1920

womble · 04-20-2020, 03:29 PM

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

I would like to acquire a usable camera made in 1920 for a photo project. I'm guessing some sort of folder that uses 120 film, but that's just a guess.

Any suggestions?

Many thanks, Kris.

CarlH · 04-20-2020, 03:36 PM - **1 Like**

I'm thinking along the lines of a Zeiss Ikon of some kind. I have probably my grandad's Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 530/2 which still works as it should without, to my knowledge having never been serviced.

**Apet-Sure** · 04-20-2020, 04:56 PM

I have a Kodak No. 2-A Folding Cartridge Premo that shows patent dates of 1910 and 1913 on the shutter mechanism. Different versions of it were quite plentiful on e-bay when I was doing some research last year. You can see a couple pictures here: What has it seen? - PentaxForums.com

mkgd1 · 04-20-2020, 05:10 PM

Agfa and Ansco made a lot of cool bellows cameras between the two world wars.

Astro-Baby · 04-20-2020, 11:33 PM

Box Brownies are cheap enough and were the mass camera of the day. Use 120 role film so readily available film. Just about the most basic camera you can imagine.

**MossyRocks** · 04-21-2020, 09:31 AM - **1 Like**

The various pocket Kodak cameras mentioned above sound like they may be a good option. They are cheap and plentiful and if you look around can probably find a nice one with good bellows for what I got mine for which was $35 as an impulse buy at a pawn shop. There were a bunch of different ones with different lenses with some actually being pretty good. They also have a nice artdeco look to them so it only add to the cool factor. Mine is one of the Pocket Jr. ones so is smaller than others but it isn't that small.

I don't actually take pictures with mine because the light leaks and it is one of the ones with a low quality lens but I do use it all the time when doing photography merit badge with scouts as it becomes really easy to see how things works as it is so simple.

johnha · 04-21-2020, 11:47 AM

Most of the Kodak's of this era probably use 620 film, running 120 through these isn't the easiest option. You may be able to get modified spools or re-spool the film yourself.

**TomB_tx** · 04-21-2020, 12:28 PM

Graflex SLR RB Series B 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 with cut film back. Clip and load from 120 roll.
I have the 3-1/4 x 4-1/4 and have to cut down 4x5 film to fit.

g026r · 04-21-2020, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by johnha

Most of the Kodak's of this era probably use 620 film, running 120 through these isn't the easiest option. You may be able to get modified spools or re-spool the film yourself.

If the goal is a camera that was being produced in 1920, then 620 film isn't a concern. The 6xx series of films weren't on the market until the early '30s.

The bigger concern would be the sheer number of different roll films on the market. This is of particular irritation when it comes to Kodak cameras, where the model number used to indicate the film size wasn't consistent between the Brownie & non-Brownie lines.

kypfer · 04-21-2020, 02:42 PM

Originally posted by johnha

Most of the Kodak's of this era probably use 620 film, running 120 through these isn't the easiest option. You may be able to get modified spools or re-spool the film yourself.

620 film wasn't introduced 'till 1932 (by Kodak) so's they could make (slightly) slimmer cameras. The downside was that the film was wound so tight on the smaller spools that it often wouldn't lie flat in the camera!

Something like a No.1 Autographic Kodak Junior or a No.2 Folding Autographic Brownie will fulfil the date requirements and take 120 roll film. Both models were available with a range of lenses and shutters so a reasonably high-spec camera might be found if lucky. Obviously the 'Autographic' feature won't work

leekil · 04-21-2020, 09:40 PM

This site woudl probably show you what cameras use films you can get today. With the additional possibilitiy of using 120 for 620 (with a little work) or possibly adapting a 120 reel for use in a larger format film camera.

THE BROWNIE CAMERA PAGE - All About Eastman Kodak Brownie Cameras

titrisol · 04-22-2020, 07:16 AM

If you want something unique, get a Verascope
something like this: Verascope stereo camera by jules richard. format 45x107 mm with case and holders | eBay

**TomB_tx** · 04-22-2020, 08:45 AM

1920 is a decade early for anything related to Pentax. Starting in 1931 Asahi Optical made lenses for the predecessor of Minolta, and a bit later for the predecessor of Konica, and so forth up to the war.

johnha · 04-27-2020, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by kypfer

620 film wasn't introduced 'till 1932 (by Kodak) so's they could make (slightly) slimmer cameras. The downside was that the film was wound so tight on the smaller spools that it often wouldn't lie flat in the camera!

Something like a No.1 Autographic Kodak Junior or a No.2 Folding Autographic Brownie will fulfil the date requirements and take 120 roll film. Both models were available with a range of lenses and shutters so a reasonably high-spec camera might be found if lucky. Obviously the 'Autographic' feature won't work

Thanks for this and the other corrections, I was probably confusing it with 127 film.

04-20-2020, 03:29 PM	#1
womble Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Hertfordshire Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,324	1920 Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here. I would like to acquire a usable camera made in 1920 for a photo project. I'm guessing some sort of folder that uses 120 film, but that's just a guess. Any suggestions? Many thanks, Kris.

04-21-2020, 02:42 PM	#10
kypfer Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2018 Location: Jersey C.I. Posts: 3,592	Originally posted by johnha Most of the Kodak's of this era probably use 620 film, running 120 through these isn't the easiest option. You may be able to get modified spools or re-spool the film yourself. 620 film wasn't introduced 'till 1932 (by Kodak) so's they could make (slightly) slimmer cameras. The downside was that the film was wound so tight on the smaller spools that it often wouldn't lie flat in the camera! Something like a No.1 Autographic Kodak Junior or a No.2 Folding Autographic Brownie will fulfil the date requirements and take 120 roll film. Both models were available with a range of lenses and shutters so a reasonably high-spec camera might be found if lucky. Obviously the 'Autographic' feature won't work Last edited by kypfer; 04-21-2020 at 02:48 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Anyone interested in a 1920x1200 images group.	normhead	Pentax DSLR Discussion	23	12-06-2016 01:29 PM
Red-1920 style	sjpieri	Monthly Photo Contests	0	08-12-2013 03:56 AM

04-20-2020, 03:36 PM - 1 Like	#2
CarlH Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Carlisle, Cumbria Posts: 58	I'm thinking along the lines of a Zeiss Ikon of some kind. I have probably my grandad's Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 530/2 which still works as it should without, to my knowledge having never been serviced.

04-20-2020, 04:56 PM	#3
Apet-Sure Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2015 Location: Goldsboro North Carolina Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,861	I have a Kodak No. 2-A Folding Cartridge Premo that shows patent dates of 1910 and 1913 on the shutter mechanism. Different versions of it were quite plentiful on e-bay when I was doing some research last year. You can see a couple pictures here: What has it seen? - PentaxForums.com

04-20-2020, 05:10 PM	#4
mkgd1 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2019 Location: Mohave county Arizona Photos: Albums Posts: 1,076	Agfa and Ansco made a lot of cool bellows cameras between the two world wars.

04-20-2020, 11:33 PM	#5
Astro-Baby Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2018 Location: Reigate, Surrey Posts: 764	Box Brownies are cheap enough and were the mass camera of the day. Use 120 role film so readily available film. Just about the most basic camera you can imagine.

04-21-2020, 09:31 AM - 1 Like	#6
MossyRocks Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,982	The various pocket Kodak cameras mentioned above sound like they may be a good option. They are cheap and plentiful and if you look around can probably find a nice one with good bellows for what I got mine for which was $35 as an impulse buy at a pawn shop. There were a bunch of different ones with different lenses with some actually being pretty good. They also have a nice artdeco look to them so it only add to the cool factor. Mine is one of the Pocket Jr. ones so is smaller than others but it isn't that small. I don't actually take pictures with mine because the light leaks and it is one of the ones with a low quality lens but I do use it all the time when doing photography merit badge with scouts as it becomes really easy to see how things works as it is so simple.

04-21-2020, 11:47 AM	#7
johnha Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Lancashire, UK Photos: Albums Posts: 1,155	Most of the Kodak's of this era probably use 620 film, running 120 through these isn't the easiest option. You may be able to get modified spools or re-spool the film yourself.

04-21-2020, 12:28 PM	#8
TomB_tx Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,446	Graflex SLR RB Series B 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 with cut film back. Clip and load from 120 roll. I have the 3-1/4 x 4-1/4 and have to cut down 4x5 film to fit.

04-21-2020, 12:35 PM	#9
g026r Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,074	Originally posted by johnha Most of the Kodak's of this era probably use 620 film, running 120 through these isn't the easiest option. You may be able to get modified spools or re-spool the film yourself. If the goal is a camera that was being produced in 1920, then 620 film isn't a concern. The 6xx series of films weren't on the market until the early '30s. The bigger concern would be the sheer number of different roll films on the market. This is of particular irritation when it comes to Kodak cameras, where the model number used to indicate the film size wasn't consistent between the Brownie & non-Brownie lines.

04-21-2020, 09:40 PM	#11
leekil Pentaxian Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 2,003	This site woudl probably show you what cameras use films you can get today. With the additional possibilitiy of using 120 for 620 (with a little work) or possibly adapting a 120 reel for use in a larger format film camera. THE BROWNIE CAMERA PAGE - All About Eastman Kodak Brownie Cameras

04-22-2020, 07:16 AM	#12
titrisol Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: In the most populated state... state of denial Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,851	If you want something unique, get a Verascope something like this: Verascope stereo camera by jules richard. format 45x107 mm with case and holders \| eBay

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-22-2020, 08:45 AM	#13
TomB_tx Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,446	1920 is a decade early for anything related to Pentax. Starting in 1931 Asahi Optical made lenses for the predecessor of Minolta, and a bit later for the predecessor of Konica, and so forth up to the war.

04-27-2020, 10:26 AM	#14
johnha Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Lancashire, UK Photos: Albums Posts: 1,155	Originally posted by kypfer 620 film wasn't introduced 'till 1932 (by Kodak) so's they could make (slightly) slimmer cameras. The downside was that the film was wound so tight on the smaller spools that it often wouldn't lie flat in the camera! Something like a No.1 Autographic Kodak Junior or a No.2 Folding Autographic Brownie will fulfil the date requirements and take 120 roll film. Both models were available with a range of lenses and shutters so a reasonably high-spec camera might be found if lucky. Obviously the 'Autographic' feature won't work Thanks for this and the other corrections, I was probably confusing it with 127 film.