non perf in a Nikon FM2

brucemuir · Oct 30, 2010

Can you run non perf 35mm in the FM2 or are the perfs needed for the film counter?

Anyone tried it?

Thanks in advance.

Bruce

JayGannon · Oct 30, 2010

Can I hijack this and expand it to if not what camera can run non perf thats not a microfilm camera!
I have a tonne of non perf film but no use for it =)

PhotoJim · Oct 30, 2010

No. All traditional 35mm cameras need perforations.

828 film was 35mm with a backing and no perforations. It is long obsolete but you could possibly use it in such a camera.

Photo Engineer · Oct 30, 2010

No, non-perf film cannot be used in 35mm cameras. With that I agree. However, 828 film, along with its backing did have perfs, but only a few, not the regular ones like 35mm. It was more like 126 which also had perfs.

PE

brucemuir · Oct 30, 2010

http://cgi.ebay.com/Kodak-35-x-100-Ft-Portra-160NC-Color-Pro-Film-Non-Perf-/170557759749?pt=US_Camera_Film&hash=item27b608e105#ht_4790wt_1137

what is this film for? I thought I read on photonet that on some 35mm cameras if you could thread the take up reel then it might work but I don't remember the specifics.

I think the FM2 needs the perforations so the film counter advances correctly. I can't open my camera right now...
it is loaded

Rol_Lei Nut · Oct 31, 2010

The Soviet spring-motor driven Leningrad doesn't use or need perforations.
Very interesting camera for several other reasons as well.....

Les Sarile · Oct 31, 2010

The film counter advances on my FM2 - or for that matter most all my cameras, without a roll of film in it so I don't believe perf film is needed for this function. With the FM2 you thread the film into the take up spool so the perf on the film is not required for this either. The perforations probably help keep the film aligned though.

Steve Smith · Oct 31, 2010

The perforations are there so the wind on stops at the correct point to give even frame spacing. Most cameras however will still cock the shutter when you wind on and allow the shutter to be pressed so I think it would work but you would have larger than normal spacing between frames getting larger towards the end of the film.

The frame counter is usually independent of the perforations and will still count if worked without a film.

Cameras like my Voigtlander Vito B however also use the perforations and its gear to cock the shutter. This is why you can often find them cheap on ebay as their sellers think the shutter is broken.

Steve.

brucemuir · Oct 31, 2010

maybe that film is for some long roll back from when school portraiture was film based.

Photo Engineer · Oct 31, 2010

It may have been used for Microfilming! IDK.

However, consider this. The metal "gears" on the "drive" shafts in 35mm cameras project upwards through the holes just enough to clear the back of the camera and yet go through the film. Without holes in the film, the film is deformed around those "gears" and scrapes on them giving deformed film and scrapings from the surface of the film which is being scratched.

This is UNGOOD!

PE

JayGannon · Oct 31, 2010

Ahha, a use possibily, someone told me that the 35mm adaptors for MF cameras like the Rolleiflex don't have any sprockets at all.

Steve Smith · Oct 31, 2010

Photo Engineer said:
The metal "gears" on the "drive" shafts in 35mm cameras project upwards through the holes just enough to clear the back of the camera and yet go through the film. Without holes in the film, the film is deformed around those "gears" and scrapes on them giving deformed film and scrapings from the surface of the film which is being scratched.

This is UNGOOD!

True, that has much ungoodliness about it.

However, if you had a lot of non-perforated film to use it could be worth modifying a cheap camera body to take it.

Steve.

Steve Smith · Oct 31, 2010

I have just opened up four cameras of four different makes at random and all of them have plastic gears rather than metal so it would be easy to file off the teeth.

The gears also seem to be on a barrel fitted over a metal shaft so with a bit of dis-mantling and re-mantling (which should be a word) the whole gear assembly could be removed.

Steve,

perkeleellinen · Oct 31, 2010

Mantle - to cover
Dismantle - to uncover

Mantelpiece has the same origin as it covers the fireplace.

Steve Smith · Oct 31, 2010

But you never hear anyone say they are going to mantle something as an opposite to dismantling it.

Steve.

Photo Engineer · Oct 31, 2010

Mantle is usually a noun and dismantle is usually a verb in common usage. Just like film with perfs and film without! Different uses.

PE

brucemuir · Oct 31, 2010

but the sprockets/gears are outside the image area

I agree it would probably cause film flatness issues which is a good point that I hadn't thought about before...

Photo Engineer · Oct 31, 2010

If the sprocket gears are there at all, they will be scratching the film probably and creating "shavings" of the emulsion that will look like dust in the camera and will create defects.

Our film in research was unperfed 35mm. We never used it in-camera unless we had it specially perfed in a separate operation. It was for flatness and for eliminating scratching.

PE

nyoung · Oct 31, 2010

I've never tried it but, a friend who used 100' rolls of non-perfed Veri-Color in long roll cameras for school photography used to load up his leftover end rolls to shoot in a Minolta 700? 70000? something or another. I couldn't say what the over all success rate was but I did see some good photos out of that set-up.

non perf in a Nikon FM2

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency