New Camera First Pictures

[photohiker]

Well, new for me, and the pictures are of the camera, not by the camera...


That's a Tessar 12.5cm/4.5 with a Compur 1-250 Shutter.


Camera is an Ensign Carbine No 12, Tropical Model. Made in London by The Houghton-Butcher Mfg Co Ltd, about 1926.


Catch detail.


Name engraving and tripod socket on the folder flap (no idea what this is actually called) Note timber frame.

The Camera was probably my Great Grandfather's, still trying to find that out. Its in reasonable nick too, shutter and aperture seem to work ok. Slide is stiff, bellows look perfect. One of the side stays is missing a screw, but otherwise everything looks fine. Takes 120 film, tempted to put a roll through it to see results, camera would need a good clean first though, lots of dust about.

Shots 1,3,4 taken with OM Zuiko Macro 50/2 on a Panasonic GF1, Shot 2 taken with Lumix 20/1.7 on the GF1.

Michael

[PiroStitch]

Very nice. Definitely worthwhile putting a roll through it to see what comes out.

[gstark]

Takes 120 film, tempted to put a roll through it to see results

120?

Or 620?

I would think it might be 620 - very similar, but not quite the same.

Otherwise, very nice. Well done. Clean her up and shoot.

[Reschsmooth]

Very nice indeed. Does it shoot 1020p video?

[photohiker]

Takes 120 film, tempted to put a roll through it to see results

120?

Or 620?

I would think it might be 620 - very similar, but not quite the same.

If the production date of mid '20s is correct, it can't be 620 as that size didn't show up until 1932. There is a sticker inside the camera that suggests "Ensign Speedy 2 1/2" film. The difference is the size of the spools:

The 620 format was introduced by Kodak in 1931 as an intended alternative to 120. Although mostly used by Kodak cameras, it became very popular. The 620 format is essentially the same film on a thinner and narrower all-metal spool (the 120 spool core was made of wood at that time):

120 2.466" width, 0.990" flange, 0.468" core
620 2.468" width, 0.905" flange, 0.280" core

Now that I have actually opened the back, I see that I have an original spool, and it's a kodak one, and the core is just under half an inch, but the flange is about 1.25 inches and the length is wrong at almost 3 inches!, hmm. We're both wrong.

Digging deeper, I found a table of film sizes on archive.org via wikipedia. and it would appear that this is 116 film, Frame size is 2 1/2 x 4 1/4", Spool length 2.814", Flange 1.250", Core 0.468" That matches the spool and the frame inside the camera.

Discontinued in 1984. Bugger.

Camerapedia has some ideas. Will investigate.

Edit. B&H has Kodak 116 TriX Pan film in stock. $25.00 but shipping is over the top...

[surenj]

Is the shutter all manual on this one? ie do you have to have a stopwatch?

[photohiker]

Is the shutter all manual on this one? ie do you have to have a stopwatch?

Oh no, Surenj, not at all. it's Automatic!

Shutter speed and aperture controls are shown in photo 1&2. You can see the shutter speed is currently set to 1/10th. The Shutter speed control is marked from 1 to 250. I think that means I can have 1/250th all the way through to 1 whole second, but according to the pictogram I should only rotate the control one way or something bad might happen. (i.e. stopwatch may be required)

You do have to 'cock' the shutter for each shot. Hopefully, I can do that without 'cocking' it up.

Dropped in to Teds and bought a roll of 120 FP4. $9.95! While I was at it, I grabbed a 135/36 as well. total $20.90. This film caper is expensive isn't it?

[Matt. K]

It's just beautiful! There is a place in US of A that provides old film sizes. I think they custom cut it. Can't remember who they are but you could Google it. You may be able to cut down some 120. Give it some thought.

[Raskill]

Awesome old camera!

I just got a box brownie, 1926 model. It takes 120 film also, but apparently I can use 116 on a different spool? Does that sound right? I want to put some film through it also. Perhaps we can find a few users and order some, reducing the freight costs....

[photohiker]

It's just beautiful! There is a place in US of A that provides old film sizes. I think they custom cut it. Can't remember who they are but you could Google it. You may be able to cut down some 120. Give it some thought.

Yes, found it. Film for Classics. they sell through B&H & Central Camera now apparently. Cost is pretty high, and freight kills it for one roll. (and they're out of stock) As above, B&H have some TriX, but price with freight is silly.

So I have decided to run some 120 FP4 through it, adapting the spool size difference via this method. And winding on to the next frame via darkroom and safelight.

Question: Is the actual beginning of the film marked on the 120 backing, and if so, how?

I plan to load the 120 and wind it on to the first frame, marking the trailing edge of the frame with marker pen. After taking a shot, return to the darkroom and wind the film forward so that the exposed area is clear by a few mm and re-mark with marker pen. This is a bit tedious, but there's not that many shots with this camera on a 120 length film.

Michael

[photohiker]

Awesome old camera!

I just got a box brownie, 1926 model. It takes 120 film also, but apparently I can use 116 on a different spool? Does that sound right? I want to put some film through it also. Perhaps we can find a few users and order some, reducing the freight costs....

It's possible. Do you know the model number? http://www.brownie-camera.com/index.shtml

If it takes 120, you're good to go, I wouldn't fuss with hard to find sizes... If not, it might be a fiddle like this one.

Edit: Take a look here, much better brownie reference, look under 'all the Brownies' http://www.browniecamera.nl/

[Reschsmooth]

And winding on to the next frame via darkroom and safelight.

Question: Is the actual beginning of the film marked on the 120 backing, and if so, how?

I plan to load the 120 and wind it on to the first frame, marking the trailing edge of the frame with marker pen. After taking a shot, return to the darkroom and wind the film forward so that the exposed area is clear by a few mm and re-mark with marker pen. This is a bit tedious, but there's not that many shots with this camera on a 120 length film.

Michael

Take care exposing film with a safelight - I understand film has greater sensitivity to light than paper, and you may fog the film.

120 roll film does have indicators showing Start - in same cases (Ilford) this is done simply with an arrow that extends the width of the film.

[phillipb]

Michael, I'm not sure I would chance doing anything with the film under safe light. If you want you can borrow my whatyoumacallit. It's basically a bag with slieves that you put your arms through and is light tight. The idea is that you put the roll of film and the empty spool inside the bag, you then put your hands in the bag through the slieves and transfer the film from one spool to the other just by feel. May be a bit tricky but possible.

[gstark]

And winding on to the next frame via darkroom and safelight.

Question: Is the actual beginning of the film marked on the 120 backing, and if so, how?

I plan to load the 120 and wind it on to the first frame, marking the trailing edge of the frame with marker pen. After taking a shot, return to the darkroom and wind the film forward so that the exposed area is clear by a few mm and re-mark with marker pen. This is a bit tedious, but there's not that many shots with this camera on a 120 length film.

Michael

Take care exposing film with a safelight - I understand film has greater sensitivity to light than paper, and you may fog the film.

It's not so much "greater" sensitivity, but the wavelength of the light that's at issue here. B&W film is sensitive to all wavelengths of visible light; most B&W papers are not. Thus you can safely use most B&W papers under a red/orange safelight with no adverse effects, but film will most likely be fogged.

Rather than retiring to a darkroom for some of these tasks, consider the option of using a change bag. Much more convenient.

[gstark]

Michael, I'm not sure I would chance doing anything with the film under safe light. If you want you can borrow my whatyoumacallit. It's basically a bag with slieves that you put your arms through and is light tight.

That would be a changebag.

Snap!

[phillipb]

Michael, I'm not sure I would chance doing anything with the film under safe light. If you want you can borrow my whatyoumacallit. It's basically a bag with slieves that you put your arms through and is light tight.

That would be a changebag.

Snap!

What's wrong with "whatyoumacallit"

[photohiker]

It's not so much "greater" sensitivity, but the wavelength of the light that's at issue here. B&W film is sensitive to all wavelengths of visible light; most B&W papers are not. Thus you can safely use most B&W papers under a red/orange safelight with no adverse effects, but film will most likely be fogged.

Rather than retiring to a darkroom for some of these tasks, consider the option of using a change bag. Much more convenient.

Has this changed in the last umm... 35 odd years? I have yet to dig through my darkroom archives, but I seem to remember I had a fancy (wratten?) safelight filter that was dark green or something like that. Very dim, but safe for limited use with film. The paper backing is basically lightproof isn't it? So very dim light of this type should be reasonably film safe under these circumstances?

Change-bag would be great as long as there are braille markings on the backing, but yes with care and luck, the operation could be carried out by touch

Thanks for the offer phillipb

[gstark]

Michael, I'm not sure I would chance doing anything with the film under safe light. If you want you can borrow my whatyoumacallit. It's basically a bag with slieves that you put your arms through and is light tight.

That would be a changebag.

Snap!

What's wrong with "whatyoumacallit"

Nothing.

Has this changed in the last umm... 35 odd years?

No, and to some extent, you're correct; there certainly was the wratten filter/safelight that you mentioned; my recollection though was that it was so useful that it was not worth the trouble.

[Matt. K]

First 4 inches is usually wasted loading the film into the camera, however all of the film is usable and you don't have to start at any particular spot. You'll know when you reach the end of the spool.

[Mr Darcy]

Changebag

In my early days of film I couldn't afford a changebag. I used to hide under the blankets at night to do this sort of stuff. After I got a changebag, I found I preferred the blanket method. I only used the changebag when in the field.

Question: Is the actual beginning of the film marked on the 120 backing, and if so, how?

That's been answered, but there are also numbers across the backing for each frame. You wind on until the next number show up in the little window. The person who invented the locking wind mechanism should have got a Nobel Prize!

I plan to load the 120 and wind it on to the first frame, marking the trailing edge of the frame with marker pen. After taking a shot, return to the darkroom and wind the film forward so that the exposed area is clear by a few mm and re-mark with marker pen. This is a bit tedious, but there's not that many shots with this camera on a 120 length film.

Not sure why you are doing things this way. I know the numbers won't match, but you could take the backing out. Wind it through the camera with the back off and add your own markings, then reassemble the film and load it YOu would still have the pain of doing the markings by hand but you would only need to do it once & you would be able to two photos in a row without revisiting the darkroom. You would also be able to transfer your custom backing paper to the next roll & save a lot of the pain.

[photohiker]

Not sure why you are doing things this way. I know the numbers won't match,

The problem is 120 film in a 116 camera. 116 is about 10mm narrower than 120. Use of the 116 film number window will fog the film as it is near the edge. People get around this in Brownies by drilling a new hole, but I'm not prepared to do that to this camera.

Thanks for the suggestions though. I'm going to drop in to the photo lab (yes, they still do 120) and see if I can purloin a used 120 spool and backing paper to experiment with. Perhaps counting winder revolutions will be adequate.

[photohiker]

Using the wallplug method previously linked from Flickr.

One cutdown wallplug inserted into each end of the 120 roll. Spooling onto the existing 116 takeup spool. Will transfer film back onto 120 before having it developed.



The 120 backing almost reaches across the height of the frame. Not sure I can do much about this, there is not a lot of room in the folder to add a new frame in there. The film rollers are higher than the frame though, maybe 1mm. Will the film sit flat between the rollers, or does it rely on the frame?



The frame itself is unmarked apart from one high point where the paint has worn off, so it doesn't seem to be an actual film support. I'm thinking I might get away with it. Clearly, it will lose part of the image top and bottom but will have full width, I will have to make sure I compose with that in mind.

And no, I'm not shooting velvia, this is the empty 120 backing If the FP4 works out great, I might try some velvia or colour print film for kicks though.

Next job is to count turns of the winder between frames. Expecting the number of turns to decrease as the takeup spool increases in diameter. There is an error here, as I am testing with no film - so as long as I work to tight tolerances, should be good in actual use.

Thoughts or suggestions?