Minolta Autopak 470

So, I like toys as you can see.

I bought this camera for 10 bucks from a lady who helps people get rid of clutter by selling items for them. It's a 110 camera, which means it takes cartridge film which is 16mm wide and which is generally not available any more. Lomography has started making 110 film again but if you've read some of my other posts you might know that I have a beef with their company (although I keep giving them my money. urgh.) Despite this, you should probably consider the format dead (gasp).

Back in the 90s I used 110 film a lot in my Barbie camera. It was really easy to use because loading cartridges is a snap (ha...) and as you can imagine it was easy to go through a lot of film quickly. I'm not sure why it died out. As far as I can tell it's because the small negatives were harder to enlarge into good quality prints, and there were not a lot of good cameras made to use the film. Think about it like the Virtual Boy... maybe it was a good idea but not well executed, and they didn't release any big-name games for that console, dooming it forever.

I bought some Fuji 110 film off of ebay, and it was fine except that there is only one place in Vancouver that processes it. Furthermore, I asked for prints which ended up being very expensive because they have to scan each frame and print it out since they don't have the carriers for this size any more. You could always just ask for scans, but high quality ones that can be used for prints will still cost you.

If anyone knows a cost-effective way to shoot 110, please let me know. My developing tank only takes 135, 127 and 120 so I couldn't even do a B&W roll at home.

Anyway, this camera seems to have it all. Good optics, a built-in close-up lens, and a removable flash (which I don't have). Its exposure is automatic and it has zone focusing. Of course, it is also very small!

It might be my model, or maybe a combination of the model and my dumbassery, but I had a lot of trouble with this camera. The film advance is a moving piece of plastic which is sunken into the bottom of the camera, and which you push in to move to the next frame. For some reason, mine almost never worked right after taking a photo. It would jam, and then after walking around for a bit with it in my bag, it would work again.

The other thing is that the exposure and focus ended up being really wonky. I used 200 film so maybe it was designed to expose for 400 (very few 110 cameras were designed to detect a film's ISO from the cartridge). The focus may have been a fault on my part, maybe forgetting to double check the zone focusing or something, but in some of the photos it was so far off it doesn't make sense. Also a lot of them were taken in bright sun so the camera should be stopped down and be sharper. I don't know, man.

My overall experience with this one is that it has potential... but I probably won't use it again. My Olympus XA is smaller, lighter and more reliable. And then of course getting the 110 film developed was a whole other trial that I just don't think is worth the time or the money for me, as a girl who is just starting out and doesn't have a ton of expendable income.

You be the judge... These were taken on Fujicolor 200 ISO film, in and around Olympia, WA.

Olympus Trip AF

Well, hello? Surprised to hear from me? Me too!

I'm sick of making excuses for myself for not updating my blog. You may have noticed that I tweaked the layout and design and everything-- this is kind of like starting over without starting over. Like dying your hair after a bad breakup. Or something.

Anyway, the point is that I still have things to share and I am still learning about photography and want to help other people learn too. The show must go on!

Without further ado...

I bought the Olympus Trip AF from the Vancouver Camera Show and Swap Meet back in April (yes it HAS been that long), mostly because I love my Olympus Trip 35 so much and I hadn't explored compact cameras very much. However, the difference between the Trip 35 and the Trip AF couldn't be greater.

A quick google search will tell you that Olympus used the Trip nameplate on these lower end cameras to try to sell them based on the name's popularity. With that in mind, it should come as no surprise that the quality of the Trip AF is not up there with the older Trip models.

Here are the specs: it's a fully automatic camera with a built-in flash, and as you can see from the photo it has a Zuiko 35mm 1:3.8 lens. It apparently only has two shutter speeds (1/85 or 1/120) and two focal settings (1.5m or 4m) among which it automatically selects. And it has automatic film advance and rewind functions. So there you have it: a very uninvolved and easy operation.

And here's what you probably can't find through google:
The shutter and film advance have a very unnerving sound. Very 1985. Very Return of the Living Dead. It's really fun to use, mostly because of its retro appearance, as well as the aforementioned demonic shudders. However the quality is about as poor as you might expect. I ran a roll through my Canon Snappy 50 around the same time as this baby, and the Snappy wins out, for sure, as far as retro compact cams go.

The photos I got were unpredictable and reeking of my-first-grade-school-camera charm, but I still got a few gems. It's a good camera for snapshots or parties because of the built-in flash.

And ahoy hoy, here are the photos:

I don't remember the film I used... probably generic 400 rated somethingorother.

Till next time,
-CWB

Canon Snappy 50

Why, hello again!

I've been toying around with compact cameras a bit lately, including the Canon Snappy 50 and the Olympus Trip AF Motor... but unfortunately I seem to have lost the roll from the Trip, so that will have to come later...

So the beast I am talking about today, the Canon Snappy 50, is from the 1980s. It is fully automatic, with AE for ISOs of 100 and 400, and it has an eensy 35mm 1:3.5 lens. I picked it up because I heard that it has a bit of a cult following. Don't ask me where I heard that (I think it was a Craigslist ad) because I have nothing to back it up. But it's a fun camera anyway... I mean, just look at it! I get some weird looks when I walk around with it.

Rumours aside, here's what I think of the camera: for what it is, a cheap, light, and easy-to-use machine, it's alright, but not amazing. I ended up with some interesting shots with nice contrast and colours, and it has a flash which is handy for on-the-fly shooting at night. BUT! Parts of this camera, like the clamshell lens cover, are quite flimsy, and the image quality is nothing to write home about. You'll see in the examples below that there's quite a bit of distortion by the lens.

 If you're looking for an inexpensive, simple camera that takes beautiful photos, buy an Olympus Trip 35. If you want to recapture the essence of your photos from the 80s and 90s, the Snappy 50 might be the camera for you. I used it to document my husband's high school band playing at their 10 year reunion, so it was kind of perfect for that situation. It's also just a quirky showpiece, if you're into that.

Without further ado, here are the photos. They were taken with Shopper's Drug Mart 400 film.

Happy 4th of July!
-Canuck Caity

Olympus XA

 Guess who's back? Okay, so it's not Wednesday. I'm sorry... but my state of upheaval seems to be finally downheaving itself. So, I bring you this delayed post about a great find: the Olympus XA. I bought this guy at Shipwreck Days in Anacortes, WA.

This camera came out in 1979 and is a favourite of many... but why, you ask? The main thing is the handiness. That flash bit on the camera's right side is detachable and often it's better to remove it altogether, especially since it's only made to work for ISO 100 and 400 films. So, when that piece is removed, you can see that the camera itself is really quite small... and it's light! It's the kind of thing you can just keep in your pocket when you're out with your family or on vacation and it won't weigh you down.

The other great thing is that it consistently takes decent photos. Its lens is a pretty sharp 1:2.8 35mm, which apparently uses "magic" to focus internally (to paraphrase Ken Rockwell). In other words... the lens doesn't retract or extend when you focus or open the camera. This means once you open the camera, it's good to go! So simple... I love it.

Here are the basics: the XA is quasi-automatic, choosing its own shutter speed according to the ISO and f-stop you select, kind of like the Nikon EM. It is a rangefinder, although I found it quite hard to see the guides through the viewfinder. And, of course, it has that flash component as well as the awesome clamshell cover.

Although it is a delightful specimen, the XA does have a couple of shortcomings... The film advance is really, really picky, and you have to load it just right for the film to catch properly. I've also heard of older models getting weird and increasing the distance between shots so you end up with fewer photos on your roll than you should. Also, the little shutter release, while charming, is incredibly sensitive. I often end up snapping the picture before I've totally prepared myself. This can be annoying if you're trying to get your horizon level, or whatever.

That being said, I don't regret picking up this doodad. The following shots are pretty neat and are enough to make me love this camera forever. These were taken on Velvia 50 in Edmonton. I really like the lens flare in the third one, which was taken at the Muttart Conservatory.

Cheers,
Caity

Olympus Trip 35

This week's special friend is none other than the very classy compact camera, the Olympus Trip 35.

I paid $25 for this (apparently very dusty) guy, but immediately found another one for $10 somewhere else. So, look around! They are in abundance.

At first I was reluctant to buy one of these, since they're automatic and don't offer that much control. However, they do offer some, and what they lack in that regard they more than make up for in performance.

They were introduced in the 60s as an easy-to-use compact cam to take along when traveling. With that in mind, they are kind of the perfect compact. The Trip 35 has zone focusing, with little diagrams to indicate the general distance you want (landscape, full shot, medium shot, and so on). The shutter speed is entirely automatic, but I think it only has two settings: 1/200 and 1/40 of a second. The aperture can be selected manually or automatically. The best part: this little machine doesn't require a battery, because all that automatic stuff is powered by solar energy, hence the panel around the lens.

Another feature I really like is that there's a little window in the viewfinder so you can see what settings you've selected for your f stop and focus range. Awesome!

Furthermore, despite its simplicity, the camera is equipped with a hot shoe for a flash and screw threads for filters. It was produced well into the 80s, and I think that it has many reasons to have become a favourite for all types, from pros to lomophiles.

Ken Rockwell's review is worth checking out. He compares this compact's lens with some fancy pants Canon lenses and it holds up pretty well, for what it is.

And now for the photos! I believe I used some expired Kodak 400 somethingorather for the stuff at Kitsilano beach and some Fujichrome Superia 200 for the shot of my mama at the UBC botanical garden suspension bridge.