| Author |
Message |
    
Tom
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, March 18, 2006 - 12:55 pm: | 
|
I bought a Kodak Disc 4000 Camera at a thrift store about a year ago for $2, and somebody told me that the battey came with the film. They don't make film for the camera anymore, (and if there's still some out there, it would be expired or I wouldn't be able to develop it), how can I make it work? Could I solder a chip battery (one of those small ones) to the battey point on the camera to make the flash work? I just want to see if it still works at all. |
Tom
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, March 18, 2006 - 01:07 pm: |
|
One more question:
Is there any company that still produces film for this type of camera? Or is there a place where you can buy unexpired disc film? |
Winfried
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, March 18, 2006 - 01:14 pm: |
|
The disc camera hype was strong but short and did not last more than two years or so. I think disc camera film was discontinued several years ago by all manufacturers. Also even if you find disc film which is still usable you also have to find a lab to process it. I don't think any lab kept the machines needed for processing disc film.
BTW I never heard that batteries were included in the film discs. Only film packs which had a battery inside were the Polaroid film packs for the SX70 type cameras. |
biff
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, March 18, 2006 - 05:46 pm: |
|
Tommy: disc film processing:
http://www.rockymountainfilm.com/disc.htm
as for the camera battery, i thought they were internal and only supposed to be changed by kodak? someone must know.
p.s. you are sick (but i like it) ;)
i'm digging out my duran duran spandau ballet cassettes ;) |
rick
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, March 19, 2006 - 09:36 am: |
|
how about grafting a 120 roll holder onto the back of it?
: ) = |
Tom
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, March 19, 2006 - 04:47 pm: |
|
I saw that website ealier, but that $25 is quite a lot just to develop 15 pictures (or however much there was in the disc film), in addition to the at least $5-$10 per disc I'd have to pay for at places like eBay.
And how do you open a Kodak Disc 4000? I can't see a single screw on that camera. And if you have to pry it open, then where?
And kind of off topic, but is the Kodak Instamatic 60 a good camera? I know it's old, but I heard that back then it was a top-of-the-line 110 film camera (with the extra features it has). And how much on average does 110 film cost and how much does it cost to develop it? And I heard that 110 film is generally used for panoramic shots, is that true? Generally, I want to know the real purpose of 110 cameras. |
Tom
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, March 19, 2006 - 04:49 pm: |
|
And what about the Magicubes (aka X-cubes)? How many times can you use them for a flash? And if they run out fast, what is a good flash alternative for the Instamatic cameras? |
Winfried
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, March 20, 2006 - 01:39 am: |
|
110 format yields images on the film which are approx. 8x11mm large. Enlarging them will show much more grain than when enlarging 24x36mm negatives. Usually the limit for enlarging 110 format images is around 9x13cm. They were made for people who just wanted some album pics. I have seen 110 images (probably made with a rather bad camera) which had much lower quality than any box camera images of the 1950s.
110 film is still available, I think Ferrania still makes color neg (print) film. But you'll hardly find them in photo shops.
Magicubes can be used 4 times, i.e. they have 4 bulbs. I have seen adaptors allowing use of magicubes on cameras with a standard accessory shoe but not the thing you will need to attach a normal flash unit to a camera with magicube socket.
Anyhow, why do you want to use camera systems and formats which (together with their accessories and supplies) have disappeared from the market years ago? If it's just for trying out such a camera I would say it's OK but I never would try to use them for any serious purposes. |
rick oleson
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, March 20, 2006 - 06:06 am: |
|
8 x 11 mm is the size of the Minox format. 110 is much larger, 13 x 17mm - about as big as you can get onto a 16mm film width. Not all 110 cameras were bad; the Pentax Auto 110 in particular produced very good results in this format, and there were a number of other good 110 cameras. The Kodak Instamatic 60 was not bad, it was the best from Kodak with its fast lens and coupled rangefinder.
Certainly the 110 format does not deliver 35mm results, other things being equal.... but a good 110 will stand up well against most 35mm cameras of comparable size (which are mostly limited point & shoots).
I never heard anything particularly complimentary about the Disc system though. The format was about Minox size, which demands exceptional optical quality for good results (something most of the Disc cameras lacked), the cameras' vertical flat shape made them hard to hold steadily and the radically different nature of the film made it incompatible with existing processing equipment. Its main (only?) virtue was a temporary shot in the arm for Eastman's film business. |
Henry
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, March 20, 2006 - 09:00 am: |
|
To use old cameras one really needs a darkroom. An enterprizing person with a well stocked darkroom can load film into and develope film from just about any camera ever made. I developed from 8x10 to the tiniest format.
I call a person who works on old cameras a camera tinkerer. But what would one call a person who takes photos with old cameras...besides masochistic. Which, by the way, is a necessary trait of a true tinkerer too.
Makes me miss having a darkroom. Well technically I still got it. Only it is in numerous boxes in the attic of our new house. Am I getting less masochistic? Is this the first step in the twelve step program to kick the old camera addiction?
:-)
Henry |
