I remember owning and using a Kodak Pony 135 in the 1950's. It was a fully manual 35mm camera and I either had to guess the focussing distance or use an external rangefinder. I used the sunny 16 rule for exposure extensively back in those days.
Len --- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 1:50 PM Subject: Was: Old slides ... Now: The 126 Instamatic > Has anyone ever read "Glass, Brass & Chrome: The American 35mm > Miniature Camera" by Kalton C. Lahue and Joseph A. Bailey? > > It lovingly and technically traces the American 35mm camera industry, > framing it in perspective with Leica and Contax, telling the story of > Argus, Univex, Perfex, Kodak, and more, and closing with what they > were sure was the imminent demise of the 35mm format. The copyright > date? 1972, by the University of Oklahoma Press. > > Here's what their perspective was as they put this book together in > the late '60s and early '70s: > > Engineering design of the Kodak Instamatic, under the name Project > 13, was completed in 1961, with production beginning in 1962. It was > probably Kodak's best-kept secret of the century; few even within > Kodak were aware of its existence. > > The Kodak Instamatic, while not a genuine scientific or technological > breakthrough, was a masterful example of engineering ingenuity and > packaging (even the cheapest Instamatic camera was fitted with an > f/3.5 plastic lens, which was physically and permanently stopped down > to f/11 or f/16 for better definition, a practice the Ansco Memo had > used in the '30s. > > The cartridge, known briefly as the Kodapak, was made of a special > polystyrene stable enough to hold the film flat (or reasonably so, I > guess), but it was also inexpensive enough for mass production. > > Designers decided on a square format to utilize the full covering > power of a lens with a short focal length, which allowed the camera > to be slimmer wtihout the need for a collapsible front. > > Within the first two years of the Instamatic's introduction, more > than 7.5 million cameras were sold (in seven models) -- almost half > of which were sold overseas. > > Surveys at the time showed that while owners of other cameras used an > average of four rolls a year, Instamatic users used eight rolls. > Kodak sold 50 million cartridges of film in the first 21 months after > the format's introduction -- which, of course, was the primary goal > it set to achieve: increased film sales. > > The introduction of the Kodak 126 Instamatic cartridge was > devastating to the Japanese photographic industry, which only > survived by forming a cartel to restrict production during 1965-66. > > The high-end Kodak Instamatic X-90, featuring an Ektar f/2.8 lens and > some sort of exposure computer that allowed for nearly program > exposure, alone outsold all the rest of the world's "quality > rangefinders" combined. > > Kodak's Instamatic Reflex, which was manufactured in Germany by Kodak > A.G., replaced the famed Retina line. > > No American manufacturer produced a camera using 35mm film at the time. > > Within four years after its introduction, the Instamatic had cut > total 35mm sales nearly in half, from 600,000 to 325,000. "And while > 1971 sales figures showed the 35mm camera holding its own, it stands > no chance of ever catching up to its brother with the plastic > cartridge," the authors boldly stated. "The 35mm cameras once > manufactured in America died and are now half-forgotten, but the > rectangular negative took on new life in a square shape and is firmly > established today as the format of the future." > > Without automation, acrylic-lens technology, and Yankee ingenuity, > there would probably be no American camera industry today, the > authors said. > > > Any comments? This is at least partially on topic, as Asahi certainly > was affected by the 126 format's popularity, as were all Japanese > manufacturers. > > And they do have at least one Pentax mention: In a photo (the small > book is very nicely illustrated) showing the Exakta, the Asahi > Pentax, the Alpa Alnea, and the Edixa Reflex, the caption states: > "Four reasons for the decline of quality American cameras are these > products produced by foreign manufacturers in the 1950s. Left to > right: The dated but popular Exakta, the Asahi Pentax (later to > become the very popular Honeywell Pentax) ..." > > Joe > > >I had no idea anyone ever offered any kind of quality cameras for 126; all > >I ever saw were thos Instamatics. That's why I was surprised that there > >was slide film in 126 format: I couldn't imaging an Instamatic getting the > >exposure close enough to make it worth while. > > > >I'll bet you're right about the film flatness issues being the achilles > >heel of this format. Keeping the film flat and sufficiently perpendicular > >to the lens axis would seem to be almost impossible in those cheap plastic > >cartridges. And the 25mm x 25mm square size seems a bit weird; you don't > >really have the film area to be able to afford to crop down to a rectangular > >format like you do with 6 x 6 medium format ;-) > > > > > >- -- > >Mark Roberts > >www.robertstech.com > - - > -- > > Joe Wilensky > Staff Writer > Media and Technology Services - Cornell University > 1150 Comstock Hall > Ithaca, NY 14853-0901 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > tel: 607-255-1575 > fax: 607-255-9873 > Please visit our Web site at http://www.mediasrv.cornell.edu > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
