Another Eye-Level Box Camera: Kodak Brownie Cresta III

 I had a recent trip to Inverness and took with me another box camera, just in case there was anything nice to shoot while I was there.

After my failure with the Agfa Clack I decided to give another camera a go that is also shot at eye-level, a Kodak Brownie Cresta III. This plastic wonder may not look like much but it has one of the most reliable shutter mechanisms in my whole collection and its plastic Dakon lens gives lovely results. 

It dates from the first half of the 1960s and has a choice of two apertures, f/11 and f/16 (though these are labelled EV12 and EV13). It also has a close up lens that pulls into place with the lever on the side which allows you to focus as close as 4 feet. Its single shutter speed of 1/40 puts it on a par with the plastic Ensign Fulvueflex, another camera that many might dismiss as a toy but actually gives rather nice results.

As it happens, the weather was rather nice in Inverness and my husband and I had a hour before we had to move on, so we decided to take a walk along the Caledonian Canal. I am very happy to say that my pictures came out a lot sharper on the Brownie than they did on the Agfa, and most of the roll had some nice pictures on it.

One interesting thing did crop up, though. Apparently, at some point during lockdown, I loaded this camera in the vague hope of getting some nice shots near my home. I guess the conditions weren't great and I only managed to get 4 shots, after which I shelved the camera and awaited better conditions. I guess they were a long time coming because I couldn't remember for the life of me when I loaded the camera, or what film it was loaded with when it came to our Inverness outing. Peering through the film window revealed rounded numbers, which were a tell tale sign of Catlabs X Fiilm 80, a film I am very fond of. Now, either because the camera had been shelved for so long or because the film unravelled a little on loading, the first couple of shots had light leak. It probably happened during loading as I took the same shot of a sand castle three times, so I must have suspected the first frames wouldn't come out. The third shot was mostly unscathed and is pictured here:

Sand Castle

That's a surprising amount of detail in the sand from a plastic lens. 

Anyway, as I couldn't remember what the first 3 frames were, or the conditions in which they were taken, we decided to semi-stand develop the film, a process I will explain in more detail in the next post. For now, it will do to say that the film responded very well to this approach and we got some nice snaps.

Old Tractor Factory

Boats on the Caledonian Canal

More Boats on the Caledonian Canal

Swans

Bell Tower

Caledonian Canal

Wait For Me, Dad

Clachnaharry Railway

Railway Cottages

So we've ended up with some pretty vintage looking shots. I think C. T. Goode would have been very proud of my Clachnaharry Railway shot!

 I don't know how long the film sat in the camera but the sky shows some imprinting of the film backing paper on the image in many of the shots. I've had this happen before when a camera has sat loaded but unused for some time, so it's best to avoid that if possible. It hasn't ruined the shots though. Shall we just claim it adds character?

The Cresta III is a lovely camera. Highly recommended. A great box camera for beginners that's easy to use and doesn't involve any tricky waist level composing. British made Brownies are also good choices as they tend to take 120 film. Lots of other Brownie models take 127 film which is harder to come by and expensive.

Eye Level Box Camera: The Agfa Clack

Not all box cameras are shot at waist level. Some nice models are shot at eye level.
I have a couple in my collection and on the arrival of the recent lambing snows in my part of the world I thought it'd be nice to go out, play in the snow a bit and take some snaps with one of these machines. 

I'm pretty comfortable shooting at waist level now. I can usually do it without camera shake. Depending on the model of camera, and the size of its viewfinders I can more or less get a straight horizon too, though this is challenging on some, cough cough Junior Box Ensign. 

The eye level shooter I chose today was an Agfa Clack,which is a really lovely model with bells and whistles such as a swing in place close up lens with built in yellow filter, and two apertures, f/11 and f/12.5! It shoots eight 6x9 frames and has a 95mm meniscus lens. It's solidly made and feels nice to handle. In the right pair of hands it takes great shots.

Mine were not the right pair of hands today. I thought I was managing to keep the camera steady but the image blur shows I failed. The only image that was crisp, the last one, was also the only image I took in portrait instead of landscape. This suggests to me that my method of holding the camera up and pressing the shutter release with my right thumb was the problem, as when I held the camera differently for that one shot it remained steady. 

I can hardly review the camera with these shots. It would be grossly unfair. As the final, sharp shot demonstrates, the lens has some decent resolving power so I will have to learn from my mistakes and take this camera out again. It was still fun being out and about with a box camera, and I hope with time I'll get the hang of this one. 

I was shooting Catlabs X Film 80, pulled a stop to ISO 40 as the snowy conditions were so bright. The pictures are ordered from worst to best.

1) House and Boat

 

2) Fence Posts

 

3) Drunk Gate

4) Impressionist Power Poles

 

5) School Football Pitch

 

6) Road

7) House Under Clouds

8) Stream

 

So some of those pictures will probably give you a headache if you stare at them too long. Others are blurry though I don't mind the results. I actually quite like the slightly impressionist vibes I get from the shot of the power poles, and I find the mild soft focus of the road shot quite pleasing. The image has a nice mood. I was very happy with the stream shot though. I think it gives a tantalising taste of what this camera can do. Let's hope I do better next time.

Testing the Halina 6-4

Well, it's safe to say that I haven't exactly been itching to go out with the box cameras during the Covid 19 pandemic. The travel restrictions meant that I'd have to shoot the same few miles around my home again and again which gets dull fast. The abysmal Winter weather didn't exactly lend itself to good box camera photography either, so many months have passed where all I've really done is keep the cameras dusted and wait for happier times.

The restrictions haven't lifted yet, but some of my as yet untested cameras have been staring me in the face, longing to be loaded and used again for the first time in who knows how long. This weekend I couldn't stand it any more, so I planned a brief excursion just a few minutes from home where hopefully there would be some nice seascapes and maybe some of the local livestock would be obliging and pose for some snaps. 

The camera of choice was a Halina 6-4, which, on the one hand is quite a swish box camera in that it has three apertures to choose from, double exposure interlock prevention, and shoots dual format, either 6x6 or 4x4. On the other hand the build quality is shocking, looking as though it was assembled as cheaply and quickly as possible. The edges are rough and the joins aren't exactly flush (particularly when you try and sit the 4x4 mask in place, it wobbles a bit, at least on my model), and you shudder as you place the film back on after loading because you strongly suspect it won't keep the film light tight. So, not exactly a precision model.

However, there is something about Halina cameras that make them an absolute joy to shoot. One of my favourite 35mm cameras is my Halina Paulette Electric. It wasn't exactly assembled with any love or care either but the experience of using it just puts a smile on your face. Maybe it's the knowledge that the camera isn't a laboratory standard precision instrument that needs treating with reverence and ceremony every time you raise it to your eye. Shooting the Halina feels so laid back and easy that you don't really think about buttons and dials and just think about the composition. One final point worth making is that while the camera bodies aren't exactly oozing quality, Halina did put good lenses in them, and the lenses are far more important. What this means is the cameras still take good pictures, and this is precisely what I found with the Halina 6-4. 

My husband gave the camera a quick dab of oil to get the focus ring moving as it should again and once we were satisfied the shutter was behaving itself I loaded it with some Catlabs X Film 80 and then we got togged up to go out. It may be late March but it was freezing outside and blowing a gale. Not exactly great shooting conditions but this was the afternoon I had scheduled for it, so out we went. 

There were a few challenges keeping the camera still in the wind. I typically just had to find somewhere sheltered or get low to the ground or wedge myself against some of the rock faces. I used the 4x4 mask to get 16 test shots and then we made our way home to huddle in front of the fire with a warm drink.

Predictably, the lighting conditions outside weren't favourable for the film's box speed, so we pushed the film in development to ISO 125. The camera had a fixed shutter speed of 1/50 and the widest aperture available (used in every shot) was f/8. We developed the film in HC110(B) for 11 minutes and 28 seconds, giving inversions every 45 seconds. 

Here are the results (well the good ones where the wind didn't move me and the camera).

Testing the portrait zone (5-10 feet)

Lockdown Fur

Testing the scenes zone (25 feet to infinity)

Hubby scrambling over the rocks.

I liked the swirl patterns in this rock face.

Wondering how much detail in the wood the lens would capture.

Rusty Old Submarine. Okay, it's actually a rusty old silo. One of my favourite test shots, again seeing how much detail the lens would capture.

Rocks and Waves. Another generic view testing the scene zone.

Some obliging cows smiling for the camera. By this stage I was freezing and just wanted a cuppa.

 

All in all, not bad. First surprise, the film back didn't allow any light leaks. As for the two-element lens, it performed quite well, especially in the portrait zone. The car tyre, old wooden stile, and submarine shot all have a lot of detail in them. I was super happy with the submarine shot. There was an impressive amount of detail in the metal and rivets, and the highlights on the grass were gorgeous. The scene shots were perfectly serviceable. The resolving power of the lens isn't amazing, so these 4x4 negatives won't enlarge all that successfully. Would they make nice contact prints? Yes. Bearing that in mind, would I shoot 6x6 next time? Probably. 

I will definitely take the Halina 6-4 on another outing. Shooting in a gale in overcast conditions wasn't exactly giving it a fair fight, but even so it performed respectably. I haven't tried the smaller apertures yet, so the sharpness may well improve when shooting scenes at f/11 or f/16.

Another fun Halina camera and one I can recommend if you want a box camera with a little more choice when it comes to apertures. If you are considering this camera because you like the idea of shooting 4x4 just make sure you ask the seller if the mask is included. It detaches from the camera and is easily lost.

Box or Folder? Which is Better for Beginners?

As my vintage camera collection grows, this is a question that keeps cropping up in my mind. For the most part, folding cameras were more advanced models than box cameras, with better lenses, more shutter speeds, and typically a higher price. However, that is not always the case. Some folders offer little more by way of functionality than the box cameras, which makes me wonder what the thought process was when choosing one or the other back in the 1950s or earlier. 

Here is a good example:

As we can see from this advert for the All Distance Ensign and the Pocket Model No. 1, there really isn't much to distinguish these cameras. Both offer a single, instantaneous shutter speed, both allow time exposures, both have direct vision and reflex view finders, and both cameras come in red, blue, or brown. The only real difference is the price (25/- versus 37/6). Now the folding camera is obviously the more compact. The clue is in the name "folding" camera. In fact this model it is marketed as a camera for your pocket. One might suspect it has a better lens, but this is just another single element "all-distance" lens, with preset "portrait" or "view" mount positions.

So, is it a case of convenience only? Is it worth the extra cash just to have a camera that will fit in your pocket? Or is it a status thing? Do you buy the folder just because it looks like a more expensive camera?

There may be something in that theory. An early Ensign camera catalogue includes a review of the Ful-Vue (early model), which states:

Finally, it has the appearance of a very expensive camera, although one can buy it for a modest 25/-.

Nevertheless, in the same catalogue, a description of the Ensign Pocket E-20 Camera states:

Many beginners escape the box camera stage entirely and commence with a folding model.  The convenience with which  this type of camera can be carried compared with the 'box' needs no emphasis.

No better folding camera for a beginner is to be found in any maker's catalogue than the Ensign Pocket E-20....its graceful tapering ends and slim body enable it to be easily carried in almost any normal pocket.

A particular feature... is the hinged back, a feature until recently only found on the more expensive types of camera. 

In terms of functionality and creative scope the Pocket E-20 cannot outdo the cheaper box cameras, so it isn't much of a progression for beginners to exchange their boxes for this. The description does indeed seem to claim that the convenient size and the appearance of a more expensive camera are the main selling points of this camera.

Were the beginners to fork out for Pocket E-20 Model 2, on the other hand, that would be quite the upgrade. They would get an Ensar f/7.7 anastigmat lens with front cell focusing  and two instantaneous shutter speeds of 1/25 and 1/75. The model 1 cost 27/6. This upgraded model 2 cost £2-5-0.

What about other models, such as the Selfix Snapper? The entry camera into the impressive Selfix folding range.

Advert in PhotoGuide Magazine, Vol. 5, No.6 (1954)

Well, if you read the advert you'll see this camera is barely more capable than the Ful-Vue Super, released the same year. Both had a three point focusing lens that would focus from 2 yards to infinity. They have a single instantaneous shutter speed, are both synchronised for flash, and both take 620 film. The only way that the Snapper is an upgrade on the Super is because it offers 2 apertures instead of just one. However, given that in 1955, The Chemist and Druggist magazine listed the Super's retail price as 59/8, you'd have to really want that extra aperture to pay £5.10.8 for the Snapper instead.

All I will say is the Snapper was a fine looking camera, and maybe that was part of what you were paying for.

So, for absolute beginners it seems to come down to aesthetics (my camera looks pretty), bragging rights (my camera looks expensive), and ease of carrying (my camera fits in my plus fours). If you had a little more cash at your disposal, the folders could offer nicer lenses and a few more apertures and shutter speeds. That said, not all box cameras were created equal. Some, such as the Balda Baldixette c.1956 had 2-element lenses and 2 apertures. The Halina 6-4, c.1961, had a 2-element lens, shot dual format, and had 3 apertures. So at the beginner level it  really is swings and roundabouts. The folders don't outclass the boxes until we get to the improver models such as the Ensign Pocket E-20 Model 2, the Ensign Ranger II, or the Franka Bonafix. 

Ultimately, what it really comes down to is the final print. The better the resolving power of the lens, the larger you can enlarge your prints. For those folders and box cameras that are roughly equivalent, with 'all distance' lenses, you probably wouldn't expect anything more than contact prints. If you could afford a Kodak Sterling II with its 4-element Tessar-type lens then you will be able to blow up the prints a good deal. If you're just starting out the cheaper boxes will do nicely.

A child with a folding camera, pictured in The Home Photographer and Snapshots Magazine, October 1933.