picturetaker
Established
Do any of the old Kodak folders (1910-1940) qualify as a medium format camera? Certainly the film is big enough at least by looking at the spools. But does it depend of the camera design/construction as well?
And does anyone have experience of know of site that gives info on the rejuvenation of an old folder? Manythanks
And does anyone have experience of know of site that gives info on the rejuvenation of an old folder? Manythanks
P
pshinkaw
Guest
Medium format is just that, a film format. I fit's big enough it's medium. If it's larger, it's large format.
I think most people consider MF to start at 6X4.5 cm. and go to about 6X9 or 9X12. Ther are difference of opinion of course.
There are also many sites to research this. An interesting one is:
http://www.certo6.com/
But the most information in one place is at:
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/index.html
Have fun.
-Paul
I think most people consider MF to start at 6X4.5 cm. and go to about 6X9 or 9X12. Ther are difference of opinion of course.
There are also many sites to research this. An interesting one is:
http://www.certo6.com/
But the most information in one place is at:
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/index.html
Have fun.
-Paul
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
You might look into this site for information: http://www.kyphoto.com/cgi-bin/forum/discus.cgi
A medium format camera qualifies purely on the size of the film it takes. It doesn't have anything to do with the type of camera. So you could have a box camera, TLR or folder, any of which would be deemed an MF camera if the film it takes is medium format. Kodak made a lot of MF folding cameras, but many of them took obsolete formats, like 828 or 620. I'm not exactly sure how those formats differ from 120.
A medium format camera qualifies purely on the size of the film it takes. It doesn't have anything to do with the type of camera. So you could have a box camera, TLR or folder, any of which would be deemed an MF camera if the film it takes is medium format. Kodak made a lot of MF folding cameras, but many of them took obsolete formats, like 828 or 620. I'm not exactly sure how those formats differ from 120.
S
Scarpia
Guest
Kodak 828 was 35mm film on a roll with paper backing and I think only took 8 photos per roll. 620 was identical to 120 except for having a much narrower spool. Kodak developed it in order to make folders narrower and more pocketable. It is still available from B&H respooled from 120 and 5 times the cost as well as only in 2 or 3 varieties.
Kurt M.
Kurt M.
oftheherd
Veteran
I have seen several times, instructions on how to convert 120 spools to 620 spools. Looked easy enough, but I have never tried it. There were some other odd formats also, such as 616, which was a little wider than 120, and in sheet film (not what you were asking about). Some of those old cameras make fun cameras to tote around and take photos with. Some of them had very sharp lenses, others so so, but giving a flavor to photos not easy to get any other way.
Repairs are another issue. I think some of the members here might to that. Certainly they could check/repair shutters/diaphrams. You need to check the bellows with a penlight inside them in a darkened room. If they need to be repaired, again, there are people who do that. If you don't want to try anyone in the forum, you could google camera repair and then contact those who turn up.
Good luck. I am partial to a couple of old folders I have in both 35mm and MF.
Repairs are another issue. I think some of the members here might to that. Certainly they could check/repair shutters/diaphrams. You need to check the bellows with a penlight inside them in a darkened room. If they need to be repaired, again, there are people who do that. If you don't want to try anyone in the forum, you could google camera repair and then contact those who turn up.
Good luck. I am partial to a couple of old folders I have in both 35mm and MF.
VictorM.
Well-known
Here's a good site for Kodak info: http://kodak.3106.net/. Be sure to read about the Duo 620. Kodak folders varied from early 20th century point & shoot to professional quality roll film cameras. Most of the more recent models took 620 film, but some took 120. My interest in folders started a few years ago when I bought a couple of Retina IIa parts cameras and made on working camera. Then I discovered there's medium format folders that aren't much bigger than a Retina. The rest is history...
VictorM.
Well-known
And David Richert has an illustrated example of renovating an Agfa folder: http://www.davidrichert.com/AGFA rebuild/agfa.htm.
picturetaker
Established
Great information - Thanks youi
Abbazz
6x9 and be there!
KoNickon said:
IMHO, "medium format" or "large format" is not only a matter of film size. In the modern acception of the term, a medium format camera is a camera designed to use primarily roll film of any size larger than 35mm.
Nothing to do with the size: if your camera takes 6x9 pictures on sheet film or glass plates, it is a large format camera. If it takes 8.25x14cm postcard sized pictures on 122 film (like the 3A Kodak folders), it is still a medium format camera.
Nothing to do with camera movements neither: a roll film Mamiya Super 23 is capable of some film plane movements, but it is a medium format camera, because it is normally equipped with a roll film back, even if you could attach a accessory sheet film back. OTOH, a 2x3 Linhof Technika or Speed Graphic is a large format camera, because those press or technical cameras were initially equipped sheet film backs, even if you could use a roll film adapter.
My .02
Abbazz
Bryce
Well-known
Here's another look at things- All those funny number film sizes... 120, 127, etc are originally Kodak stock #'s. Present day (and anything like recent ) medium format cameras all use 120, 220 or both. 220 is just a modification to 120 to get more frames per roll. Anyhow, Kodak folding cameras came in varying sizes, one of which was the camera for which 120 film was designed! The other sizes became obsolete as Kodak dropped the cameras for them. If your camera takes 120 film, you are in business!