Early 35mm Cameras

[sepiareverb]

Came across this today.

http://corsopolaris.net/supercameras/early/early_135.html

Vintage graphics too!

 

[View Range]

Thanks for posting this, Bob. It is very interesting. The only issue I have is the lack of precision in the terms single frame vs half-frame and double frame vs full frame. That is, the website uses modern terms for frame size rather than the terms that we used at the time the cameras were new.

 

[HHPhoto]

Thank you!
Very interesting!


Cheers, Jan

 

[seany65]

So Ossie B. didn't invent 35mm still film cameras?

 

[Dwig]

Thanks for posting this, Bob. It is very interesting. The only issue I have is the lack of precision in the terms single frame vs half-frame and double frame vs full frame. That is, the website uses modern terms for frame size rather than the terms that we used at the time the cameras were new.

I agree that using, or at least mentioning, the term used at the time of these cameras would improve the page.


I noticed another "error", though very hidden. The URL references "135" instead of 35mm. Very few of these cameras (only the Leicas ??) can accept 135 size film. 135 being Kodak's "standardized" packaging of 35mm film in a factory loaded cassette. They introduced it along with their Nagel made Leica competitor, the Retina. Prior to that, 35mm cameras were bulk loaded, either directly or via camea-specific proprietary cassettes that you loaded yourself.

 

[sepiareverb]

The graphics would indicate to me this is not a top quality site, but the images were of most interest to me.

 

[konicaman]

Cool - thanks for sharing!

 

[Erik van Straten]

A Krauss Eka was used by Cartier-Bresson in 1931 in Ivory Coast in Africa. Unfortunately it leaked light. Some pictures survived. He used the same camera later on in Berlin, Poland an Czechoslovakia.

Back in Paris he bought his first Leica (I, model A) new from Tiranty, the French importer of Leitz. The story that he bought his first Leica second hand in Marseille is not true.

Erik.

 

[tunalegs]

I've handled a Tourist Multiple camera before, interesting camera, but pretty unwieldy. Also suffers from the same problem of "who is this for?" that later "not quite a movie camera" still cameras had. Who really needs to shoot several hundred small, low quality images on a roll of film, using an awkward camera?

 

[lynnb]

An interesting resource - thanks for posting.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Good illustration why Leica.

 

[Laterna Magica]

Thanks!
Most of these cameras I have not seen so far .

 

[Steve M.]

Aside from the website's clunky design, it has some wonderful old cameras featured with nice write ups and good pictures. I like it. It's amazing how many photos a lot of these cameras were capable of making with a single loading of film!!!

In some ways film cameras haven't shown much innovation since these, and actually seem to have gone backwards in design. That's probably because the market went from having talented individuals designing and making cameras to more of a corporate, team project. Corporations like to stay safe with things and standardize as much as possible.