, I rarely waste shots by shooting uninteresting things like brick walls, test charts, or newspapers tacked to a wall; instead I shoot the things I normally shoot and fully expect to have keepers from the roll.</p>

[mark_medin]

<p>I test general function when I'm out buying, but am I the only one that kept an old portable TV plugged in for finer testing at home? I've been mostly fortunate so far, also about 2/3 of the cameras I've acquired have had electronic shutters which seem to either work or not so I can ignore those with nonworking shutters. The only one that I got burned on was an older mechanical Canon that capped at 1/500 and did not meter correctly, I missed both issues.</p>

[lauren_macintosh]

<p>Freestyle dot com has 12 loads of film B&W and color of course your limited to their choices and they have 24 and 36 loads</p>

[machts gut]

<p>Some years ago I bought 70 expired Kodak CN-Film, for 1 Euro plus shipping. The green ofe the leaves and grass is a bit too green, but they serve the purpose of camera testing very well.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I check the light seals, mirror foam, and accuracy of the shutter and meter <em>before </em>I shoot any film. Then I just load my usual 36-exposure roll of Ektar 100.</p>

[craigd]

<blockquote>

<p>I never take test shots. I take real pictures I intend to use, the same as if I wasn't testing the camera.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Perhaps I should have made it clear that I work this way too. I don't take "test shots" as in, brick walls or random garbage just to see if the camera works. I take the camera out for real and hope for the best. So far I have rarely been disappointed.</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I do take test shots and 36 exposures is ok for me. I do test the camera throroughly before I put film in it. It's no big deal. After all we're talking about classic cameras which don't have a lot of functions, not very high shutter speed etc.. so it's not hard to test them.</p>

[jodys]

<p>I buy bulk rolls of B&W, 2x or 3x 100ft at a time, total cost with developing runs about US $0.50 a roll for approx 15-18 exposures per camera- partly because I can develop myself in less time than it takes to drive to a store to drop it off for developing. If I like the results of that, I'll usually try a color roll also, whatever expired rolls I have lying around from my purchases of camera bags & kits. That's about when I decide whether or not I'm keeping the camera.</p>

<p>Like everyone else it seems, I don't do 'test shots' unless there's a specific reason. I take photos for the pleasure of taking photos, though if I'm testing a camera I will make sure I do a few shots wide-open, requiring critical focus. I will also do a mix of indoor-outdoor to test a range of shutter speeds and apertures. What that means in practice is walking around outdoors for a while, then going indoors somewhere, or waiting for dusk. If I'm on a roll, I may do 4 or 5 cameras in one day. I have 3 lined up for today, a Minolta Autocord, Canon A35 Datelux, and a Nikon EM. Not sure I want to bother with the Canon, it's ugly as sin (and not in the good way). The Nikon is mostly so I can try out a few lenses that don't mount on my F.</p>

[chuck_foreman1]

Like most of the others mentioned above I insure the hardware is working, so I rarely come away with nothing, But there are many gotcha's as Rick N mentioned! The past 5 years I was able to get 12 exp rolls and I was one happy dog. I was really into "exercising" all my cameras and basically this was perfect. Now as another reply mentioned there are "no more 12exp" rolls. Being the tightwad I am I also bought the 100ft of B&W film but this was just being "tight-fisted" This was not just for "test" purposes. I do my own developing too. So now it's rare that I shoot any color. just no budget - no money etc!

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>btw, I can hear JDM chuckling about my misfortune with the Signet ;)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Rick vN is referring to my often expressed feeling about the Signet 35 -- only camera I ever hated... :(<br /> I do, however, have a Signet 40. ( http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00Sx2C )</p>

<p>But Schadenfreude is not my style, generally, heh heh</p>

[mark_medin]

<p>I obviously misunderstood - I never shoot a new acquisition until I know it shoots! After that, I do seals and run one test roll (I got a few dozen rolls of 24 exposure Elite Chrome 100 slightly expired for $1.25 each which I use for tests). If it passes, then anything goes and so far I've had no problems.</p>