Agfa film identification?

[Mike Briggs]

Hello

Can anyone identify the film in the attached image? Agfa, obviously, but with a square image and having single perforations. The film is 35mm high, 20 images to a roll, and dates from the 1970s.
It would be interesting to know the camera models that might have been able to shoot it too.

Thanks!

 

[Adrian D]

Could it be the old 126 cartridge film format? As used by Kodak Instamatics and similar?

 

[snapguy]

Agfa, like Kodak, would come up from time to time with their own film formats. This might be their Rapid format of about that era. They always were trying to make casettes that were easier to load. Wirh the rapid you needed two casettes for it to work.

 

[Ian C]

Except for the claimed 20-frame length, and the apparently shorter frame, this matches 828 roll film.

828 Paper-backed roll film was 35mm width, single hole on one edge only per frame for film registration, 8 frames per roll.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/828_film

 

[Mike Briggs]

Thanks for the ideas.

I should have done it initially, but I've now also measured the exposure size - it's 28.5mm x 29.5mm - which is maybe a little large for the 126 (which I note is nominally 26x26mm, but actually 28x28 mm)? Though as it was popular, and as the perforations seem to be in the right place relative to the frame, it looks a good match.

There are several sets of transparencies that match this format, none with more than 20 exposures, which would also be compatible with 126 film. But I guess it could be something specific to Agfa - though it looks as though the Rapid system required film with perforations top and bottom (http://www.lomography.com/magazine/229113-how-to-reload-an-old-agfa-rapid-cartridge-with-35mm-film).

 

[Meyer Trioplan]

My guess would be 126 as well.

I've got a few 6x9 cameras that are a little "generous" with the image size compared to others, so I'd guess it could well be possible that some models of 126 camera may have encroached the official measurements by a millimeter or two.

 

[Xmas]

My guess would be 126 as well.

I've got a few 6x9 cameras that are a little "generous" with the image size compared to others, so I'd guess it could well be possible that some models of 126 camera may have encroached the official measurements by a millimeter or two.

!26 film used a cartridge which controlled size of film (and registration!) it would have been possible to use larger (or smaller) than 35mm if you wanted to, providing the cartridge outer size was within tolerances.

The single 'sprocket' hole is an indication the 126 cameras sensed the sprocket hole as a next frame in correct place.

If you have a nice 126 and Kodak had two then go Lomo...

http://www.lomography.com/magazine/44732-recargando-tu-carrete-de-126-con-pelicula-de-35-mm

 

[MartinP]

It looks like 126. Used by umpteen families (including mine and the grandparents!) as their family camera in the 70's and early eighties. The only drawback was the lack of a film pressure-plate to keep the film flat. 126 seemed noticeably better than 110 at the same price level of camera and developing, but this is because the image area is much larger of course - nothing magical about it.

The 828 was rectangular format and much older than the date mentioned by the OP.

 

[railwayman3]

Definitely 126....I've just checked and I have some similar transparencies and negs in front of me here, which match in all respects. The white edges were part of a pre-exposed "frame" around all the shots on the film...I've read that this was done to avoid large areas of unexposed film when it came to processing, as this could exhaust the various chemical baths at different rates. Maybe PE or someone with lab experience could confirm?

I'm sure that the slight oversize of the image compared with the nominal 26x26mm is to allow for small variations in registration when the negs are printed, or the transparencies put into slide mounts.

Agfa Rapid film used standard 35mm perfs, with the film being wound from one special cassette/cartridge to the other (I think that I still have a cheapy Rapid camera somewhere in the attic!). It was a much less popular format than the Instamatic 126, but was arguably better in using a pressure plate and standard 35mm perfs, and also a square image.

 

[Mike Briggs]

Thanks everyone for your input - good to have the answer

 

[cmacd123]

yep 126. The 126 size film did come with pre-exposed borders but AGFA may have made them Generous to avoid having a white border on a slide. The black borders on the top and bottom are from the cartridge and or Camera opening.