Philip Forrest

It sounds like you don't have a camera yet, correct? If so, your options are very open. In a nutshell, you can use an FD to C mount adapter on most C mount cameras, all turret Bolexes, and you should be able to hang whatever lens you like with the exception of mirror lockup lenses, like the 19mm. That said, those adapters along with the lenses themselves, are much larger than native C mount lenses, she adapter + lens can become a little heavy hanging off the front of the camera. You're going to be looking for a "normal" for the 16mm camera, so a lens with a focal length close to 25mm. You're also going to want this lens to be fast, which is going to limit you to the 24mm f/1.4 (which you probably don't already have) or the 24mm f/2 (which is easier to find.) Both of those lenses aren't cheap and the f/1.4 version is extraordinarily expensive these days. You could go with a slower lens but you're also going to be limited in how you shoot because focusing an f/2.8 lens through a reflex gets difficult once the sun goes down, if you don't have supplementary light. The real "cheap" FD mount lenses are 50mm and up, but for those focal lengths, you can get native C mount lenses for about the same cost. You don't need to shoot Kern lenses, there are many fantastic optics out there in C mount. The only issue is if you are shooting a reflex Bolex and your C mount lens is shorter than 50mm, it needs to be one made for the reflex camera, due to the prism. You can stick a normal C mount on the reflex, you just can't get the sharpest image out of it at wide apertures. You can find lenses specifically made for Bolex reflex cameras made by Kern, SOM Berthiot, SOPELEM, Angenieux, Schneider, and maybe a few other marques. These are really for the focal lengths below 50mm (where you're hard pressed to find fast FD lenses which are affordable.) After shooting a Bolex REX 4 for a year, I went back to my Bell and Howell Filmos, which I like better for a few reasons, one of which is the parallax viewfinder which is very bright and not affected by the shooting aperture of the lens. I found myself returning to the parallax Octameter when shooting towards or after dusk, so there was no benefit to the reflex viewing system for me, other than during the daytime. Granted, it's not TTL viewing, but I can also walk around with my camera with my Angenieux 25mm f/.95 hanging off the front and not have to be concerned with focus issues that would otherwise affect the reflex camera. I'm good at estimating distance, my shoes happen to be exactly 12" long, and I carry a measuring tape when I'm serious and using a tripod. All this is my personal opinion along with some issues I've experienced, though. Phil Forrest

The reason that medium and large format lenses show lesser performance when compared with miniature format lenses, besides age and individual lens condition, is that the viewing distance of the final print is assumed to be greater, which negates the issues we see these days of "pixel peeping." These lenses are designed with this in mind, allowing some compromises. Phil Forrest

I was meaning rectilinear when I mentioned the 38mm SWC lens, since fisheyes are quite limited in their utility. Most fisheyes are more expensive anyway, and the theme of the thread is kind of using other optics on the cheap. If you want to talk expensive fisheyes, there's the 6mm, 8mm, 13mm and 15mm Nikkors alone. Unfortunately, the rear elements are too deep with all but the 15mm. Same goes for the Pentax 19mm, 2.1cm Nikkor, Yashica 19mm, and the Minolta 19. The aforementioned Nikkor shouldn't be in the same group as those fisheyes though, because it's a rectilinear superwide, just like the 38mm Biogon. There is a superwide medium format lens, the Schneider Apo-Digitar but it's quite slow and very expensive. Back to the original topic though, Spiratone marketed a 28mm f/2 in many different mounts. Phil Forrest

It doesn't make sense to adapt any medium format lenses to most motion picture film or digital cameras. The widest lens you'll get for medium format is the 38mm Zeiss Biogon for the Hasselblad SWC. It's pretty slow at f/4.5, but a stellar lens. After that, the most affordable is the Schneider 47mm Super Angulon from the old Brooks Veriwide 100 and later Veriwide offerings. Again, not a fast lens but very wide for a camera that can shoot 6x11. There is no fast, cheap, and wide offering that you can easily stick on an EF camera. The widest and fastest you'll get would probably be the 24mm f/2 Nikkor. Phil Forrest

The flange focal distance of the Signet lenses is far too short to be adapted to anything other than M4/3. Lumenized is Kodak's trade name for it's magnesium flouride coating. Phil Forrest

No need to get an insanely expensive 3.5cm Zeiss Biogon in S mount when you could get a perfectly fine Jupiter 12 (sometimes made from old Zeiss glass but with a different beauty ring) in M39 for peanuts. My M39 (LTM) J-12 is a very early production with coating, and pristine glass. The cool thing about the pure symmetrical formulations like that Biogon is that they have essentially zero distortion. No barrel, no pincushion. Phil Forrest

Yes, but only the optical modules from the IIIC and early Retina Reflex. They designed the convertible IIIC and early Retina Reflex (pre Deckel) where the lens formulations in front of the aperture were the only part of the system that changed (since most double-gauss are very similar on the film plane side.) It was a smart, unique design but they changed to the full unit focusing, single optical module because there were too many limitations in the design and also some compatibility problems. I don't know if anyone has ever taken the rear cell of a Retina IIIC out and made a whole lens with the front. Goodness knows there are enough broken Retinas of this era to supply a ton of beautiful glass for experimentation. Phil Forrest

Regarding Deckel mount lenses, these must be the full lens, not just the front optical cell which was used in the Retina IIIC and early Retina Reflex. Both of them came packed in nearly identical plastic bubble containers. The 80mm Retina-Longar may look tempting but it is only half of the lens, as the other half is in the Retina body. There's also Isco-Gottingen (Schneider,) who made lenses in many mounts, primarily M42 and Exakta. Mamiya made an 85mm f/1.7 in M42 and a medium format 85mm f/1.9 for the 645. There is not much in the way of wide lenses which are faster than f/2. Pentax made the 31mm FA limited in K mount. The fastest lenses available are always those close to the "normal" for that particular format, so those which are ~50mm will have the fastest offerings. The Noct-Nikkor is a 58mm f/1.2 but please don't permanently modify this lens. In my opinion, I think there should be a group of skilled "enhanced interrogators" who hunt down those who permanently modify lenses which were produced in very limited quantities. I can think of one party in particular, who bought up a lot of the market in uncommon motion picture lenses, then hacked the mounts and stuffed them into donor mounts (from other ruined lenses, mostly FSU) so a few folks could try them on their Leica M cameras as a curiosity, then stick them on a shelf because they preferred the utility of their 50mm Summicron instead. Now that digital mirrorless offerings are everywhere, this enables adaptation instead of modification, thank goodness. Granted, I love my 63mm f/2 Cine-Ektar and I wish I could stick it on a 35mm camera (the circle of coverage isn't big enough,) but using it on my M4/3 camera and on a Filmo has to suffice. I suppose I'll have to find a 65mm ELCAN if I want a rare optic in that focal length... Phil Forrest

Most of the Deckel mount lenses for the Kodak Retina Reflex S are made by Schneider and are very good. Nothing wider than 35mm, if I recall correctly but some of the longer lenses are very unique. Not much is fast aside from the 50mm f/1.9. Konica lenses are usually outstanding and if someone were to be willing to spend the money to permanently convert something like a Zeiss Contax lens, then there is certainly a reason to do so for a Konica. The flange to focal distance is 4mm less than EF mount but if it were rehoused, there would be no problem. Konica lenses are insanely inexpensive. I've built up most of a collection of some of the best Konica AR glass just by hunting thrift stores. The 135mm f/3.2 isn't "fast" but it is an amazing shooter. The build quality and image quality are every bit as good as Leica or Contax, and it's a great thing no one cares about this system because they can be had for peanuts. Komura was another manufacturer that made some very nice optics in just about every mount out there. There are a lot of other brands out there that can be tried easily. Phil Forrest

A 110 deg. shutter would be amazing in a Filmo. I've even thought about having a new foil shutter custom made to decrease exposure. Phil Forrest

Are there any letters with the number? They would tell you the month and year according to the CAMEROSITY production codes. Phil Forrest

The REX4 is sold. Everything else is still available. Phil Forrest

Derick is great to deal with, folks. I bought a few things from him here and there and just wanted to pass this on. Phil Forrest

I don't want to deal with ebay and all the hassle/risk/fees. I'd rather keep it than have an ebay headache. I got this camera from a good friend and I feel that I don't want to take advantage of the low price I paid and make a big profit. I listed the issues it has and feel that it could use a CLA. I was in line to get it done by Bernie last winter. NOTE: as of 11:44 am EDT, the camera is tentatively sold. I will update with any changes. thanks all, Phil Forrest

Selling my Bolex REX 4 simply because I need to work towards funding a car to replace my ancient, rusting 1972 diesel Benz (which also happens to be for sale locally.) I got a camera last year and it's been fantastic. I haven't had any time to get any film developed but I've shot 4x100 feet with it recently and have never had any jamming issues. The camera runs smoothly and steadily, pulling evenly for 44 seconds at 16f/s, and 32 seconds at 24f/s. There is no corrosion anywhere on or in the camera. That said, I think the original mastic light seal may be still there as it's hard, so this probably could use a CLA. There is some dust in the viewfinder. The plastic eyepiece adjuster also could be replaced as it was cracked when I received the camera, and there are none available which I can find, so I fixed it myself using a little bit of heat to weld the plastic adjuster. It works perfectly as it is. I was going to have it replaced with a CLA this year. Camera comes with a late Octameter with the 10mm aux diopter. Also will include 1 Bolex c mount cap, turret lock, and 1 generic c mount cap. Cosmetically, this is a really beautiful camera but at this point I can't afford to be keeping it. Asking $450 OBO. Also selling a Rexofader 40 and Surefire grip with working cable and connector. $75 Also for sale are 2 lenses. Both are SOM Berthiot H16 RX lenses: First is a 10mm f/1.9 Cinor (with hood) which I wrote about permanently fixing the weak aperture blades. I performed this fix on this lens and it has worked well. Focus is smooth but slightly dry in my opinion. Small amount of dust in this optic. Asking $100. Second is a 25mm f/1.4 Cinor (with hood). Aperture blades are clean, glass is excellent with a small amount of haze and dust when put against the "flashlight test." Asking $150. I will ship using USPS with full insurance, tracking and direct signature confirmation. Shipping will be calculated. I can take paypal and the fees are on me. I'm located in Philadelphia if anyone wants to check it out, run a test roll, save shipping cost, etc. Send me a PM for photos. Thanks all. Phil Forrest

I've been looking for any pre-EF mount Canon 24mm f/1.4 lens which I can afford, for close to twenty years. And I'm not a Canon shooter. If I ever find one, I'll get a New F1 body just to shoot this lens. Phil Forrest

I love how 5222 tends to lay flat as well. I got a emails back from both Cinestill and Kodak. Cinestill said it was the real deal. Kodak said that Cinestill made a custom ordered cut in 120 width. So, if anyone wants to shoot this film in this width, the only to get it is through Cinestill, or a reseller, and they can charge whatever they like. Currently, that's $12 USD per roll. If I want Kodak in 120, I'll get it at $8/roll. If I don't mind "slumming" it with some of the excellent films from the smaller manufacturers, they start at about $5/roll, which is much more my speed. As for 5222, I'll stick with loading my own Nikon cassettes and Kodak snap caps with the 35mm real deal.

Can't you just get an adapter? Phil Forrest

I don't understand the cachet of shooting 5222 in a still camera, instead of other, better stocks. 5222 has great tonality and a wonderful adaptability, but it is quite grainy, as it's meant for motion picture, not still printing. 35mm Tri-X, in all of its iterations, is a much better film. I like, or liked, shooting 5222 because it was cheap. Now it's a hip, niche film for still shooters, who have no problem paying 5x what the film should cost, if it's repackaged by Cinestill. When I started shooting 5222 years ago, a roll of 36 exposures cost me about $1 USD. Even with an educational discount, now it's just under $3 USD per roll, direct from Kodak, all I have to do is load my own canisters. The 120 format for XX (or whatever they are going to call it) is great and I hope it injects a shot of money into Kodak's film production but I'm not holding my breath either, considering what we've seen happen with Kodak over the last 10 years. My inner cynic is telling me this is just a custom run or a found stash of 70mm that was cut down and respooled. Phil Forrest

I'm not sure about the validity of this film actually being real XX (5222/7222) with the same emulsion and the same base, but unperforated and much wider. I'm wondering if it is a custom cut or a recan of a custom run of 70mm done by Kodak. https://emulsive.org/articles/news/my-dream-come-true-kodak-eastman-double-x-film-now-in-120-format-available-from-cinestill-to-photographers-for-the-first-time-in-medium-format Hopefully it's the real deal AND it sticks around. Phil Forrest

If you do it carefully and do it right, it will work great. You MUST take the whole shutter out of the camera, remove the shuttle (which has the claws), recheck about 5 times before you make the cut, then completely remove the appropriate claw and then file it down smooth, making sure to remove burrs. The shuttle pins need to be reinstalled correctly or you can get drag on the shuttle. The 70D mechanism is amazing in simplicity and reliability when properly lubed and maintained. Phil Forrest

The D mount lens natively sits 5.3mm closer to the film plane than C mount. As a result, if you put a D mount lens on a C mount camera, you would be effectively putting an extension tube on it, making the D mount lens only able to resolve an image very close, if at all. In order to get a setup that gives you a workable image with some distance between camera and subject, you would probably need a D mount with a focal length greater than 25mm, the longer, the better. This doesn't say anything about how the image circle will cover your film plane, there may or may not be vignetting. Phil Forrest

Thank you for providing us all with such painful, personal details that had no bearing upon this overall thread. I'm sure Bernie and Julie had intended for their email to you to be shared with the world. Phil Forrest

Don't discount the Bell & Howell Eyemos. Parallax viewing, but otherwise an amazingly reliable camera. It doesn't come any less expensive with reliability than an Eyemo. Phil Forrest

This is pretty cool. How close does the rear element shroud get to your prism? Phil Forrest