Which 16 mm still cameras have double exposure capability?

[fabulousrice]

I have been progressively getting more and more involved in 16mm film photography.

To the point that I am considering using a 16mm film camera as my go to camera when I am out and about, versus doing a serious photo shoot where I would keep using my SLR with a 1.2 lens.
However, I do a lot of double exposures and all the models I have tried so far were not letting me do that easily.

I have the same problem when I use the Pentax auto 110. But I would love to find a tiny 16mm camera that lets users do multiple exposures, ideally by design versus a hack.

 

[MattKing]

Thread title updated, to make it clear that this is not a Want To Buy thread - those are only permitted to paid subscribers in the Classifieds.

 

[fabulousrice]

Thread title updated, to make it clear that this is not a Want To Buy thread - those are only permitted to paid subscribers in the Classifieds.

Ah ok thanks! Yes I just want to know if there’s such a model and which one, maybe get some feedback on people who have used one.
Thank you!

 

[xkaes]

I'm sure there are some, especially the early ones and the simple ones (not mutually exclusive groups) -- but you might not like the results. The problem is, there is no list of them anywhere -- but there is a list of 16mm still cameras -- with many photos. Your job, should you choose to accept it, is to start at the top of this list.

http://www.subclub.org/shop/16mm.htm

 

[fabulousrice]

I'm sure there are some, especially the early ones and the simple ones (not mutually exclusive groups) -- but you might not like the results. The problem is, there is no list of them anywhere -- but there is a list of 16mm still cameras -- with many photos. Your job, should you choose to accept it, is to start at the top of this list.

http://www.subclub.org/shop/16mm.htm

Haha I know this website and I appreciate your idea. Maybe someone with extensive knowledge will chime in while I get to work peeling off the website.

 

[Donald Qualls]

FWIW, all the "HIT type" cameras allow easy double exposure -- but that's the "you might not like the results" category. Not only are they hard to feed (most use 17.5 mm paper backed roll film and you'd likely have to buy two, or a lot of long-expired film, to get the minimum two spools, never mind backing paper) but almost none have a decent lens, adjustable focus, or more than one shutter speed or two apertures. I'd look for one of the early models that have a manually cocked shutter (a feature you can often spot in display or sales listing photos); those are likely to be easy to double expose (intentionally or not).

 

[xya]

Maybe it would be easier to switch to 110 film. AFAIK there is no advanced 16mm camera with double exposure capability. For 110 film there are at least two Lomography cameras tha can do double exposure: the Diana Baby and the new Lomomatic 110, maybe there are others that I have not seen yet. And: film supply is easy for 110...

 

[fabulousrice]

Maybe it would be easier to switch to 110 film. AFAIK there is no advanced 16mm camera with double exposure capability. For 110 film there are at least two Lomography cameras tha can do double exposure: the Diana Baby and the new Lomomatic 110, maybe there are others that I have not seen yet. And: film supply is easy for 110...

Ah thanks for the input. I love 16mm as much as I dislike 110 unfortunately. The 110 format doesn't allow me to load the film types I want to use (Kodak Vision 50D for example) and the Lomography 110 stock is often just very mediocre. I own 6 110 film cameras however and know how to do double exposures on a Pentax Auto 110 (take out the cartridge, push down the pin, advance till winder locks, put cartridge pack in, shoot, etc). I'm just disappointed that there isn't a more manual camera from the 60s or 70s in 16mm. Even finding one that has a manual winder and Bulb pose is difficult. I tried a Mamiya 16 but the shutter is getting stuck. The search goes on! Maybe I need to build or modify my own from an existing busted minolta mg.

 

[fabulousrice]

FWIW, all the "HIT type" cameras allow easy double exposure -- but that's the "you might not like the results" category. Not only are they hard to feed (most use 17.5 mm paper backed roll film and you'd likely have to buy two, or a lot of long-expired film, to get the minimum two spools, never mind backing paper) but almost none have a decent lens, adjustable focus, or more than one shutter speed or two apertures. I'd look for one of the early models that have a manually cocked shutter (a feature you can often spot in display or sales listing photos); those are likely to be easy to double expose (intentionally or not).

It actually looks like the Zany 16mm camera has an everset shutter AND Bulb pose which would make it an amazing contender. Also the Rubina 16 seems to have shutter and film advance as two separate mechanisms and has Bulb. I cheated on the submini website and checked out Camerapedia instead which sometimes is more up to date and has less dead links

 

[Donald Qualls]

Looks like Zany would be easy to feed, if you can find or make cassettes, but I expect it's hard to find. The Rubina looks like the decent Japanese submini that devolved into the HIT (one speed, one or two apertures, 10x10 frame on 17.5 mm paper-backed film made by slitting unperfed 35 mm and rolling it onto spools, made to look like a Rubina but nothing functional under the top cover). Might or might not be easier to find than the Zany, but you need spools and backing to load it even though it uses 16 mm width.

I think you might be ahead to go with a Lomography Baby Diana; 110 film is easy to get as long as Lomography has a market for it, and you get a significantly larger frame.

 

[fabulousrice]

Looks like Zany would be easy to feed, if you can find or make cassettes, but I expect it's hard to find. The Rubina looks like the decent Japanese submini that devolved into the HIT (one speed, one or two apertures, 10x10 frame on 17.5 mm paper-backed film made by slitting unperfed 35 mm and rolling it onto spools, made to look like a Rubina but nothing functional under the top cover). Might or might not be easier to find than the Zany, but you need spools and backing to load it even though it uses 16 mm width.

I think you might be ahead to go with a Lomography Baby Diana; 110 film is easy to get as long as Lomography has a market for it, and you get a significantly larger frame.

I definitely hear you regarding the Diana, however :

-Loading 110 cassettes with actually decent film that isn't crap is super difficult (cannot use Kodak Vision in a 110 camera because of the weird gap between perforations)
-Diana lens is plasticky and crappy

So all in all I would have to either break / modify a 16mm camera to override double-exposure prevention or break / modify a 110 diana to take 16mm film and not use a pin for advance.
My journey with film photography is so full of grief, because most camera manufacturers were struggling to decide if a camera should be full featured or dumbed down for dumb dumb users, and as a result we have a lot of vintage gear that is neither professional nor good as point and shoot... A good example is how a perfect camera for what I need would be a 35mm fujica mini with Bulb pose and multiple exposure, I would literally take that anywhere I go but it doesn't exist and even when current manufacturers make a half frame camera they make it bulky and without good glass... anyways sorry for the rant.

 

[xya]

When I read you ranting, there are things that I find inconsistent, but that's only my impression of course.

You mention the Fujica Mini, a half frame with fixed focus and only one speed. Even a B setting would not make it a good camera and seen the size it's heavy. There are some many half frames that are much better. There is even a half frame with double exposure, the Lomo LC Wide can do this. If you consider tweaking a camera for double exposure, I would recommend the Agat 18k, good lens, tweakable plastic gear and cheap. https://www.135compact.com/ half frames are in the second section, after the full frames. And there is the Lomography TIM with B and double exposure https://www.plastikcam.com/holga_135_tim.htm

If 16mm is your preferred playground, there are so many good and full featured cameras, one of theses can certainly be tricked into double exposure https://ww w.subcompactcam.com/ last section...

There is always a better camera to imagine. But your journey with film photography should not be full of grief, it should be fun.

 

[xkaes]

One possible approach -- easier with some cameras than others -- is to use your pocket. Hopefully a large pocket. Let's us the Minolta MG-s as a possible example. Let's say you take a shot and want a double exposure. Before the second shot, put the camera in your pocket. Then open the film door -- you can do this with one hand -- and pull out the film cassette about 5mm (1/4"). This will disengage the film advance gear. Then cock the shutter by turning the wheel until it stops. Then push in the cassette back in, and lock the film door. Take the next shot.

Sure, the film counter resets, but you got your shot.

 

[fabulousrice]

When I read you ranting, there are things that I find inconsistent, but that's only my impression of course.

You mention the Fujica Mini, a half frame with fixed focus and only one speed. Even a B setting would not make it a good camera and seen the size it's heavy. There are some many half frames that are much better. There is even a half frame with double exposure, the Lomo LC Wide can do this. If you consider tweaking a camera for double exposure, I would recommend the Agat 18k, good lens, tweakable plastic gear and cheap. https://www.135compact.com/ half frames are in the second section, after the full frames. And there is the Lomography TIM with B and double exposure https://www.plastikcam.com/holga_135_tim.htm

If 16mm is your preferred playground, there are so many good and full featured cameras, one of theses can certainly be tricked into double exposure https://ww w.subcompactcam.com/ last section...

There is always a better camera to imagine. But your journey with film photography should not be full of grief, it should be fun.

Thank you so much for your input, and sorry if I sounded negative! I like your ideas and suggestions.
What I meant is that my film photographic journey is incredibly fun! Sometimes I reach the limits of my gear, and then I am either able to circumvent them with my tinkering skills, or I am not.
I love the portability of the Fujica Mini versus the Lomo Wide, which is why this slight frustration rose. Yes there are other half-frame cameras with lesser lenses and long exposure or double exposure features - usually bulkier - in the realm of 35mm, like the Diana 35, absolutely.

For 35, I tinkered two Kodak Bantam 818 cameras to shoot a quarter frame and full frame on bulk loaded 35mm film. Fixed focus, two speeds (one of the Bantams has a bulb mode, and the other one has a T and normal). So far the 2-perf (quarter frame) Bantam with bulb or normal (plus multiple exposures) is my favorite 35mm camera for experimenting and it is also really small (I also added a 17mm filter thread and add smartphone filters on it and anamorphic).
However I have to load it in the dark, and the focus is only point and shoot. Other than that, it brings me lots of joy (until I reach the end of the roll, every 140 frames shot or so).
I also tinkered a Zenobia to shoot 6x3, 24 frames per roll of medium format, so my needs to have a camera with lots of frames per roll and double exposures and some longer exposure settings are also covered for 120.

It was when I ventured into 16mm photography that my usual habits kicked in after a few test rolls of single exposures: Can I do night photography, can I use manual settings, can I do doubles, etc.
I have a Minolta 16-PS, a Minolta 16-MG, A Minolta-16, a Mamiya 16 Super and a Narciss. All of them are fun especially the ones with manual features. Since I bulk load, the Minolta-16 whose film advance mechanism is operated when you open or close the camera isn't always convenient because when I reach the end of my film with the feeding spool, the camera can get stuck in open position (I like loading a lot more than 20 exposures). I love the results I've shot with them (even though the Narciss has a weird film advance problem), and I was feeling a bit limited in not being able to do doubles in this format.

I like the webpage you shared, however I'm not sure I'd be able to convert a shutter that needs to be cocked (which advances the film) into an everset shutter and separate advance mechanism.
I also like the idea of taking the film out and putting it back in - this is how I do double exposures in the Pentax Auto 110.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I'd be cautious with the "pocket" method on two counts. First, very few if any pockets I own are light tight enough to get away with this, never mind when my hand is pushed in to manipulate the camera -- and second, pockets are notorious sources of lint (it was a major failure cause for early cell phones, before touch screens). Lint is bad for negatives, and more so the smaller the image area. Carrying a changing bag would solve the pocket problems, but it's another (fairly bulky) piece of gear to carry.

 

[fabulousrice]

Actually I think Bronson answered my question in this deep (but how fascinating) thread:

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/110-16mm-camera-image-quality.180063/post-2561316

 

[xkaes]

And there are several Stekys to choose from. I don't think the Golden Steky would work though.

http://www.subclub.org/shop/steky.htm