Halina 35x - the £7 Leica

[tunalegs]

I recently picked up this rather crude scale focus 35mm camera. Cleaned the lens and regreased the helical, which was the most nightmarish experience I've ever had working on any camera - despite the apparent simplicity of the camera.

Anyway, the Halina 35x was made by Haking in Hong Kong, starting around 1959. It's a rather blatant rip off an older, also rather crummy camera, the Nescon 35. For good measure Haking ripped off Petri's red dot icon. One wonders why they only copied ideas from the bottom of the barrel (ok, so Petri did make a few rather nice cameras - but still).

The Nescon 35 BTW, was a development of the Aruba 35, which apparently was advertised as a Leica for 4000 yen...

The Halina 35x sold for just short of £8 when new - so it was pretty darned cheap for a 35mm camera. The camera was most famous for being made out of metal, apparently.

Interesting notes: two bladed leaf shutter, speed controlled by spring tension. The center element of the triplet lens is uncoated - I guess Haking were really pinching the pennies hard.

Despite the overall lack of confidence this instilled in me for this mechanism, the results are kind of better than I had expected...

It's acceptably sharp in the center (acceptable for 5x7 prints anyway - probably not for anything larger) - but the focus falls off noticeably in the edges, even at f11. There is some slight vignetting too. The overall effect is reminiscent of the Lomo LC-A in my opinion - but without the noticeable pincushion distortion.

Crop. Shot at f5.6 noticeably soft.

Kind of odd flare in a strip along the side.

Hey! I'm actually pretty good at guessing distances without a rangefinder it turns out! One thing I do not like about the lens is the way it renders OOF areas. But I can't put my finger on what it is that I don't like about it. It's smooth, but in a strangely blurred way - there's something rather unnatural looking about it.

I wasn't expecting much, so it did exceed my expectations. However it's a pretty mediocre lens even for a low price triplet. I guess considering these things cost half of what an Argus C3 cost that is acceptable though. Kind of. :lol:

 

[fidget]

Thanks for the run down on this camera, I'd seen it on the bay from time to time and wondered.
Great refurb work! especially for such a low value camera.

Dave

 

[tunalegs]

Yes it's definitely a notch lower than the cheapy Japanese point and shoots of the era (some of which are actually incredibly good if you don't mind slow shutter speeds and slow lenses).

It does look cool though, and the construction is fairly robust, though crude. I might run more film through it if I want a real faux-vintage look.

 

[citizen99]

This was my first 35mm camera as a youngster in the '60s. I seem to remember (with hindsight) a tendency to vignetting. Anyway, I got some memories out of it .

 

[farlymac]

Hey, I've got one of those. I never put a thought about running film through it, just wanted it for the looks. An early stamped-metal knock-off before the really crude plastic ones started showing up.

PF

 

[Steve M.]

The photos are certainly....interesting. May be a bit of a focus issue?

I applaud your initiative to get the old thing working again. Cute little booger.

 

[John Robertson]

I remember these new, they were sold by a chain store in UK. Boots (the Chemist) and were quite popular, that would be in the late 50's or very early 60's. They were under £10 new. They also sold the Cosmic 35 a bakelite Russian camera which had a very good lens. A Smena 8 I think at around the same price as the Halina. Mine is still working well!!

 

[jesse1dog]

I think many were abandoned because the greasing of the helical was pretty diabolical - the one that came into my hands became impossible to focus - it just seized up. And at the price, repairs just were not viable.
Well done getting your to work - a labour of love!

jesse