[rollei_list] Re: [rolleiusers] Argomania

  • From: Allen Zak <azak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:55:49 -0500


On Jan 11, 2010, at 9:30 PM, Don Williams wrote:

At 08:19 PM 1/11/2010, you wrote:

The comment about influencing Kodak to switch from 126 to 35mm seems strange since Kodak did not introduce the 126 film type until 1963.

Bob C.
I never heard about 126 when I was a kid, just 620, 127, then later 120 and finally 35mm.  There was also a much larger paper/roll film, forgot the number.

I recall that the Brownie and Baby Brownie used 620 and 127 respectively.  Those were our family cameras.  I had some of those as well as a film pack camera, mfgr forgotten.

That Argus website has several spelling errors which tends to reinforce my notion that it's a Hong Kong company that just purchased the Argus name.

There seems to be an Argus interest group, I'll check it out.

DAW

I think the reference was to 828, same width as 35 mm but configured as a roll film with paper backing rather than light tight cassette. It provided 8 exposures with an image on film slightly larger than 35 mm because of no sprocket holes. The same gauge was later used for 126, putting 12 or 20 (?) exposures in a cassette. Eventually, 828 was discontinued, and later so was 126. The Argus company of today is strictly a marketing firm that badges but does not make photo equipment.

Allen Zak



Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. rollei_list
  3. Archive
  4. 01-2010