Box cameras

[tunalegs]

@tunaegs, thanks for the extra info and the new camera suggestion.

Some of the simpler 126 cameras, such as the kodak 177x) had fixed focus, 1 speed and 2 apertures. They were basically small box cameras. If more 126 cameras had been like the rollei 126 or ricoh 126 (prolly not quite the right names) ie. like 'proper' cameras but with easier film loading, then maybe 126 wouldn't have died out.

@wjj3. That brownie flash iv is quite pretty, but I think it's even simpler than the brownie model 2 f, so I wonder why they'd do that given the rise of more complicated cameras.

Box cameras got simpler precisely because other cameras got more complex. Most box cameras were produced and sold by film companies. Basically to provide the cheapest entry into photography and thus build a consumer base for film. In order to sell cameras for $3-$5 they just made them fixed focus, fixed aperture, 1 shutter speed, plastic or cardboard. Camera companies didn't need to bother growing the film market so generally didn't venture into the very bottom of the camera market, they left that to Kodak, Ansco, etc.

 

[seany65]

I suppose you're right tunalegs. Though I don't get why they'd go so far with the simplification as they did: early on I think the simplicity wasn't too bad as most people didn't have access to the good cameras and didn't really want to do the faffing about needed for good pics, by the end I think they were too simple to get decent results and at the same time people had much better access to good but cheap cameras and had begun to want the better results.

Anyway, despite what I said in an earlier post about not bothering with a box camera yet, I've just 'pulled the trigger' on a Gevaert Gevabox version 2, with 1 speed (I think 1/30th) and 3 apertures (f8, f11 and f16) and 3 focus zones. I'm probably wrong but I thought this would give me 3 usable apertures rather than the 2 of a brownie 2f.

I just hope I ca find a manual for this version.

 

[tunalegs]

The Gevabox seems like a good choice, I have seen some nice results from others using them. As I mentioned before I find having selectable focus more useful than having multiple shutter speeds, plus with three apertures you do have a modicum of control over exposure that will suffice for most usual situations.

As regards the simplicity of later box cameras, I think it had to do with many different developments. For a company like Kodak that manufactured a full line of a cameras the lack of features on the most basic cameras gave them an opportunity to upsell to their customers, using a loss-leader approach. Show people the cheapest camera to get their interest, then try and sell them on the one that's a step up from it. And if they didn't go for it, at least they bought a camera and would buy film in the future.

The other thing is with the advent of more sophisticated films like Verichrome Pan (which was as I understand it, developed primarily with box cameras in mind) the need for multiple apertures was reduced, and the advent of cheap flashbulbs meant the need for T and B settings was similarly reduced.

 

[Muggins]

I'm probably wrong but I thought this would give me 3 useable apertures rather than the 2 of a brownie 2f.

If I may be a terrible nit picker, the Brownie 2F has three apertures, roughly F10 - 20 - 30. Leastaways, every one I have owned (at least four) has.

Mind you, I wouldn't kick the Gevabox out of bed for farting...

Adrian

 

[02Pilot]

Shameless self-promotion for a short piece I wrote on box cameras: https://filmosaur.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/a-tale-of-two-box-cameras/


And another Ilford Craftsman photo, just because:

 

[Mark Schretlen]

I have an Artima Arti-Six which is a slightly fancy 6x9 box camera (bake-lite) that uses 120 film. Three apertures(f9,f12.5,f18), three shutter speeds (1/25, 1/50, 1/100, bulb) and scale focus at four focus stops (4ft, 6ft, 13ft, and inf). It has a viewfinder as opposed to a WL finder of a typical box camera. That's the good news, the bad news is it's a single element lens which only has acuity in the central portion of the image. It's a fun shooter that's light and portable. I believe a mono-pod might improve results if one were expecting to make any enlargements. Then again, if I were expecting to enlarge very much, it's definitely the wrong tool.

Anyway here is a shot using the Arti-Six circa June 2016 (FP4+ @100 ISO, Rodinal/Blazinal 1:50).

 

[seany65]

@tunalegs. I think would've een in the lot that did not buy a 'step up' camera if the results I got from the cheapo were any good. I think it would've put me off.

@Muggins. Apparently the apertures No. 2 F has are f11, f22 and f32 according to what I've read. What I was thinking about is I'd been using my lightmeter to see what apertures would be suggested with a speed of 1/60th (to see if a no.2 f would 'work' for me), and f32 almost didn't come up at all, and f22 only came up sometimes whereas experimenting using 1/30th (to see if the gevabox would 'work' for me) the apertures f8, f11 and f16 have come up more often.

@o2pilot. I've just looked at your article. It's quite interesting. I found the craftsman pic at f9 to be out of focus, I can't see the 'reasonably well defined' bit. Is that the sort of result to expect from a doublet lens?

@Mark. I've just dome a quick google on the camera you mention. To be honest it's not what I'd call 'pretty'. It's also the same sort of shape as the 3 cameras I've got now so I woun't be getting one. Thanks for the suggestion though.

 

[02Pilot]

@o2pilot. I've just looked at your article. It's quite interesting. I found the craftsman pic at f9 to be out of focus, I can't see the 'reasonably well defined' bit. Is that the sort of result to expect from a doublet lens?

I think there's a few things at play here. The version you see there is scaled down considerably, and the way Wordpress compresses (I'm not sure if that's the correct technical term) images makes it look a bit softer than the original scan. It's not out of focus, just soft, and there's still quite a bit of detail in there. If you want to see out of focus from that camera, look at the distant areas in the photo I most recently posted in this thread.

I would not say that this lens is necessarily representative of all doublets. Nor is it to everyone's taste, to be sure. I much prefer it to the overall better performance of the Brownie Hawkeye I also mention in the blog post, as the Ilford has a lot more character to it. If I want sharp, there are plenty of other, better choices.

 

[tunalegs]

I have a Kinoflex with a doublet - also known as the Halina Prefect, Wales Reflex, and doubtless many other names:

Penny Wheeler by Berang Berang, on Flickr

Reasonably sharp in the center, massively soft in the corners.

This is not an achromat cemented doublet, but rather a "periscope" style with two symmetrically opposed elements separated by the shutter. This eliminates barrel and pincushion distortion but does nothing for anything else.

 

[seany65]

@02pilot. Yes, I suppose the pics would be affected by being scaled down and compressed.

@tunalegs. If only that last pic of yours was /mono/sepia, I think it'd look much better.

The Gevabox turned up earlier today and it seems to be working so I cleaned it up by getting rid of almost all of the rust and the bits of 'black, sticky' stuff. 'She' looks much better now.

I have seen a video on youtube by a man using the same style of gevabox and he says the focus goes from 1.5m to infinity. (I think mine is in feet as the numbers go from 5-10, 13-20 and 23-inf.) The lens also rotates freely between 5 and to Inf. the long way around, but not the short way and there's no 'click' stops.

This gives me the impression that it can focus on any distance between the min. and max. distances. Does anyone know if this is correct?

Has anyone got any idea why the distances marked (on mine, see the thumb I posted earlier) don't mention any between 10 and 13 and between 20 and 23?

Does anyone know if I turn the lens so that the dot at the top is half-way between the '10' and the '13' the lens will be focussed on '11.5'?

Ditto for the dot being half-way between the '20' and the 23', will it be focussed on '21.5'?

Any help would be much appreciated.

 

[tunalegs]

I'm not really familiar with the gevabox, but if the lens simply screws in or out of the body to focus, then presumably the focus can be set at distances between the marked zones. The lens should screw out further the closer the indicated distance.

The engraved distances probably have gaps because the zones were chosen to optimize depth of field. That is if they marked 21', the DOF might not have been great enough to reach infinity, so instead they moved focus a bit back to do so, and never mind the tiny gap between 20 and 23.

Edit: playing with the DOF calculator, assuming a focal length of between 90 and 100mm, and the known f/stop of f/8, the actual focus distance for 23' to infinity, would be around 50 feet. Depth of field then covers the rest of the indicated zone. In truth there is probably some "overlap" of DOF between zones, but the maker may have excluded that overlap to ensure people didn't misjudge distances when focusing (for example, somebody was standing 21 feet away, it'd be safer for the user to step back a few more feet and select the last zone, than try and guess which zone would be best between two different zones).

 

[seany65]

Thanks for the info and the faffing about with your dof calculator tunalegs.

Edit: I've just been thinking about getting an accessory rangefinder for it just to be 'on the safe side', but if the actual focussed distance is 50ft when the lens shows 23ft-inf. and is not 23 feet, could thast mean the other distances on the lens aren't actually what they say they are as well? If so, is ther any point in getting a rangefinder for it?

 

[tunalegs]

Thanks for the info and the faffing about with your dof calculator tunalegs.

Edit: I've just been thinking about getting an accessory rangefinder for it just to be 'on the safe side', but if the actual focussed distance is 50ft when the lens shows 23ft-inf. and is not 23 feet, could thast mean the other distances on the lens aren't actually what they say they are as well? If so, is ther any point in getting a rangefinder for it?

Not really. Keep in mind when you shoot at f/16 you'll have even greater depth of field. Only the first zone might be tricky, but it should be pretty easy to guess, over five feet would be roughly the length of a person lying down on the ground (I usually just guess where my head would be if I decided to lay down and nap right there), over 10 feet would be roughly just a bit short of a car length, so pretty easy to estimate by looking. I think the whole point of toying around with box cameras is doing away with all the ancillary stuff and just having a go with the absolute basics, if you miss focus on a shot once in a while no big deal.

 

[seany65]

You're probably right tunalegs, though knowing me I think I'll still end up getting a rangefinder to check the distance.

Unfortunately, that will have to be after I get another Gevabox version 2 as I've just broken the one I got the other day. I'd managed to get inside and clean the vertical viewfinder and saw that there was a piece of wood behind and above the 'finder mirrors and I removed it.

Either the piece of wood did something or I broke something in trying to remove it, but the shutter stopped working. Not 'dead', but either not opening or closing fully or properly.

So it had to go.

 

[tunalegs]

Send it to me. It's probably nothing complicated.

 

[seany65]

Send it to me. It's probably nothing complicated.

Thanks for the offer tunalegs, but it's gone to the great camera shop in the sky, ie. chucked in the bin and the binmen have emptied the bin. 🙁

I now wish I'd posted about it sooner and perhaps you could've made it comeback to life, but I was a bit too miffed with myself to post.:bang:

Still, I suppose another one'll come along sooner or later.

 

[tunalegs]

Don't you find it a little bit silly that the thing survived five or so decades, only to be thrown out because of what was likely a simple issue? Even if it was terminal, it could have been converted into a very fancy pinhole camera with no real effort and gone on a while longer.

I wouldn't want to encourage hoarding, but there is very little worth throwing away when it comes to old cameras.

 

[seany65]

I've just bought another Gevabox that's the same design as my first one. It came with a manual. I was surprised to find that it says the shutter speed is 1/50. I thought they were about 1/30. I suppose everyone could think it was 1/30 'cos all the shutters have slowed down since and thus given a false impression of their speed.

I was also surprised to learn that they could take a flash, attached to the bottom of the camera. Unfortunately neither of mine had/have these connections. I presume that means there were slightly different versions made over time.

I'm wondering if the manual I have is for an early version of this type or if it's the last version of this type they made?

I'm also wondering how usual it is for these cameras to have lenses that are not properly fixed in place? I was cleaning the inside of it by using a cotton bud with the shutter set to 'B' and the lens popped out. It has a plastic ring which wasn't fixed to it and I managed to get them both back in.

It doesn't mention in the manual what the focal length of the lens is. Anyone have any idea?

Finally, does anyone have any idea of what speed the shutter has, when it's set to 'B' but the button is released straight away? This is an actual alternate 'speed' setting recommended in the manual for when '1/50' isn't enough.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . Finally, does anyone have any idea of what speed the shutter has, when it's set to 'B' but the button is released straight away? This is an actual alternate 'speed' setting recommended in the manual for when '1/50' isn't enough.

Depends on how fast you release it! Sorry to be a smart-arse but it ain't likely to be outstandingly consistent. I'd guess about 1/10 to 1/20 but that is complete guesswork.

Cheers,

R.

 

[tunalegs]

Most 6x9 box cameras use a lens with a focal length of around 100mm. Some are slightly longer, and some are slight shorter. So far I have not encountered one that is not at least slightly wide. No point in worrying about it though, it is what it is.

Put some film in it and shoot.