I had no idea I had these, probably a yard sale a few years ago?
Film dated 1990, 12 Magicubes blue "X" type (the good stuff?!?)
How to process the 126, no idea!
Found 126 film and flashcubes under a shelf at home!
-
A
- Thread starter jay moussy
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Nikkor lenses and Nikon accessories
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Trade 9 Leica IXMOO reloadable cans.
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
Sold Olympus XA
- Started by RoboRepublic
-
For Sale Mint Nikon AI-s Lenses
- Started by Barlow
Forum statistics
I had no idea I had these, probably a yard sale a few years ago?
Film dated 1990, 12 Magicubes blue "X" type (the good stuff?!?)
How to process the 126, no idea!
Some of those are the older electrically fired Flashcubes, rather than Magicubes, unless they've been reboxed.
The Kodacolor, dated 1990, should be C-41, so anywhere that takes 35 mm film should be able to handle it (if they know how to open the cartridge, that is). Film that old does require actual stabilizer, so you might want to plan to send it to a lab that can give it that little extra.
The Kodacolor, dated 1990, should be C-41, so anywhere that takes 35 mm film should be able to handle it (if they know how to open the cartridge, that is). Film that old does require actual stabilizer, so you might want to plan to send it to a lab that can give it that little extra.
If you process it yourself there is no difference from 35 mm C-41 color negative film as Donald said. The cartridge would usually be opened by brute force (twist and rip open). It the film is not exposed you might be better off selling it to collectors and getting fresh film instead. In my opinion it is not worth the effort provided it is a 12 exposure cartridge for a pretty basic 126-type camera.
By "actual" do you mean formalin? I wonder if it is still used in E-6 chemistry?
By "actual" do you mean formalin? I wonder if it is still used in E-6 chemistry?
That is correct but with a film that old ( 30+ years) I wouldn't be too worried about stabilizer or lack of it. Modern C41 (since around 2000) doesn't use the stabilizer (with formalin), it uses a final rinse.
Honestly, don't over think it. If you are going to shoot the film, then don't fret over the processing of it.
Yes, formalin-based stabilizer was needed for C-41 up until the early 2000s. If E-6 stabilizer still uses this, you might be okay using that for home processing -- or as suggested by @foc just don't sweat it and either get it processed however, or sell the unopened boxes on eBay and get one of the new 3D printed reloadable 126 cartridges to put your own 35 mm film into.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Messages
- 867
- Format
- 4x5 Format
Do you need a camera to use that film? -
Do you need a camera to use that film? -
THAT'S the $64,000 question! The OP says, "Got it at a yard sale", so I assume no 126 camera.
Assuming not, the best alternative is to sell it -- is it worth the time?
If a 126 camera is available, it's probably as bad as the film -- sell the camera with the film!
OP
OP
I do, I do, a 104 and an X15 or something like that!
I should sell the film and cubes, but never been an eBait seller before.
I should sell the film and cubes, but never been an eBait seller before.
Sell it here. Magicubes are irreplaceable.
Magicubes can be replaced via adapters and an electronic flash. Some are here https://www.instantphoto.eu/diy/big_flash.htm but there are more on my site.
If you are looking for a camera to use the film, get a good one, even the best are cheap now https://www.135compact.com/rollei_a26.htm
The 104 is a better camera, but the X15 will use the Magicubes (if you don't want to sell them off). The electric flashcubes will work on the 104, providing the battery terminals haven't been eaten by leaking batteries in the past six decades and the flash capacitor is still good (if it uses one).
What happened to the camera? I just split a kodak cartridge for bulk loads into an Instamatic 500.
35mm film functions well with an original 126 cart in the Instamatic 500 if you do a blank exposure for the extra advance. The 126 split cart is a bit less prone to light leaks than 110 but not perfect.
The lens is partially collapsible and gruesomely sharp. The Gossen selenium meter is *dead on* with an ISO 80 cassette, according to a modern Gossen Sixtomat F2. A great little camera if you can deal with the odd film format. You won't save any film given the fussy advance mechanism.... but you do get a smaller-than-FX frame with at least one row of sprockets.
Instamatic 500, built-in meter
Kentmere 100 @ 80, Xtol 1+1 11'
V800 negative scan
The lens is partially collapsible and gruesomely sharp. The Gossen selenium meter is *dead on* with an ISO 80 cassette, according to a modern Gossen Sixtomat F2. A great little camera if you can deal with the odd film format. You won't save any film given the fussy advance mechanism.... but you do get a smaller-than-FX frame with at least one row of sprockets.
Instamatic 500, built-in meter
Kentmere 100 @ 80, Xtol 1+1 11'
V800 negative scan
That is impressively sharp for 126 (which has long been blamed for not holding film flat enough for sharpness). I wonder how the Rollei 126 cameras fare? (The A26 has a Sonnar lens.) I could've bought one of those for a song a few years ago. I'm thinking of @Huss' experience with Rollei 110 cameras, of course.
Coincidentally, I just bought a Kodak X15 because it came with 5 Magicubes. Exposed film in the camera that I may develop next time I do colour developing.
Coincidentally, I just bought a Kodak X15 because it came with 5 Magicubes. Exposed film in the camera that I may develop next time I do colour developing.
I taped a portion of the original backing paper into the cartridge to help with flatness. I can see light scratching on the first few frames on the base side but they don't appear in scans, with this film at least. The transparent windows on the cart and camera were both foiled over, but no additional sealing added to the camera back, which is often need for reloaded 110.
The results are almost good enough to saw off the sprocket feeler and source some unperfed 35mm film... almost
Any of the obsolete, sprocketed Kodak film formats are a crapshoot when it comes to camera compatibility but the A26 is another good contender.
The results are almost good enough to saw off the sprocket feeler and source some unperfed 35mm film... almost
Any of the obsolete, sprocketed Kodak film formats are a crapshoot when it comes to camera compatibility but the A26 is another good contender.
I had a Zeiss Contaflex 126 (SLR) back in 1981 -- didn't keep it long, because I decided a 35 mm SLR would serve me better (still have the Spotmatic SP that I traded it against) -- but it seemed to do fine on sharpness, at least for 4x4 prints. Don't recall ever getting anything larger from it.
I have a Yashica EZMatic that I ground the advance feeler off. It is quite sharp. I think an issue with 126 film, however, was the fact that it would sit with the exposed frame (or the unexposed frame) in the film plane for days or months and the edges would curl. Obviously not a big deal for the exposed frame, but could throw the film out a bit on an unexposed frame.
I don't think many people got anything bigger than the small square snapshots.
My mother would mistakenly order 3.5x5 prints from the 126 film and end up with people's heads cut off.
MattKing
Moderator
I have a bunch of beautifully sharp 126 Kodachrome slides from my father. Some of them were shot in an Instamatic Reflex - a very good, and quite quirky version of the Retina Reflex camera.
The film flatness issue with 126 was something that could be mostly dealt with by engineering - resulting in a more expensive camera. It also limited the flexibility of the system. Because of the issue, and because it was square format, it was never going to replace 35mm.
It limited the potential uses of the format. It didn't make it unusable.
The film flatness issue with 126 was something that could be mostly dealt with by engineering - resulting in a more expensive camera. It also limited the flexibility of the system. Because of the issue, and because it was square format, it was never going to replace 35mm.
It limited the potential uses of the format. It didn't make it unusable.
It's been a long time since I've used 126 but I recall that the film transport and film plane are internal to the 126 cartridge, with film flatness completely a function of the cartridge. Perhaps camera engineering could better register the cartridge, film plane, and mitigate some of the slop, but a lot of the slop is inherent to that cartridge design. Or am I mistaken?
My guess has always been that crisp 126 images were more a function of aperture/DOF than camera design.
My guess has always been that crisp 126 images were more a function of aperture/DOF than camera design.
Last edited:
MattKing
Moderator
It is possible to add some tension to the film and backing paper - with a fairly complex camera design.
This isn't 126 specific, but how have the selenium meters held up in the various cameras, particularly in the Yashica which doesn't have an obvious full manual mode?
The selenium meters in the German cameras I own tend to be accurate or accurate enough for non-critical use, but the one in my Canon Demi S is essentially kaput and so I've tended to avoid them. I've had good luck with CdS meters in most models (Minolta Mg-s, Canon Dial-35, etc) when setting the film speed 1 stop faster to account for the difference between the 1.5v and 1.3v battery.
Don't do what I just did and try exposing and processing a cart of Kodacolor C-22. I'd stick with b&w processing with a strong anti-foggant if you want to recover any exposures.
Edit: This C-22 Kodacolor had a silver based antihalation layer which would further complicate b&w processing.
The selenium meters in the German cameras I own tend to be accurate or accurate enough for non-critical use, but the one in my Canon Demi S is essentially kaput and so I've tended to avoid them. I've had good luck with CdS meters in most models (Minolta Mg-s, Canon Dial-35, etc) when setting the film speed 1 stop faster to account for the difference between the 1.5v and 1.3v battery.
Don't do what I just did and try exposing and processing a cart of Kodacolor C-22. I'd stick with b&w processing with a strong anti-foggant if you want to recover any exposures.
Edit: This C-22 Kodacolor had a silver based antihalation layer which would further complicate b&w processing.
The Yashica meter is working. I think mostly because it was kept in the dark for most of its life. It seems hit or miss with those things - working or not working due to bad cell or bad connections - but there are stages of decay. I don't think it's very accurate.
The colour film is c41. It's Kodacolor II. I've always been disappointed by the colour film I've developed in b&w dev. I usually save found rolls for the end of life of my colour dev that I mix up. 9/10 times, the film is light fogged. A 126 film stands a better chance of that not being the case.
| 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:  |