• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

110/16mm Camera Image Quality

Latest Gallery

Tied to the dock

D
Tied to the dock

  • 4
  • 0
  • 59
Running in the Snow

H
Running in the Snow

  • 1
  • 2
  • 72

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
203,082
Messages
2,849,599
Members
101,649
Latest member
fat-totoro-cat
Recent bookmarks
0
Their claim of "world's smallest pocket camera" is a base canard. The Minox had been out for more than two decades by the time that ad ran, was about the same length and much narrower and thinner. And had a better lens. And held more exposures.

I don't recall for certain, but I think the Minolta 16, Edixa 16, and Rollei 16 were also out before the 110 cartridge debuted in the late 1960s (yep, just looked it up -- Edixa in 1960, Minolta in 1962, and Rollei in 1966). Edixa and Rollei loaded like a 35mm, but the Minolta used a drop-in cartridge that was designed to be reloadable. And they all had better lenses than the Pocket 30 (the Pocket 50 and 60 were a different breed).
 
Might also look for an adapter to mount AG-1 bulbs -- some rotated and held four bulbs, others held a single. Same bulb that was in the standard Flashcubes, and similar reflector size, so should be okay with that Minox, but much more available.
 
Minox B and C flash module uses the AG-1 bulbs. Minox changed the module to use cubes with the LX. Not sure if the flash modules are interchangeable.
 
Donald Qualls said:
Their claim of "world's smallest pocket camera" is a base canard. The Minox had been out for more than two decades by the time that ad ran, was about the same length and much narrower and thinner. And had a better lens. And held more exposures.

I don't recall for certain, but I think the Minolta 16, Edixa 16, and Rollei 16 were also out before the 110 cartridge debuted in the late 1960s (yep, just looked it up -- Edixa in 1960, Minolta in 1962, and Rollei in 1966). Edixa and Rollei loaded like a 35mm, but the Minolta used a drop-in cartridge that was designed to be reloadable. And they all had better lenses than the Pocket 30 (the Pocket 50 and 60 were a different breed).
Click to expand...
Kodak introduced the 110 size cartridge and cameras, model 20 through 60 in in late 1972. Before that time 16mm film cameras were not mainstream, although Minolta worked mightily to promote their 16mm cameras and probably had the major market share in that film size up to that time.
Kodak had already had considerable success with the 'Kodapak' 126 cameras launched in 1963 and wanted to build on that all the while using 1/2 the film that 126 used.
Kodak at the time was the photographic businesses '800 pound gorilla' and could make (or break) a film format, at least in the non professional consumer market. Just look at any 1960's era news photo of tourists gathered on a Florida beach to watch a Cape Canaveral rocket launch. There is a sea of people holding cameras and, from kids to moms a lot are holding simple 126 cameras.
I was a young 20 something in the early 70's, working in a camera store (remember those) and the introduction of 110 hit like a bomb. They sold like hot cakes and even the photographic press were wringing their hands at the time, wondering if this new format would at least partially kill off sales of regular 35mm cameras. It turned out that no such thing happened. During the remaining of that decade established camera makers came out with more compact 35mm cameras with image quality that 110 just could not approach. The format stayed popular with the kids and moms and was ok for the then standard 3.5X5 inch 'album sized prints' but with the crop of compact 35's more discerning photographers ignored 110 as strictly 'kid stuff'.
 
And in a way, that's too bad. The better 110 cameras had a frame that was a full quarter of a 35mm, good triplet or even four-element lenses, a few had rangefinders (even at introduction) -- and later there were the ones with a slide-in tele lens and rangefinder (Tele-Ektra line). The top models had good auto exposure, and though they used a proprietary battery, Kodak supported that very well (it was available practically anywhere you could buy 110 film for as long as the cameras were sold, and a good while after). IMO, the only bad thing was an inevitability of Kodak marketing: lock-in to a cartridge designed to be destroyed to process the film (same for the K battery, but that at least can be worked around without tools that wouldn't be along for another forty years).

There were always cheap locked-in consumer cameras -- the first Kodak was one of those, fixed-everything, paper negatives, send it back to EK for processing, and then reload it and send it back with your prints -- but Kodak always sold good cameras alongside the "you're too dumb to know the difference" junk, and even their "toys" were good enough to produce a print that could go in the family album.

If the 60 had a manual film speed control, it would do everything I want from a 110 (it'll work with unperforated, unbacked film if you can reload the cartridge).
 
ciniframe said:
Kodak introduced the 110 size cartridge and cameras, model 20 through 60 in in late 1972. Before that time 16mm film cameras were not mainstream, although Minolta worked mightily to promote their 16mm cameras and probably had the major market share in that film size up to that time.
Kodak had already had considerable success with the 'Kodapak' 126 cameras launched in 1963 and wanted to build on that all the while using 1/2 the film that 126 used.
Kodak at the time was the photographic businesses '800 pound gorilla' and could make (or break) a film format, at least in the non professional consumer market. Just look at any 1960's era news photo of tourists gathered on a Florida beach to watch a Cape Canaveral rocket launch. There is a sea of people holding cameras and, from kids to moms a lot are holding simple 126 cameras.
I was a young 20 something in the early 70's, working in a camera store (remember those) and the introduction of 110 hit like a bomb. They sold like hot cakes and even the photographic press were wringing their hands at the time, wondering if this new format would at least partially kill off sales of regular 35mm cameras. It turned out that no such thing happened. During the remaining of that decade established camera makers came out with more compact 35mm cameras with image quality that 110 just could not approach. The format stayed popular with the kids and moms and was ok for the then standard 3.5X5 inch 'album sized prints' but with the crop of compact 35's more discerning photographers ignored 110 as strictly 'kid stuff'.
Click to expand...

I used 110 as a kid in the late 80's early 90's. I even had a 110 film cassette that was really a radio. Wish I kept it. My buddy had a rocket that had a 110 camera in it.
 
Cholentpot said:
My buddy had a rocket that had a 110 camera in it.
Click to expand...

The Estes Camroc II (the first Camroc used custom-cut circular film, included a cutter). They sold that well into the 1990s, until digital cameras got small and cheap enough to ride on Estes engines.
 
Donald Qualls said:
The Estes Camroc II (the first Camroc used custom-cut circular film, included a cutter). They sold that well into the 1990s, until digital cameras got small and cheap enough to ride on Estes engines.
Click to expand...

I think we had the AstroCam and would jam in larger engines than it was supposed to take. Melting off fins as it went on it's merry way.
 
I agree with Donald about the 110 cartridges. Not being easy or even intended to be reloaded kind of killed it for me in 16mm, even back in the 90’s when 110 was still readily available and cheap in 3 packs.
If I were going to design a 16mm camera from the ground up I’d choose a Minolta cartridge but without the bridge between the feed and take-up. That would increase the freedom in film gate size and film flatness. And, Minolta cartridges that have broken bridges that are completely removed can still be used in their cameras.
I would choose a 12x16mm frame size (personal choice, I like the 3:4 ratio), use a 4 element 25mm f2.8 lens with front element focusing, (while front element is not ideal it would massively simplify focusing design). The control layout would would resemble a Rollei 35, with shutter speed dial on the right and aperture dial left of the lens. The bright frame finder would fold for compactness, there would be a standard PC flash connection, shutter release tapped for standard mechanical cable release, 1/4-20 tripod tap, 22.5 mm filter size with filters and close up lenses contracted to Hoya. Thumb wheel advance, single strap lug, ......what else.....oh yeah, I’d need to be a millionaire several times over to develop this and not have a profit motive but be a passion project.
 
I'm with you, mostly. I'd rather have a 12x18 frame, don't think it would be that hard to manage unit focusing (ideally with an RF). A two-cassette system with identical cassettes would be my ideal, but I'm not sure how that would work with single perf film, and ideally it should at least work with both single and double; better if it doesn't need perfs at all (and we're back to Minolta -- or Kiev, with the smaller spool and thus larger capacity).
 
ciniframe said:
I agree with Donald about the 110 cartridges. Not being easy or even intended to be reloaded kind of killed it for me in 16mm, even back in the 90’s when 110 was still readily available and cheap in 3 packs.
Click to expand...

How much did 110 film cost back then? Now a 3 pack is $19.90 or $6.63 for one. Using an inflation calculator, that makes one roll cost $3.27 in 1990.

It seems to me that 110 film still is cheap today. As is all film when you take inflation into account.
 
I guess I should clarify -- I can still use my Minolta 16 format cameras, 25 years after they dropped the film, because Minolta designed the cartridge to be reusable (and the Kiev copy is, well, a copy, so it is, too -- not to mention the Soviet Union you used to have to buy 35mm film as a loose strip and load it into a cassette yourself). If Lomography stopped making 110 film tomorrow, we'd be in the same boat as Polaroid Type 100 pack film users -- competing for any remaining stock and not knowing in advance how well it's been stored. With Minolta 16, as long as I can buy film -- 16mm cine (single or double perf, or even double 8), 35mm, or 120 (the latter two to be recut) I can keep shooting the cameras that use this cassette. The same is true to a slightly lesser degree for Rollei 16 (depends on at least single perf) and Edixa 16 (hope you got a takeup spool with your camera, but the supply cassettes are fairly common and last forever).

Cost isn't the big factor (though it rankles a little that 135-36 Superia Extra costs less than 110-24 Lomography Tiger -- and is both easier and cheaper to have processed if you don't do your own). Availability is. When 110 cartridges are gone, unless someone steps up with a 3D printed cartridge and a good set of instructions for bypassing the film feeler on any given camera, those cameras are done (no matter how good they are).

At least it's *possible* to 3D print a 110 cartridge (probably). Make all the shells you like, they won't help you for shooting your Polaroid 350 -- best you can manage is to hack the camera to take sheet film (and there are so many choices in 3x4).
 
Great use of color, Huss, and they convey the sense of freedom one gets when using a small camera.
 
Donald Qualls said:
I'm with you, mostly. I'd rather have a 12x18 frame, don't think it would be that hard to manage unit focusing (ideally with an RF). A two-cassette system with identical cassettes would be my ideal, but I'm not sure how that would work with single perf film, and ideally it should at least work with both single and double; better if it doesn't need perfs at all (and we're back to Minolta -- or Kiev, with the smaller spool and thus larger capacity).
Click to expand...
Concerning using a non bridge Minolta cartridge I was trying to think ahead and cover as many bases as I could. A non bridge Minolta cartridge could still be used with all the Minolta 16 cameras out there and allow leeway in the film gate size of a new 16mm camera.
About unit focusing, interestingly the Kiev 30 has unit focusing, pretty good for a inexpensive camera. The 12x18mm format is a 2:3 ratio and exactly 1/4 area of full frame 35mm. My preference for 12x16mm, a 3:4 ratio is only a personal preference. Probably from all those years when 35mm half frame was my favorite camera. I don’t print big, largest from a half frame neg would be 6x8inch on 8x10 paper although I have occasionally printed 11X14 from half frame.
Hess has made a good point about the price of 110. Given the rate of inflation and relatively low demand compared to films hay day it really is not any more expensive than it ever was. The caveat on that point for myself, and Donald too I’d expect, is that I already have a dozen Minolta cartridges and I can readload them with B&W for 80 cents per roll, based on buying Eastman 7222 100 ft. roll from B&H. If I wanted to shoot color negative it would be a little over $2 a roll, slitting down Kodak ColorPlus in 35mm, wasteful as that would be. So, being an inveterate cheap skate, you just know my preferred option regarding film.
 
Last edited:
ciniframe said:
If I wanted to shoot color negative it would be a little over $2 a roll, slitting down Kodak ColorPlus in 35mm, wasteful as that would be. So, being an inveterate cheap skate, you just know my preferred option regarding film.
Click to expand...

Easy enough to slit from 120 instead of 35mm. Sure, 120 is all "professional" emulsions, and costs more per roll than 135-36 -- but I can get six "barely long enough" reloads from a 120 roll if I strip off the edge markings on both sides. Eight at about half a millimeter under width if I leave the edge markings on (load the original roll edge toward the cartridge bridge). And eight buck roll of Portra 400 becomes a $1 reload with the right slitter and some care loading, or $1.35 if you don't take a chance on edge markings in your image area.
 
Cholentpot said:
I still haven't got my paws on one of these A110 cameras. I guess the ones who know keep snatching them up.
Click to expand...

Create a search for one on ebay, and you will be notified the moment one appears.

It is kinda weird that the Rollei A110 uses flash cubes for such a sophisticated little camera (spd meter, good shutter speed range etc), and I took a gamble that the flash attachment thing would work.
But it is so basic, I figured why not buy a bunch o cubes? Didn't really make much sense to buy a couple as the shipping cost becomes too large a percentage of that.

I fired off two shots of my dogs with the cube just to see if it triggers - it does. It's not a very good design though as that flash bleeds off/leaks around the camera to residual blast you in the eye! It's obviously not the full strength of the flash, but more than is comfortable..
Just finished my first cartridge of Mistaken Identity - which happened to be Lomo Purple. Never shot that before so this should be interesting.
(The deal with Mistaken Identity is you don't know if you're going to get Metropolis or Purple when you open the actual sealed package. It was discounted so I was all in!)
 
Huss said:
Create a search for one on ebay, and you will be notified the moment one appears.

It is kinda weird that the Rollei A110 uses flash cubes for such a sophisticated little camera (spd meter, good shutter speed range etc), and I took a gamble that the flash attachment thing would work.
But it is so basic, I figured why not buy a bunch o cubes? Didn't really make much sense to buy a couple as the shipping cost becomes too large a percentage of that.

I fired off two shots of my dogs with the cube just to see if it triggers - it does. It's not a very good design though as that flash bleeds off/leaks around the camera to residual blast you in the eye! It's obviously not the full strength of the flash, but more than is comfortable..
Just finished my first cartridge of Mistaken Identity - which happened to be Lomo Purple. Never shot that before so this should be interesting.
(The deal with Mistaken Identity is you don't know if you're going to get Metropolis or Purple when you open the actual sealed package. It was discounted so I was all in!)
Click to expand...

Forgot about this feature. Thanks.
 
Not sure about where to mention this, but this thread seems as good as any. The Film Photography Project is selling 3D printed Minolta style 16 cartridges. I emailed them and asked if they were felted and they said no but hadn’t had any reports of light leaks. But 3D printing leaves ridges so not sure how film is not scratched when it goes through the slots. Maybe they smooth the film channels but can’t tell from the pictures.
They mentioned some users were applying their own felt.
 
I've got plenty of Minolta/Kiev cartridges for the foreseeable future -- but it's good to know they're offering them (since neither Minolta nor the Kiev factory will ever make any more).

If they're printing them with PLA filament, they can probably get them smooth enough not to scratch straight off the machine (if they're resin printed, they can be better than that). There'll be a continuous line for each layer around the inside of each chamber, and the film will tend to unroll, so the base side will ride on that surface and the emulsion won't contact anything in the cartridge. I don't know how they'd keep light from entering the chambers via the film channels, though, but if you have coffin cases, and load in subdued light (like they're always telling us to do), you shouldn't see much fogging past the first couple frames inside the chamber anyway -- and if you wind to 0 instead of trying to squeeze a couple extra, then wind all the way through after 20, the film will protect the images.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:
Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom