Nelsonfoto Forums
February 10, 2012, 06:50:15 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Happy New Year to all!
Nelsonfoto Forums - Five Years And Going Strong!
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Slim steps out  (Read 726 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
connealy
call me mike
Prolific Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3192


View Profile WWW
« on: March 14, 2008, 03:48:27 PM »

Slim has had an eventful couple of days in Albuquerque.
First there was lunch at the Barelas Cafe with three lovely ladies.





Then, there was a trip to the Aquarium.





And, finally, a stroll through Old Town.





The Ultra Wide & Slim was loaded with 800-speed Walgreen's film.  The rating seemed a bit over-blown, as the film really performed better in moderate to bright light rather than in low light levels.  In contrasty low light, there was a lot of grain and noise, but that may have been partly the fault of the drugstore scanning.  In any case, it seems like 200-400 is a better choice for this camera.
Logged

mdcarma
delusions of adequacy
Prolific Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1873


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: March 14, 2008, 03:54:40 PM »

Neat shots. That last one is a classic "free my people" shot.
Logged
Julio1fer
Prolific Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3771


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 14, 2008, 06:53:08 PM »

Nice shots.

Isn't the Slim a fixed aperture-speed camera at 1/100 in f11 or thereabouts?
Logged
connealy
call me mike
Prolific Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3192


View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2008, 03:08:08 AM »

Quote from: Julio1fer;132522
...Isn't the Slim a fixed aperture-speed camera at 1/100 in f11 or thereabouts?
That's about it; basically a tiny, plastic box camera.

There's a page on my web site about the Vivitar plastic cams I've used over the past couple years.  The others are rather more substantial in their construction, with a panoramic option and a built-in lens cover.  The Ultra Wide & Slim dispenses with those features, and also has a paper-thin shell with everything packed into the absolute minimal space to house a full-frame camera.  In fact, when you look at the size of the thing, it seems impossible that a roll of 35mm film would fit into it.

The other notable feature of the camera is the ultra-wide lens which Wayne determined to consist of two elements.  I believe it likely the elements are molded in acrylic in an aspherical design.  The thing is exceedingly sharp.  About the only obvious fault in the images is some darkening at the corners.  I think that may not be a lens aberration, but rather just light fall-off across the flat plane similar to what you would see in a wide-angle pinhole camera.
Logged

Gene M
It's funny.
Prolific Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2797


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2008, 05:41:19 AM »

I love the motel stuff.
Logged
Wayne
Bottom feeder
Prolific Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3246


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2008, 05:12:45 PM »

Yep, love that old signage and the shark Mike.

Quote from: connealy;132544

The other notable feature of the camera is the ultra-wide lens which Wayne determined to consist of two elements.


Well it's got at least two - there's something on either side of the shutter anyhow. It's an amazing performer really for such an inexpensive, tiny thing. Have loaded mine up, but yet to put it through it's paces.
Logged

Wayne

Flickr
ImageMaker
B&W Geek
Prolific Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5990


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: March 16, 2008, 01:10:33 PM »

It's very likely exactly two elements, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.  Long, long ago (like 120+ years ago) a lens design came along called "Periskop" which consisted of two deeply curved meniscus lenses, concave sides in and spaced approximately with the inner surface of each at the inner center of curvature of the other, with the stop centered between; it was special because the two elements were the same glass, identical curvatures, and though pretty slow (f/11 max, sound familiar?), the thing would cover an incredibly wide angle (for such a simple prescription -- around 120+ degrees total, as I recall) with no distortion and a perfectly flat focal plane.  Similar lenses have been seen in various box cameras, "folding box cameras" like the Kodak Vigilant Jr. (where it was called a Kodet) and Ansco Speedex Jr. (where it had no name), as well as the low-end versions of Polaroid pack-film cameras (which were still capable of quite acceptable prints) made into the 1970s.  It wouldn't surprise me at all to see a version of the Periskop still in use in the wider angle single-use cameras, much less in the Ultra Wide and Slim.

FWIW, the lens in my first Speedex Jr. (which had a good bellows and was perfectly focused) was good enough that at f/22, you could count bricks in a chimney a block away on a 6x6 negative; I'd have put it up against a low-end triplet at the same aperture...
Logged

Never let yourself spend 25 years away from the darkroom...
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!