Unperforated film with 35mm SLR

I looked back to my PM's in 2009 and it appears that I sent the Autoreflex T body off to dynachrome (user name in here). So long ago that I have no recollection about whether it was put back into use.

Hey @Rowreidr

Thanks for the pic, the mystery is solved!

I already got my hands on a Ricoh XRX, for free. It works with unperfed! But I can't get familiar with the many automatics in this camera...plus it doesn't look that bad in real

One more to add to the list is the Canon T50. Got one for free these days and it works, too! Buuut: It's running fully automatic only!

I'll keep my arms open for the case a nice FTb is falling down somewhere...

Some years ago I came across a large roll (1000 ft) of 35mm wide film that had really tiny sprocket holes spaced farther apart than regular film. It would not transport in any of my cameras. I searched the internet and found that one of the Canon EOS cameras (I forget which one) advanced the film via an infrared sensor in the body , no sprockets. I gave up on the project and sold the film on the auction site. You might research the EOS line to see if they would work for you.

The idea could work.
But on one condition.
You should use a Zenit (E) camera, this model has very sharp serrations and you will punch this film by force.

randyB said:

...one of the Canon EOS cameras (I forget which one) advanced the film via an infrared sensor in the body , no sprockets

Click to expand...

You're probably referring to the EOS10 / 10QD. As the enthusiast model of their time, they have a solid feature set and do not rely on the sprockets for advancing the film. I can certainly recommend them for use with sprocketless film.

I know this is an old thread, but it's one that's likely to come up when people look for the topic. So let me add my (currently limited) experience here!

Mentioned cameras that definitely work:
Canon EOS 10s
It seems like a bunch of these from the early generation should also work - basically everything on this list below the EOS 700. Keep in mind that you have to tape on your own perforated leader in order for the camera to initially load the film. The one I've used is only about 1.5in long - just the end tab and a bit of full-width film.

Mentioned cameras that definitely DO NOT work:
Ricoh XR-10m
It looks like it must be using the sprockets to count frames. The camera will pull in the entire roll of film and then just throw up the ol' blinking roll symbol on the LCD. A poster above mentioned the XR-X, which is the older model. I might pick one of those up if a cheap enough copy appears. Since it's older, it's possible that they hadn't implemented the frame-counter yet, but it certainly looks like the same mechanism as the XR-10m. I would assume that the later models such as the XR-X3000 and XR-X3pf won't work either.

Minolta Maxxum 5
With or without a perforated leader, no dice.

Other cameras that work with caveats:
Canon L1
I haven't actually shot a roll of film yet, so I'm not sure about frame spacing, but this did successfully pull a 15-frame strip of unperforated film through shot-by-shot, with no modification to the sprocket column. It might be safe to assume that other Canon rangefinders will work as well. Likely down to the takeup column having enough torque that the sprocket column isn't necessary. That's probably the reason why people cite other RFs from the same era, mainly the Soviet ones.
Note: with this and my modified Super Program below, if you don't tape the film leader to the takeup spool, it will get yanked out when you hit the end of the roll. On the modified camera, this is pretty clearly noticeable (and the Super Program has a film indicator anyway), but because of the winding strength of the L1 I couldn't feel anything when it happened. It's a good idea to have a general concept of how many frames are on your roll!

Modifications
I've only tried this with one camera so far - a Pentax Super Program that I don't care much about since it has a slightly wonky meter. I removed the sprockets with a nail clipper, then put on a narrow strip of grip tape over each of the formerly-sprocketed sections. I've shot six very short strips of film with it so far (6-7 frames each), and while spacing is definitely a little wide, there has only been one instance of overlap, on the first two frames of one strip. I could feel it when it happened, too. I think I might add another layer of tape and see if that has any effects.

Other mentioned cameras I haven't tried
Canon FTb
I don't really want an FTb, but from what I can tell the famed QL17 GIII has the same film loading mechanism. I wouldn't mind owning one of those, so I'll give it a shot at some point.
Canon T50, T80, T90
Various Soviet rangefinders
I have a Kiev 4a, as well as a FED-2 with a heavily-perforated shutter. I'll try them out later on.
Various Barnacks and Barnack copies

Really, any other cameras that work will be a huge bonus. The EOS-10 series is obviously the 'best' option...but it's big and clunky and I get no joy from using it.

cptrios said:

Canon FTb
I don't really want an FTb, but from what I can tell the famed QL17 GIII has the same film loading mechanism.

Click to expand...

Hmm. I've got a QL17 GIII, and a bulk roll of unperfed 35 mm Vericolor II -- I might have to try this (since the alternative is to get my Bantam RF shutter working again and respool with backing on 828 spools). My other good option is to use that film in my RB67, of course...

cptrios said:

Minolta Maxxum 5
With or without a perforated leader, no dice.

Click to expand...

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "no dice" -- the Maxxum 5 doesn't have sprockets. It doesn't use sprockets to advance the film.

cptrios said:

from what I can tell the famed QL17 GIII has the same film loading mechanism.

Click to expand...

The QL17 GIII has a quick-loading system (the same on other Canon cameras, and similar to other QL methods), but it uses the sprockets to advance the film.

xkaes said:

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "no dice" -- the Maxxum 5 doesn't have sprockets. It doesn't use sprockets to advance the film.

Click to expand...

It indeed doesn’t have sprockets, but unperforated film doesn’t work. Likely for the same reason as the Ricoh - it still requires the perforations to count frames.

xkaes said:

The QL17 GIII has a quick-loading system (the same on other Canon cameras, and similar to other QL methods), but it uses the sprockets to advance the film.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I don’t know if it actually works or not, but I read elsewhere that the FTb will still advance nonperf film despite the sprockets (as the L1 does). The QL’s loading system looks the same.

cptrios said:

Yeah, I don’t know if it actually works or not, but I read elsewhere that the FTb will still advance nonperf film despite the sprockets (as the L1 does). The QL’s loading system looks the same.

Click to expand...

I can only speak about the QL17 GIII, and the quick-load plate presses the film against the sprockets -- so good luck.