Do 1/4 frame cameras exist?

[zuiko85]

Nice that you're curious 🙂 i will tell you!

Its all about getting a maximum amount of exposures on each roll, sorry maybe I should've been more clear about this.

This new camera im getting is for me taking pics of a friends band and they ABSOLUTELY have to get analog pics (very hip yes)

. But the pics are only really for posting online, fb, instagram and so on. So that's why I think a smaller format will suffice well enough and even produce more of the grainy analog feel that they like.

I did it for 2,5 years now maybe 5-6 times. And I got this idea since i was sick of the cost of developing and scanning, we always did full frame before maybe 2-3 rolls every time...money money money....

I'm thinking either getting this ridiculous nickelodeon photoblaster that was mentioned, or maybe yashica samurai cause i guess it will produce better pics...

Do you have any experience with above 2 mentioned cameras?

For your situation 35mm half frame is still the best bang for the money if, and this is true with any film camera, if you are willing to do your own processing and scanning. Outside film processing will drive cost to very high levels, the “ money money money “ you mentioned and are trying to get away from. With half frame you can shoot two 36exp rolls and come away with 150 exposures if you are careful loading the film.
Do you want to shoot color or B&W or both?

 

[sepiareverb]

4 tall exposures across 2 roughly standard 35mm frames -- essentially 4 half-frame images of the given scene.

That’s right, nearly two frames wide, thanks for the correction. I’ve not pulled out the Nimslo in decades.

 

[luz_sandeman]

For your situation 35mm half frame is still the best bang for the money if, and this is true with any film camera, if you are willing to do your own processing and scanning. Outside film processing will drive cost to very high levels, the “ money money money “ you mentioned and are trying to get away from. With half frame you can shoot two 36exp rolls and come away with 150 exposures if you are careful loading the film.
Do you want to shoot color or B&W or both?

Im gonna shoot color since i dont wanna mess around at home with the b&w chemicals. also this band's look really needs color. there's a place where i can get development and scanning in okay resolution for about 20 usd per roll. and i usually buy the rolls for like 3 usd. i think that's ok price since i dont do this so much that i wanna get a scanner myself. save me some time....

 

[wwfloyd]

...there's a place where i can get development and scanning in okay resolution for about 20 usd per roll. and i usually buy the rolls for like 3 usd. i think that's ok price since i dont do this so much that i wanna get a scanner myself. save me some time....

Have you asked if they will scan 1/2 frame? That would be your key to practicality, here. They may balk, or increase the price. If they balk, ask if they will scan as full frame (2 half frames per scan) -- you could then separate them in editing. This would bring an issue if the images of a paired scan have different lighting, where the equipment would choose one auto compensation, where separate scans would make each one better.

I've read your goals. But... I keep wondering. Shooting live action can be challenging, especially if you have to work in poor lighting -- which would seem likely. Sticking with 35mm would give you more flexibility for cameras that could more easily make good shots. You want grain -- push the film, or shoot faster films. You can get plenty of grain. That still leaves you with higher cost. But, that may be the right cost, if you end up not getting what you want with half frame.

 

[Tim Gray]

Haha, I'm thinking now I really have to get a nickelodeon photoblast ! I read about it and it DOES make individual exposures, no change of settings thouh, but it has a flash...


Thanks for the tip man, maybe this is what I've been looking for, and i love the toy look of this camera, i mean - it IS a toy! Ironic...

I only have one photo from it up on Flickr, and can confirm it does make individual exposures.

https://flic.kr/p/3JRdCf

 

[zuiko85]

Looking at Photoblaster sample pictures I would guess that built in flash has a maximum range of 8~10 feet with ISO 400 film. So, if you are any farther away from the subjects the pictures will be too dark to make out. Outdoors in good light it should be ok, but of course the small frame and simple plastic lens will limit resolution.

Maybe it would just be better to get a used Olympus E-PL2 with the kit lens, set the art filter to 'grainy film' and shoot all day long for almost no cost.

As for not shooting analog for real, well.....just don't tell anybody.

 

[retinax]

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=169205 you'll especially want to read post 11

 

[luz_sandeman]

yep scan half frame at same price

yep scan half frame at same price

Have you asked if they will scan 1/2 frame? That would be your key to practicality, here. They may balk, or increase the price. If they balk, ask if they will scan as full frame (2 half frames per scan) -- you could then separate them in editing. This would bring an issue if the images of a paired scan have different lighting, where the equipment would choose one auto compensation, where separate scans would make each one better.

I've read your goals. But... I keep wondering. Shooting live action can be challenging, especially if you have to work in poor lighting -- which would seem likely. Sticking with 35mm would give you more flexibility for cameras that could more easily make good shots. You want grain -- push the film, or shoot faster films. You can get plenty of grain. That still leaves you with higher cost. But, that may be the right cost, if you end up not getting what you want with half frame.

Yep the first thing I did was to ask my lab about if they scan half frame, they do it at the same price, in the way that you said - 2 frames at the same time so i'll just have to work a little in PS with the images I want to crop out and use.

Very interesting input with the machines auto comp. I didn't really consider this! I guess I could try to think of it when shooting, like keeping track of which is the first and last in the pair, if you know what I mean...

The thing is, im not a pro. This band usually "pay" me by buying me some food and a beer. They're my friends and I just do this for fun and to be helpful. But I still wanna get nice results that suits their style.

I see your point about full frame, it's just not that serious, lower costs are more essential. Plus the look of this band and their online "style" kinda fits with crappy image qual. weird white balance and all that. It's just supposed to look VERY analog, so stick out in some way. i dunno if it does but....

The thing with these toy cameras is that their ridiculous small apertures could make very very dark images on already expired film...but flash is included 😉

 

[luz_sandeman]

WOW 16 lenses!!

WOW 16 lenses!!

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=169205 you'll especially want to read post 11

Thanks! this was VERY interesting info. Will copy it here for ease of remembering exactly what was said:

"Akshully I think it is, because the 8 lens kamera's only options are slow, medium or fast sequential captures. While the 16 version also allows single shot captures so you can mix and match 16 unique images on the two frames of film before it advances the film.
It's also nicer because it has a physical lens cover that moves out of the way when you use it, while the 8 shot version shoots through a clear filter. So do cameras like Nikonos, Fuji Work Record, Nikon ActionTouch etc etc so there isn't an actual issue with that but I just like the idea of the 'solid' lens cover on the 16 version.

The 8 shot version is manual advance and rewind, while the 16 is automatic."

Above is about the fujifilm rensha cardia cameras.

 

[luz_sandeman]

kitchen pics right ?

kitchen pics right ?

I only have one photo from it up on Flickr, and can confirm it does make individual exposures.

https://flic.kr/p/3JRdCf

Ahh but these images look totally OKAY! from this toy - wow, i thought it would be blurry as fog.

And im looking at the correct pics, right? the four pics from a kitchen scene? (im guessing its from the same 35 mm frame?)

 

[luz_sandeman]

they would know 😉

they would know 😉

Looking at Photoblaster sample pictures I would guess that built in flash has a maximum range of 8~10 feet with ISO 400 film. So, if you are any farther away from the subjects the pictures will be too dark to make out. Outdoors in good light it should be ok, but of course the small frame and simple plastic lens will limit resolution.

Maybe it would just be better to get a used Olympus E-PL2 with the kit lens, set the art filter to 'grainy film' and shoot all day long for almost no cost.

As for not shooting analog for real, well.....just don't tell anybody.

haha thanks you dont know how many times i told my band friends that we could just shoot digital instead and make it look analog 🙂 but they are adamant it has to be analog. they have this whole 80s look and sound. i helped them shoot a video a few weeks ago using old VHS tape recorders.

and they would know if it was analog or digital, they normally pay for the development costs anyway 😀 im just a pair of hands and a pair of eyes. ok maybe a bit more.

yeah the f/8-11 or whatever it is, is really my main concern about these toy cameras. it could be so very very dark. and i think fixed 1/100 shutter, i mean i can handhold 1/30 reasonably well...so even darker still.... I will read up on some different models when I get the time!

thanks a lot for the help all u guys! this thread has expanded my knowledge about what is OUT THERE in terms of weird cameras in just a week or less 😀

 

[leicapixie]

The OP has a problem, his clients (non-paying) are the tail wagging the dog!
The "look" of film easily done with older digital point and shoot cameras..
One needs CCD not CMOS sensor.. reason i bought old DSLR Nikon-50.

Half frame is nice, esp. if under 30 and can see the negative.😀
I used 1/2 Frame when i had 4x5 enlarger (8x10 better) making multi prints..
Note i still shoot film and it's not expensive!
Consider your time, the band, transportation, snacks and drinks, etc..
Kentmere less costly but harsh look in 400.
HP5+ superior tonal scale..plan your images with sketches.

I used a Pentax Optio 3.5MP for media esp internet.!
I have an old Minolta P/S that does horrible color BUT B/W that fooled many..
It's many years now but I never worked out Minolta-Sony-Konica menu..:angel:

 

[Lee Rust]

The 4 lens Lomo camera is crude but fun. I've got one! However, for quality results plus film & processing economy, I think 1/2 frame 35 is the way to go.

 

[luz_sandeman]

The OP has a problem, his clients (non-paying) are the tail wagging the dog!
The "look" of film easily done with older digital point and shoot cameras..
One needs CCD not CMOS sensor.. reason i bought old DSLR Nikon-50.

Half frame is nice, esp. if under 30 and can see the negative.😀
I used 1/2 Frame when i had 4x5 enlarger (8x10 better) making multi prints..
Note i still shoot film and it's not expensive!
Consider your time, the band, transportation, snacks and drinks, etc..
Kentmere less costly but harsh look in 400.
HP5+ superior tonal scale..plan your images with sketches.

I used a Pentax Optio 3.5MP for media esp internet.!
I have an old Minolta P/S that does horrible color BUT B/W that fooled many..
It's many years now but I never worked out Minolta-Sony-Konica menu..:angel:

yeah sometimes u just gotta do something for someone else if you ever expect people to do stuff for you sometime 😉

Ahaa! so there's something about CCD:s ? 😀 i guess i can see what u mean. i use an old 2005 pentax compact camera(its gotta be ccd) for party pics (i dont care if it gets smashed), and i guess it kinda looks like the 80s/90s in the pictures.... what is the explanation?

 

[luz_sandeman]

yeah 🙂

yeah 🙂

The 4 lens Lomo camera is crude but fun. I've got one! However, for quality results plus film & processing economy, I think 1/2 frame 35 is the way to go.

yeah I see your point! exactly these toy cameras seem crude but fun. how is the 4 lens lomo-cam to use at like a party (dark indoors), is it the one with flash? asking cause the high f numbers kinda scare me...f8-11? seems dark for even a cloudy sky sometimes....

yeah half frame seems like a sweet spot between economy and quality! 🙂 and also 144 pics on one roll is almost too much. sometimes u dont wanna take that many pics in one go....but 72 is reasonable....

Im currently thinking of getting the half frame yashica samurai (anyone knows if the automatic exposure algorithms work O.K.?) or can you control the flash at all? to make sure u always get the flash? ive just started researching this camera didnt get the time yet...

 

[Lee Rust]

My Lomo doesn't have a flash, so it's a daytime thing.

As for 1/2 frame, I would suggest one of the several versions of Olympus Pen viewfinder cameras. They're small and dependable, but you may need an external flash or exposure meter. My favorite is the Pen S, although I do have a Pen FT reflex and Univex Mercury II as half-frame alternates.

I've never actually seen a Samurai. From what I've read it seems very interesting but maybe a bit too electronic to be reliable after more than thirty years.

 

[luz_sandeman]

half frame rangefinder.....

half frame rangefinder.....

My Lomo doesn't have a flash, so it's a daytime thing.

As for 1/2 frame, I would suggest one of the several versions of Olympus Pen viewfinder cameras. They're small and dependable, but you may need an external flash or exposure meter. My favorite is the Pen S, although I do have a Pen FT reflex and Univex Mercury II as half-frame alternates.

I've never actually seen a Samurai. From what I've read it seems very interesting but maybe a bit too electronic to be reliable after more than thirty years.

Ahh yeah a lot of people recommend these pen cameras. (But they don't have autofocus right?) Of course i know about them-but here's a thing i didn't write i guess:
My whole starting to think about a new analog camera is about getting either a rangefinder or something with autofocus. I have been using a pentax K1000 for some years and im just sick of having to focus manually with an SLR and hardly seeing where the focus is. (and also getting a half frame camera cause the people i shoot for only use the pics on instagram and fb anyway)

The perfect thing for me would be a half frame rangefinder, but I already researched that and some models seems to exist only in very small numbers, VERY expensive. if u dont have any tips?

But very good point about the electronics maybe not working anymore in a 1988 camera. if i buy it i will get it shortly before a shooting session so i can try it out immediately and check all the functions and complain on ebay if its not fully functional.

 

[leicapixie]

The CCD is older, almost always made by Kodak.
It resembles FILM in "look". Color like Kodachrome.
It is a digital image so it's not film really..
Cost can be almost zero..my DSLR with lens $75..
It has sensor marks, easily photoshopped.
1/2 Frame really not need auto-focus.
The "apparent" extra depth of field, esp in small prints.
Point and shoot auto focus are cheap, focussing and exposing,
slower than watching redwoods grow!
No matter your reason, everybody is worth their labor!

 

[luz_sandeman]

The CCD is older, almost always made by Kodak.
It resembles FILM in "look". Color like Kodachrome.
It is a digital image so it's not film really..
Cost can be almost zero..my DSLR with lens $75..
It has sensor marks, easily photoshopped.
1/2 Frame really not need auto-focus.
The "apparent" extra depth of field, esp in small prints.
Point and shoot auto focus are cheap, focussing and exposing,
slower than watching redwoods grow!
No matter your reason, everybody is worth their labor!

ah ok will read more about ccd:s, then 🙂
sensor marks??
Yeah i dont care so much about the slowness, its gonna be faster than my eyes - i can assure you 🙂 as long as its reasonably reliable. I mean i wouldnt think in this way with street photography for example - which is really my main thing. Im just sick of telling my friends to "wait while i do the focussing" as soon as we switch positions...

 

[Pál_K]

For quality images on a small format, it's hard to beat Minox or the Minolta 16mm. Next step up is Pentax 110.

Has the Nickelodeon Photoblaster been mentioned? Obviously a toy, it is possible to make "movies" with its 4-shots per frame format.

Don't cringe when you see it. It's actually interesting.

https://www.lomography.com/magazine/19451-the-nickelodeon-photoblaster