what were the markings on the cartridge. Kodak also uses a distinct spool on their one time use cameras. (with a gear design)Recently developed a roll of 800-speed film out of a fresh Fuji waterproof disposable and was surprised to discover that it is the same Kodak 800-speed film stock as found
Very interesting, if nothing else.
Can you post a picture of the negative?
Usually the rebate code on Fuji and Kodak films will tell what it is.
The cartridge is not a standard Kodak disposable camera style, but Fuji could easily have bought film and finished it themselves. .
Well ...This seems almost impossible. But Fuji has Ilford coating film. It's a brave new world!
Very good point!Well ...
Why do you assume that the Fuji disposable cameras come from the same business entity that makes the Fuji film?
That is intended to be a rhetorical question.
Here's a quick scan from the beginning of the roll. I believe the cassette spool had no notches in it. Upon closer inspection the base seems to be acetate rather than polyester but I'm not totally sure.
So you have identified the edge markings to be a Lomography marketed film. Either as has been surmised, Fujifilm may no longer be in the business of making this camera. Something seems out of place.The film is CN 800-1. A quick google search describes this as Lomography 800. Lomography doesn't manufacture film.
Fujifilm makes lots of things that have nothing to do with film. They could very easily be making this camera, but putting into it the film that they can most profitably use.Either as has been surmised, Fujifilm may no longer be in the business of making this camera
IIRC some of the Fujifilm US operations that are being phased out involved single use camera production. Could be they just got whatever was available. Seems more likely that the OP mixed his films.Fujifilm makes lots of things that have nothing to do with film. They could very easily be making this camera, but putting into it the film that they can most profitably use.
The big mystery is why would a Fujifilm camera be loaded with Lomo branded Kodak film?? Maybe Kodak sent the wrong edge printing to whoever makes Quicksnap. Or the original poster got his rolls mixed up?The Lomography branded film is thought to be Kodak Max 800, as used in Kodak single use cameras.
Another possibility is, maybe Lomography buys 800 speed CN film from the lowest bidder. Maybe one batch from Kodak the next from Fujifilm. This is a great story, thanks for the detective work.I can confirm that the roll did indeed come out of a fresh Quicksnap purchased recently from Unique Photo, but I am as baffled as everyone else about how it got there! I removed the roll and shot it in a "real" camera. This is what the cassette looked like although I didn't get a picture of the top of the spool before tossing the empty cassette. I am trying to get my hands on some more Underwater Quicksnaps for further research.
too late to edit my earlier post, the clue to me is the serial number of the roll of film is between shot 1 and 2, while Fuji puts their serial numbers before shot one.FWIW, that would be about what I would expect of the film if it was packaged using Kodak equipment.
.
Here's the loaded cartridge I pulled from one of the cameras.
View attachment 283086 View attachment 283087
Photography is not as big a part of my life as some of our members, but still..........i have never heard this before.Looks like bad news, as Superia X-Tra 800 is the better film compared to Ultramax 800 from Kodak (which is not bad, but simply not as good as X-Tra 800).
That is definitely Kodak. You can clearly identify it by the huge amount of all the black dust particles which are spread all over the film cassette. It is typical for all 35mm Kodak films.
And if you look inside the cassette, you will find these particles there, too.
These dust particles are from the velvet from the slit. Kodak is using an inferior material compared to all other manufacturers. Therefore you don't have this dust problem with 35mm films from Fujifilm, Ilford, Adox, Foma.
My local lab - Kodak customer for over 70 years - is permanently complaining about it: The velvet is crumbling and spreading the particles all over in the lab. Much more lab and machine cleaning is necessary because of that.
To avoid having all this dust in my 35mm cameras (and facing possible shutter failure because of accumulated dust in the long run) for years now I am cleaning all my 35mm Kodak film cassettes before I load them into the camera. A bit nerve-wrecking of course, but much much better than any camera damage which could occur of that in the future.
By the way, of course I also contacted my national Kodak office and reported that. They confirmed the problem. That was some years ago. But nothing has changed since then.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?