Bell and Howell Auto 35

18percentgrey · Aug 26, 2020

I picked up a Bell and Howell Auto 35 camera at a flea market recently. It came with a interesting lens. A Canon 35 mm 3.5. This camera uses a fixed lens and has the option of screw on focal lengths 50,35,95 and125mm 3.5.Shot a test roll and was surprised at the sharpness.The 35mm (my favorite focal length)is the only one I have.Shutter speeds below 1/60 not working and auto f stops not working. Thinking about having it repaired. Anyone have any experience with this camera?

AgX · Aug 26, 2020

It is a veiled Canon EX

18percentgrey · Aug 26, 2020

Thank you. I guess the lens quality is equal to other Canon lenses of the time.

AgX · Aug 26, 2020

The idea behind that camera was to offer a TTL SLR with exchangable lenses at an economy price. To do so the lenses should be designed lacking what is possible. This was achived by all of them (4) sharing the rear cell and the helicoid. These two are integral part of the body, the shutter was a focal plane one anyway. The exchangable lenses thus only contained a front cell.

This approach meant the exchanging of lenses a bit more fiddly as with their other SLRs, as dials mist be set.
Furthermore was the optical design limited by them all having to share the rear cell.

The samples I saw offered, if I remembr right, were of the body plus standard lens only. But in such case the economical advantage for the user would have been lost to my understanding, as this only would be achieved with a greater kit.

Paul Howell · Aug 26, 2020

Strange, the Canon Museum lists the Canon version with a 1.8, so the B&H version is 1.5 stops slower. Still ought be a Tessar 4 element and sharp at 5.6 to 8. The closest in terms of function and features was the Kowa series, most were fixed 50 2.0 or 1.8 6 element with auxiliary lens that screw on the front element, the last version had interchangeable lens with 28 to 135 lens. Other difference was the Kowa uses a leaf shutter. I recall that the Canon was sold under a couple of different brands.

AgX · Aug 26, 2020

You mix up lenses: amongst the 4 lenses is a 50mm 1.8 and a 35mm 3.5 (yours).

shutterfinger · Aug 26, 2020

Bell and Howell is now a trade name and nothing more.

AgX · Aug 27, 2020

But for the respective Canon models it was only a trade name from the start.

(Furthermore your remark only applies for the photographic branch. In 1957 Bell & Howell acquired a manufacturer of envelope-filling machines and this branch is still alive.)

shutterfinger · Aug 27, 2020

I don't know what ads you see on TV in your part of the planet but over here there is a smorgasbord of solar lights, flashlights, animal repellents.
http://bellandhowell.com/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_&_Howell
links may not work outside North America.
I see flashlights like those from Bell &Howell with the Atomic name.
Its kinda like the Cosina CT1 Super that was marketed as Nikon FM10, Vivitar 4000s, Ricoh KR5 Super II and probably a few others.

AgX · Aug 27, 2020

I do not doubt that the brand (aside of being used for "true" products as indicated) is used in the US extensively for rebranding other products.

But as you hint at Germany, over here the brand is completely unknown. Thus worthless...

I myself got a B&H S8 camera, but bought in Belgium. I am not even sure whether B&H 8mm cameras where in the 60s on the west-german market at all.

Paul Howell · Aug 27, 2020

Bell and Howell made many models of 8 and 16mm movie cameras, some with sound, it was staple of the Air Force for many years in the 50s and 60s. After WWII they made the Foton with a 6 or 7 PFS spring driven motor drive interchangeable lens rangefinder, was just so expensive they only sold a handful.

Paul Howell · Aug 27, 2020

From Wikipedia

A rotary framer on 35mm film projectors in 1907
A 35mm film perforator in 1908
Professional 35mm motion-picture film cameras from 1909 on
Printing equipment used by motion-picture film laboratories since 1911
The Standard Cinematograph Type 2709 hand-cranked camera (used in early silent films, it was so expensive that only Charlie Chaplin and three other people owned one.[2] The rest were owned by studios)
Newsreel and amateur film cameras such as the Filmo (end of 1923) and Eyemo (1925), and Autoload EE (1956)
Military 16mm film gun camera TYPE N-6A
Regular-8 and Super-8 film cameras and projectors (all models)
16mm silent and sound projectors (all models); the famous Filmosound projectors dominated the market for many years.
Slide projectors (2" × 2")
35 mm filmstrip projectors.
Overhead presentation projectors (all models)

AgX · Aug 27, 2020

Bob, I and likely the majority of fellows know that. But that takes not away that the manufacturer or even the brand is unknown in parts of the world.

And even if a brand was known, in shortest time it may loose its effect: Who of the now 20years-old can begin anything with "Agfa". Concerning them the brand name is worthless.
In contrast "Polaroid" was lucky to have been saved as brand by pop(music)-culture where people kept on naming it.

Paul Howell · Aug 27, 2020

Your right, in the 60s Bell and Howell was well known, now it just put it name on a variety of products and directs markets them through television and the internet. It's last gasp of air was int he 70s when it was the U.S distributor for Canon.

Paul Howell · Aug 27, 2020

I stand corrected, there are 2 Bell and Howell, one the descendant of the camera company is a service and software company, the other BrandBellHowell out of New York sells rebranded products.

AnselMortensen · Aug 27, 2020

There's a long list of defunct photography equipment manufacturers & suppliers..
Graflex
Wollensak
Revere
Bell & Howell
Bausch & Lomb
GAF
3M
Haloid ( now Xerox)
De Jur (they left to go into the soup business)
Polaroid (as mentioned)
Edwal
Honeywell
Luminos
The list goes on....

AgX · Aug 27, 2020

Over the demise of the west-german camera manufacturers (less over the other photographic manufacturers) quite a lot was said.
The demise of the US counterparts much less seems to be known.

RLangham · Aug 28, 2020

AgX said:
Bob, I and likely the majority of fellows know that. But that takes not away that the manufacturer or even the brand is unknown in parts of the world.

And even if a brand was known, in shortest time it may loose its effect: Who of the now 20years-old can begin anything with "Agfa". Concerning them the brand name is worthless.
In contrast "Polaroid" was lucky to have been saved as brand by pop(music)-culture where people kept on naming it.

Concerning me at age 22, the brand name Agfa is less than worthless. I have only seen junk beginner cameras from the 50's and rebranded budget models with that name. I understand they made real cameras but I have never seen one.

And I wouldn't be so sure that your average 20-something knows the name Polaroid from pop music. The new Polaroid I-series or whatever is pretty ubiquitous in stores these days, and they understand instant photography pretty well owing to the recent popularity of the Fuji Instax--which is not a bad system by the way... better in my mind than some of the basic 600-series Polaroids.

AgX · Aug 28, 2020

RLangham said:
I have only seen junk beginner cameras from the 50's and rebranded budget models with that name [Agfa]. I understand they made real cameras but I have never seen one.

That is a real pity, as they made some design classics.
Concernig "junk" you are too harsh. At best those menicus lens cameras they offered at diferent formats over the years. But otherwise they made decent cameras. The majority though were budget consumer cameras. The wanted to sell film. Buty the also made thr milestone of very first program-autoexposure camera. From which a whole seriews evolved over the years. They alsp made some higher end cameras as some of their early SLRs and many of their 8mm cameras. They were one of largest camera manufacturers in Germany (No.2 ?)
They also had some extraordinary marketing ideas.

wiltw · Aug 28, 2020

AgX said:
It is a veiled Canon EX

Way back when, Bell & Howell was the official importer and distributor of Canon cameras in the USA. It was 'Bell & Howell Canon FX' engraved on the body in 1965 for example.

Similarly Beseler was the official importer and distributor of Topcon, and Honeywell was the official importer and distributor of Pentax in the USA, and both names were engraved on the bodies and sometimes had different model names from the Japan home market.

AgX · Aug 28, 2020

Same for Bogen.

But with Bell and Howell I never understood it, as by then Canon was well established in the USA as brand.

wiltw · Aug 28, 2020

AgX said:
Same for Bogen.

But with Bell and Howell I never understood it, as by then Canon was well established in the USA as brand.

It might simply be that Canon Japan had no organization in the USA at the time, and Bell & Howell undertook sales and service and parts inventory responsibility of Canon brand name cameras in the USA. So similar to Bogen and Beseler and Honeywell, they marketed the gear under their own brand name, for their name recognition in the US home market.

Owners of gear knew to contact Beseler and Bogen and Honeywell and Bell & Howell for support in the USA. In part, the Japanese brands carried a stigma of low quality goods in post-WWII years, and putting US names on the cameras lent legitimacy to the stuff more readily because the brands (Honeywell, Bell & Howell) were well established already in their minds. Finally the quality of the Japanese brands came to stand out on their own and as the Japanese companies estrablished branches in the USA, the importer/distributor vanished.

wiltw · Aug 28, 2020

AgX said:
That is a real pity, as they made some design classics.
Concernig "junk" you are too harsh. At best those menicus lens cameras they offered at diferent formats over the years. But otherwise they made decent cameras. The majority though were budget consumer cameras. The wanted to sell film. Buty the also made thr milestone of very first program-autoexposure camera. From which a whole seriews evolved over the years. They alsp made some higher end cameras as some of their early SLRs and many of their 8mm cameras. They were one of largest camera manufacturers in Germany (No.2 ?)
They also had some extraordinary marketing ideas.

Looking over a December 1964 edition of Modern Photography listing the new cameras for the new model year, Agfa was associated only with what i will term 'economy' class cameras priced no higher than about $160, mostly less than that. I must admit my only familiarity with the Agfa name in the US for the longest time was for film or darkroom supplies (photographic paper) and projectors and slide viewers, but not quality film cameras. No ads with Agfa name, no used gear advertised in Dec. 1964

This story from Wikipedia explains:

"Agfa (the former parent company, which merged with film manufacturer Gevaert in 1964) had for many years been well known as a producer of consumer-oriented photographic products including films, photographic papers and cameras. However, within a year of the sell-off, AgfaPhoto had filed for bankruptcy."

RLangham · Aug 28, 2020

AgX said:
That is a real pity, as they made some design classics.
Concernig "junk" you are too harsh. At best those menicus lens cameras they offered at diferent formats over the years. But otherwise they made decent cameras. The majority though were budget consumer cameras. The wanted to sell film. Buty the also made thr milestone of very first program-autoexposure camera. From which a whole seriews evolved over the years. They alsp made some higher end cameras as some of their early SLRs and many of their 8mm cameras. They were one of largest camera manufacturers in Germany (No.2 ?)
They also had some extraordinary marketing ideas.

I speak not of actual fact, but of my experience. Surely they did make something worthwhile, but going around to flea markets and antique stores in America, you find only the most basic cameras marked "Agfa" or for that matter "Ansco." Ich sag nur was ich gesehen habe.

And hey, a meniscus lens and a one speed shutter CAN do a lot. I have had pleasant experiences with simple cameras, but I have also had very bad ones. Basically there's a zen aspect to simple cameras... one must accept chance and imperfection before one can see the true beauty.

Overall the thing to remember is that a generation generally only has it's own experiences to know by.

MattKing · Aug 28, 2020

Don't forget that there are many cameras that were popular in some geographic areas, and almost unknown in others.

Bell and Howell Auto 35

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency