Are there any MF still cameras that can shoot (Approx.) a 2.2.1 aspect ratio?

.

A
.

  • 1
  • 0
  • 129
Promethea Moth

D
Promethea Moth

  • 1
  • 0
  • 106
On The Nest

D
On The Nest

  • 3
  • 1
  • 148
Reception area - Spain

A
Reception area - Spain

  • 3
  • 3
  • 249

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
189,615
Messages
2,644,199
Members
97,308
Latest member
crockodile
Recent bookmarks
1
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
769
Location
Michigan, United States
Format
Multi Format
Though it'll definitely be some time before I can afford to buy myself another nice camera, I've been thinking I'd want some MF cameras that can get as close as possible to 70mm cinema aspect ratios. I've already determined I want something like a Fuji gx680 is about the same as a true imax aspect ratio, however, I don't know any cameras that would give me something closer to standard 70mm, or if any were ever made. if there are, I'd be genuinely interested to know about them.
 

ic-racer

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
14,765
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
If 4.5 x 9cm is too small, check out a 6x12cm camera.
Screen Shot 2024-02-11 at 4.55.24 PM.png
 

OAPOli

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
275
Location
Toronto
Format
Medium Format
Other options. a) 35mm film (via adapter) in horizontal travel and 220-compatible cameras (e.g. Pentax 67, Fuji 690). b) Mask the film back of vertical travel SLRs (Hasselblad, Bronica, etc) and fool the camera to make half-frames (via double-exposure and manual film advance). See example below from Bronica SQ-A. That'll be pretty close to a cinema frame.

20210327_142006(1) by Olivier, on Flickr

PS. GX680 shoots 6x8 frames i.e. 4:3 ratio
 

Dan Daniel

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Messages
2,440
Location
upstate New York
Format
Medium Format
There is the Fuji 6x17, which makes nominal ~6cm by 17cm negatives. I think they are in the $2000 area. And interchangeable lenses, I believe.

There are old Kodak cameras that used roll film of a wider width than 120. And made wonderfully long negatives. It isn't hard to add metal rails on each side of the image opening to make 120 film usable. Kodak 616 film, for example, is 4.25 inches long. So you could take one of the cameras that used this size, buy adapters to be able to use 120 film, mask off the image area, and get about a 2x4.25 image. On a good day, you could use just the film transport part of the camera and install a better lens and helical system on the front.

Here's a list of Kodak formats which might lead you to a good camera to start with.

 

benveniste

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
462
Format
Multi Format
While there were quite a few cameras made marketed as 6x13cm, as far as I know they were all stereo cameras. Croma makes a modestly priced 6x12 camera, but I know nothing about it save that it exists.
 

Eugen Mezei

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
451
Location
Transylvania
Format
Multi Format
about the same as a true imax aspect ratio, however, I don't know any cameras that would give me something closer to standard 70mm, or if any were ever made. if there are, I'd be genuinely interested to know about them.

Opposite to the rest of the German camera industry the producers for this specific frame format did not gather around Dresden but in Solingen: https://germanysolingen.com/collections/scheren
 

Romanko

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2021
Messages
463
Location
Sydney, Australia
Format
Medium Format
You can adapt a 6.5 x 11.5 cm folding camera (for type 116 / 616 film) to use 120 type film. This is probably the closest to your target ratio. Make your reduction mask a bit narrower than nominal 60 mm and you get the exact ratio. This is probably the cheapest option as type 116 folders can be found for less than $100. The adapters are inexpensive and the mask can be cut out of card paper.
 
OP
OP
TheGreatGasMaskMan
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
769
Location
Michigan, United States
Format
Multi Format
If 4.5 x 9cm is too small, check out a 6x12cm camera.

interesting- what are some of these camera's names?
Other options. a) 35mm film (via adapter) in horizontal travel and 220-compatible cameras (e.g. Pentax 67, Fuji 690). b) Mask the film back of vertical travel SLRs (Hasselblad, Bronica, etc) and fool the camera to make half-frames (via double-exposure and manual film advance). See example below from Bronica SQ-A. That'll be pretty close to a cinema frame.

20210327_142006(1) by Olivier, on Flickr

PS. GX680 shoots 6x8 frames i.e. 4:3 ratio

would a 6x7 adaptor be expensive and where could I get one?
You can adapt a 6.5 x 11.5 cm folding camera (for type 116 / 616 film) to use 120 type film. This is probably the closest to your target ratio. Make your reduction mask a bit narrower than nominal 60 mm and you get the exact ratio. This is probably the cheapest option as type 116 folders can be found for less than $100. The adapters are inexpensive and the mask can be cut out of card paper.

I've got a 1946 expired 116 verichrome I've wanted to use for something, but the problem is finding a camera that doesn't have damaged bellows. plus, finding 120 adaptors isn't that difficult
 

Oldwino

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
552
Location
California
Format
Multi Format

Kino

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
6,848
Location
Orange, Virginia
Format
Multi Format

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
11,305
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
Any 6x7 camera that takes 220 can feed and advance 35 mm and (if you crop off the sprocket holes) give approximate 24x67 to 24x70 mm frame. A mask in the viewfinder will aid in framing. It's a bit wider than 2.2:1 in fact; you're closely in the range of 2.8:1. With an RB67 or Pentax, you can use a wide angle lens (I have a 50 mm for my RB67) to get a pretty wide panoramic frame.

Even a 6x6 will give you 24x56 = 2.3:1, but most 220 capable 6x6 cameras are vertical travel...

The 220 backs for RB67 are quite reasonable since 220 film went out of production (aside from home-rollers and Shanghai). If you bulk load your film, you can splice on a length of leader material to stand in for the paper header on 220, take up to a second cassette, and arrange for the film to come off the supply side spool (blue painter's tape apparently does this naturally?!), and be able to reload in the field while still getting 20 shots on a roll.
 

Eugen Mezei

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
451
Location
Transylvania
Format
Multi Format
The 220 backs for RB67 are quite reasonable since 220 film went out of production (aside from home-rollers and Shanghai).

Shanghai still produces 220 format? Where can I get it? I never considered Shanghai, as I prefer controlled quality. But if I could get 220 than I would buy even Shanghai.
 

Romanko

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2021
Messages
463
Location
Sydney, Australia
Format
Medium Format
But if I could get 220 than I would buy even Shanghai.

Kodak Aerocolor is available in 220 format from ReflxLab:
 

Eugen Mezei

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
451
Location
Transylvania
Format
Multi Format
Kodak Aerocolor is available in 220 format from ReflxLab:
Very interesting. They are on the other side of the pond, but I contact them, maybe somehow I could get some rolls.
 
OP
OP
TheGreatGasMaskMan
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
769
Location
Michigan, United States
Format
Multi Format
Shanghai still produces 220 format? Where can I get it? I never considered Shanghai, as I prefer controlled quality. But if I could get 220 than I would buy even Shanghai.

just be wary they're known for quality control issues- I got a 127 gp3 where the backing paper was wound backwards
 

Eugen Mezei

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
451
Location
Transylvania
Format
Multi Format
just be wary they're known for quality control issues- I got a 127 gp3 where the backing paper was wound backwards
Thank you for the link.
Backwards as the black side outwards?
 

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
11,305
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
Yes, Shanghai appears to have poorly trained line workers and little quality control -- but the actual emulsion seems quite good (if soft -- but then so is Fomapan), and they produce 127, 620, and 220 with new, fresh film and backing paper. Their prices are also good. If you can tolerate a little "lottery" in terms of a good roll or bad roll, they are a valid source for these obsolete formats. If you're primarily a recreational user, you should be fine; if you're serious about your image quality, you may have to accept that 220 is done...
 
Joined
Jan 31, 2020
Messages
1,062
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Just ran across this for the first time. Looks like it wouldn't be too hard to get them to take on making a different aspect ratio? It's just stretching in one dimension-


These look well designed, apart from the viewfinders which I find dubious. Being cheap/poor, I'd try printing something myself or having one of the published designs printed and putting in some diy work. Well that or the route described above, feeding a 120 SLR 135 film. A somewhat affordable candidate not mentioned above might be the pentacon six and Kiev equivalent.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
48,289
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Please define the 2.2.1 aspect ratio? Ratios use the ':'
 
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