BigMackCam
Member
1. No stress on the mechanism with 36 exp rolls. Just make sure when you reach the end you leave it be, and don't try to get one more shot! Pretty much like with any camera.
I have had films that I bought from Ultrafineonline that they wound way too tight, and they were hard to advance but that was a long time before I bought this Kodak, and they are long since gone.
2. No idea. But a good idea re. the ND filter.
3. A couple of times when I use the flash, then turn it off, it will discharge some on the next shot. This is because the moment a shot is taken the camera recharges the flash and it seems the flash on/off switch only is there to charge the flash. Once off, if the flash is already charged it will still fire. it's a quirk but doesn't bother me as the flash is weak but it still can happen. - just tested it - turn the flash on to let it charge. Turn the flash off. Take a pic, flash goes off
4. No idea, but it's a pretty good lens considering. It is sharpest between 8-15 ft it seems.
This camera isn't cheap, even though it is "delicately" made, but honestly there is nothing like it that you can buy new. There are no other new half frame cameras sold.
Edit- to prevent unintentional flash pics, once the ready light for the flash has illuminated, turn the flash off. The flash will still happen when you take the shot, but will not happen on the shot after unless you turn it back on and let it charge up again.
That's good to know re the 36exp rolls, flash behaviour and advice - thank you!
Regarding the lens and "zone" of sharpness / depth-of-field, that makes sense... Assuming the designers aimed to achieve acceptable focus for the widest range of distances, I'm guessing the focal distance is around 8 - 9ft, given the focal length, f/9.5 aperture and format.
I do think it's a little odd they chose f/9.5 as the aperture
I've found the Ultra Wide and Slim's f/11 to be pretty much an ideal compromise for a 22mm fixed-focus lens on 35mm format, both for depth-of-field and - with the 1/125s shutter speed - lots of flexibility with just ISO 400 film in all but the brightest situations. An f/9.5 aperture for the same focal length on a smaller format seems a bit of an odd choice... unless they were keen to allow use of lower sensitivity film due to exaggerated grain when half-frame photos are enlarged? Anyway, I'm probably over-thinking this
Given what most people - myself included - use half-frame for, it's fine... and the sample photos look great (thanks again).
Last edited:


