16 mm magazine cameras

ramsey · Post by **ramsey** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 3:46 am

Has anyone on this forum ever used a 16 mm magazine camera? I know that the ones that Kodak made are pure trash. Having said that, there cameras out there of this kind made by various other manufacturers that have a reputation for making very robust cameras. Bell and Howell and Revere are a few examples. I am curious about what experiences anyone on this forum has had with these cameras and what the results were. The ones that I am refering to are those that take that littel 50 ft. metal magazine with 16 mm film.

Post by **David M. Leugers** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 4:06 pm

Funny you post this as I just got back two 50ft rolls of 16mm from Franklin Film Lab that I shot in my Kodak Royal 16mm magazine camera. Yeah, I still use 16mm magazine cameras because I think they are fun to use. So small and yet deliver great 16mm film images. For my money, the Bell and Howell line have stood the test of time and are superb especially the later ones made in the 1950's. They usually have a grey or green leather covering and are beautiful. The Kodak Royal is a great camera and not to be confused with its lesser magazine effort. The Royal is a beautiful camera in black leather and chrome and shoots at 24fps with extremely sharp Ektar lenses. The Kodak Royal holds the distinction of being the last 16mm magazine camera made and was for sale new up until around the early 1970's (new old stock from the last production run about 1964). I have never found a Revere magazine camera that still worked properly (probably due to lack of lubrication) and tend to stay away from them. A late model B+H or Kodak Royal almost always work as advertised. I have a cache of 50ft loads of Plus-X B+W film for loading into the magazines which I do myself. When I get around to it, I plan to make a device to wind 50ft of 16mm film onto the tiny supply spool so that I can continue using my collection of magazine cameras.

David M. Leugers

Post by **marc** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 5:50 pm

Interesting discussion. How many magazines can you run through the camera before the spring motor starts loosing it's timming?

Post by **marc** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:46 pm

That reloader Idea is great so that you can do it in the field if you are short on magazines. I might be interested in getting one of these cameras so if you do develope a reloader let me know about the specs so I can build one as well. When reloading the mag, do ever have difficulty with dust and dirt getting on the film? Also, are there any service manuals available for these cameras? I would imagine that the spring motor gets fatigued after a certain amount of use. It is kind of like a rubber motor on a model airplane. Eventually it runs out of spunk!

Post by **marc** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:48 pm

One more question for you Dave. How would you test the timming on the motor of a newly aquired camera like this?

Post by **marc** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:40 pm

Now you guys got me started. I am hooked on this magazine camera idea. I have another question for you Dave. Are the magazine and spools inside of it returned to you after processing?

Post by **studiocarter** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:31 pm

In the magazine, International Movie Making, Vol 3, Num 1, 1997 are three pages of instructions on how to load the magazines.

should I scan it and put it up here?

Post by **marc** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:33 pm

Yes please. do you know anything about repairing The camera and checking the timming on it?

Post by **studiocarter** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:50 pm

I used a Bell & Howell once with some very old film and it turned out fine. However, the camera did die after that. The lens was saved.
The cameras are so cheap that just get another instead and that would be cheaper than $90 an hour in a shop.

A magazine loaded with film would be needed to check the timing. A watch face could be filmed, one with a second hand sweep, and after processing one could count the frames per second visually on the film.

Alternately, one could mark an X on the film, shoot ten seconds of film and mark another x, open the mag and count the frames. Old film could be used for that method.

Post by **marc** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:54 pm

yours must have been on its last leg because I understand that the Bell and Howells are pretty rugged little monsters. Are you sure that it was not a Kodak model? I believe that those have a reputation for being very fragile. I would'nt be interested in paying someone to do it, I would actually like to do it myself with the aid of a thurough repair manual.

Post by **studiocarter** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:40 pm

Yea, it was, but it was brown. Could have been a Revere? It was a long time ago. No, I still have the Revere. I have the Royal, too. It does single frame for animation.
Now, here is the link to the instructions:

ftp://ftp.filmshooting.com/upload/brochures/50ft.zip

Post by **marc** » Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:53 pm

Thankyou, It looks pretty straight forward. However, I only noticed one spool in the drawing ( hav'nt had time to read it yet). Is this the case?

Post by **David M. Leugers** » Sun Jun 22, 2003 2:58 am

I have never gotten too technical when checking out a magazine camera. If it sounds strong and steady and moves the film along without problem, then it should be good. I use a good light meter that I know is accurate and when I get the film back I see if it is properly exposed or under/over which tells me if the camera is on speed, fast or slow. 8)

Every lab I have dealt with will send you your magazines back along with your processed film (except Kodak) if you leave a note to please return magazines with your order. Frank at Franklin Film Lab is very familiar with these magazines and does a great job with black and white film.

To assist your loading of the 50ft roll of film into the magazine, make yourself a daylight loader by using one of the plastic cans that 100ft rolls of 16mm film come in now. It has a snap lid and I took the light trap out of a used 35mm roll of film (I asked a 1 hour lab in a drug store if I could have one, they were glad to give me as many as I wanted) and carefully relieved one end of the lid to accept the felt light trap material. This is so you can place the roll of film in the can while inside a common changing bag (or some call it a tent) and leave about 18 inches of film hanging out the end and snapping the lid down tightly. The light trap material keeps light from reaching the film inside the can and now you can take your time and carefully thread the film into the magazine. Put the magazine and can back inside the changing bag to take the film out of the can and place on the supply spindle. Put the magazine lid on and voila! I have got it down so that it works everytime and I can be confident the film will not jam in the magazine. Once I get a way to load the supply cores with 50 ft of fresh film, I will never run out of film for these neat cameras.

David M. Leugers

Post by **marc** » Sun Jun 22, 2003 3:06 am

Dave,
What is the shutter angle on this Bell and Howell Magazine cameras? Also, I am wondering if they are governorcontrolled like their big brother 100' spool camera. I have seem some of the Kodak ones at flee markets and they seem to be "friction controlled" with this little Pumus stone looking brake pad that puts pressure against some kind of rotor disc ( complete cheesiness that will guarantee uneven exposures). I would imagine that there must be some way of replacing the spring when it starts to slack up on you.

Post by **studiocarter** » Sun Jun 22, 2003 9:26 am

Film comes on little cores and goes onto one in the magazine, too. So, there ARE two. You need to get several magazines to get the cores.
I've seen pictures of core loading devices. It was nothing more than a little piece of wood, a crank, and a nail. The crank turns the core on a spindle and the nail is set so that the diameter of the fresh load is now at the correct size. It would lay flat. There would need to be two spindles, one for the load and one for the source film core/spool. The wood was smooth and polished, nice and clean. Pictures were in an old Superior Bulk Film Co catalog.