The baffling case of the Agat baffle

[AgX]

This is completely different from using Rapid, Karat or SL cassettes!


What you mean the is Exakta system, where the take-up spindle can be substituted by a modified 135 cassette (with its own spindle orientated reversed).

 

[xkaes]

The Rapid method is to have two cassettes in the camera instead of the typical single feeder cassette -- which requires film rewinding at the end of the roll.
With two cassettes, in a Rapid method, film goes from one to the other. At the end of the roll, both cassettes are removed, and a new pair installed.
That is how the Rapid method works, and the Agat 18K works exactly the same -- except it uses regular 35mm cassettes instead of Agfa Rapid cassettes.

 

[AgX]

The Rapid method is to have two cassettes in the camera instead of the typical single feeder cassette -- which requires film rewinding at the end of the roll.

But so is case the case with Exakta (And seemingly Agat 18K) too. BUT the difference is that these use more or less standard cassettes and only standard film transport.

At Karat, SL and Rapid cameras the cassettes are different in look and construction and max. film lenght. And there were also Karat/SL cameras who did not use film transport by sprocket wheel, but by toothed slider. To my knowledge such never existed at type 135 cameras. This is what referred to with different transport, although this only was applied at a large minority of such canmeras.

 

[AgX]

Let us leave that Rapid topic now and let us discuss my question:

I googled up and down, but I did not find any hint at all of the 18K having the Exakta loading system. Maybe you misinterpreted one certain sentence at the Kosmophoto review. Well, Huss could tell us, but he remained silent on this matter.
Let us assume you are right, why should Belomo have applied this design?

The Exakta system enables not only to wind up the film onto the classic spindle, but alternatively into a modified 135 cassette.
This makes sense at professional users and engaged amateurs, as they are able to take out the cassette used for taking up the film in the light at about any moment, loosing only a small length of unexposed film.

But what use has this approach for the intended user of the 18K model, a snapshooter?

Well, I looked at Huss' photos, there seems little space for a cassette hull, but a removable spindle is imaginable. Maybe some engineer said: "we can do it, why not let's do it then...?

 

[rjbuzzclick]

Either way I completely recommend the Agat! A fun, tiny, quirky camera that actually has a very good lens. And people won’t believe it is a real camera so u can take pics anywhere.

My 18K always feels like it's going to break, or it's shredding the sprocket holes, and sometimes it is!

 

[Huss]

If the question to me is does the spindle come out - the answer is yes it does, and it obviously was designed to do that. Think of it as a poor man's Leica M3, except unlike the M3 you can also load film with the spindle in place.

 

[AgX]

Thank you, for making this clear.

 

[xkaes]

I'll report back to see if my Agat 18K has some sort of baffle -- as soon as I can find it. Here's what it looks like -- next to its sibling:

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Agat 18K is cheap plastic camera, made in Soviet. True lomography, it is mistake to expect even exposures like from Nikon SLR.


Cat. by Kostya Fedot, on Flickr

PS: Missing old days with more of your on-line presence.

 

[AgX]

True lomography, it is mistake to expect even exposures like from Nikon SLR.


Cat. by Kostya Fedot, on Flickr

Well, I find this photograph more intriguing than a lot I have seen at Photrio.

But nobody said anything as the Agat compares to Nikon SLR's.

 

[xkaes]

OK, I've found my Agat 18K and opened it up. The interior of the "lens box" looks exactly the same as on my Agat 18. I see no "baffle" or "baffling". Both sides are flat, black, shiny plastic -- exactly like in my Agat 18.
The only difference -- besides minor exterior appearance, ISO setting, exposure icons, etc. -- is the removable film take-up splindle. Once removed, an EMPTY, 35mm cassette -- to which the 35mm film leader/tab is taped -- can be inserted to pull the film into the EMPTY 35mm cassette after each exposure, to act in a Rapid-type film system.
Anyone worried about light leaks may find this helpful because each exposure is pulled into a light tight cassette.

 

[Sirius Glass]

OK, I've found my Agat 18K and opened it up. The interior of the "lens box" looks exactly the same as on my Agat 18. I see no "baffle" or "baffling". Both sides are flat, black, shiny plastic -- exactly like in my Agat 18.
The only difference -- besides minor exterior appearance, ISO setting, exposure icons, etc. -- is the removable film take-up splindle. Once removed, an EMPTY, 35mm cassette -- to which the 35mm film leader/tab is taped -- can be inserted to pull the film into the EMPTY 35mm cassette after each exposure, to act in a Rapid-type film system.
Anyone worried about light leaks may find this helpful because each exposure is pulled into a light tight cassette.

Now I am baffled!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Well, I find this photograph more intriguing than a lot I have seen at Photrio.

But nobody said anything as the Agat compares to Nikon SLR's.

I never looked at APUG as photo forum, but gear, developing forum.

 

[xkaes]

Agat 18K is cheap plastic camera, made in Soviet. True lomography, it is mistake to expect even exposures like from Nikon SLR.

You're entitled to your opinion, but that's all it is. Lomography? Hardly. The optics on the Agat are noting lens than superb -- as good as the best 28mm f2.8 half-frame lenses from Olympus, Ricoh, Minolta, and Yashica. Cheap? Nope. Inexpensive? I my book. Innovative? Definitely. It offers features that no other half-frame camera ever did.

If you want Lomography, you need a one or two element, fixed focus, f9 lens with a fixed shutter speed -- not something like the Agat 18.

 

[AgX]

If you want Lomography, you need a one or two element, fixed focus, f9 lens with a fixed shutter speed -- not something like the Agat 18.

Well, the original camera for Lomography was one that had a lens that was at least a Triplet, and focusable.

 

[xkaes]

It is unfortunate that Lomography got its name from the LOMO-LC cameras, because that is a great copy of the Cosina CX cameras -- and take great pictures.

 

[Huss]

Agat 18K is cheap plastic camera, made in Soviet. True lomography, it is mistake to expect even exposures like from Nikon SLR.


Cat. by Kostya Fedot, on Flickr

PS: Missing old days with more of your on-line presence.

Hey Kostya! Noticed that your pic has a big shaded area on the top too! I'm guessing you camera has a baffle in it like mine?

 

[Huss]

I'll report back to see if my Agat 18K has some sort of baffle -- as soon as I can find it. Here's what it looks like -- next to its sibling:

View attachment 308743

How do you use the flash with the camera? What settings?

 

[Huss]

Even though I have the fine dexterity of a petulant six year old with a hammer, I decided to take my Agat further apart to investigate this baffling case of the baffle which has become more baffling through these discussions.

Two screws needed to be removed, et voila the pressure plate mechanism comes off. To reveal.... that freakin baffle is a molded part of the 'lens box'! I thought maybe it was a piece I could just pop out! Son of a firearm!

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

The original images made the baffle appear to be a vertical strip oriented parallel to the film frame, but this view does imply some sort of optical attenuation was intended by the design and placement.

I was under the impression the Agat(s) had a 'regular' leaf shutter, but some reading tells me it's actually an EV-coupled? There are some SLR cameras (few and far between) like the Fujica ST-F that use a similarly oriented but adjustable baffle in combination with shortened mirror travel rather than a traditional aperture to control exposure.

It may be that this was applied as an 'average' correction to make up for some non-linearity in the performance of the shutter across the various EV combinations. Or for flare mitigation... or both.

It is a mystery

 

[xkaes]

It may be that this was applied as an 'average' correction to make up for some non-linearity in the performance of the shutter across the various EV combinations. Or for flare mitigation... or both.

It is a mystery

Good guess, I suppose, but my Agat 18K does not have that "baffle".

Just like with many other small cameras -- 16mm and half-frame 35mm -- the shutter and aperture change in tandem with the slowest shutter speed happening with the widest aperture, and the shortest shutter speed happening with the smallest aperture, as the exposure dial is turned. This is also effected by the ISO that is dialed in. Many of these cameras, like the Minolta 16P/16Ps had a single shutter speed, and the exposure was adjusted by the ISO and the aperture w/ weather icons -- like the Agat 18. Others, like the Fuji Mini, added shutter speed adjustment with the ISO setting -- the higher the ISO, the faster the shutter speed. And others, like the Ricoh Caddy, added a meter which allows you to manually adjust the shutter speed and aperture together to match a "line/needle" for correct exposure. The Agat 18 is at the high end of these methods -- without a meter. And it works -- with great results.

The aperture and the shutter speed use the same blades -- just like other cameras -- so a flash can be used under any setting.

My serial # is: 8859325. Perhaps that will tell us something.

 

[Huss]

It is a mystery

a mystery? Perhaps. Baffling? Absolutely.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Hey Kostya! Noticed that your pic has a big shaded area on the top too! I'm guessing you camera has a baffle in it like mine?

They are all sharing same giant baffle. SU was all about sharing.

 

[xkaes]

Here's an interesting point that I just noticed while comparing the Agat 18 and 18K. The 18K dropped the DOF scale that the 18 has. Seems odd because they didn't save any money by removing it, but they had to do it intentionally. I guess they figured that no one was using it. I can't say that I ever used it -- but interesting to note.

 

[henryvk]

Here's an interesting point that I just noticed while comparing the Agat 18 and 18K. The 18K dropped the DOF scale that the 18 has. Seems odd because they didn't save any money by removing it, but they had to do it intentionally. I guess they figured that no one was using it. I can't say that I ever used it -- but interesting to note.

It's the same with the Smenas. The 8M has a DOF scale but it was left off of the later Symbol and SL. Too bad since it didn't hurt anyone but I'm sure the idea was, since these cameras were very much intended for amateurs, that in the best case the scale would be ignored and in the worst case it would confuse people.

The BeLOMO Vilia has a DOF scale.

Two screws needed to be removed, et voila the pressure plate mechanism comes off. To reveal.... that freakin baffle is a molded part of the 'lens box'! I thought maybe it was a piece I could just pop out! Son of a firearm!

*snip*

So.. it wouldn't be too hard to simply plane that baffle with a dremel. How big of a difference can it really make during horizontal shooting when most Soviet cameras at least don't have any baffling whatsoever? You could even compensate by flocking the film chamber which should improve contrast.