Thanks so much! I actually thought about naming the episode “David and Goliath”. Would’ve worked, I think!

Great story! I think the cartridge format - whether we’re talking 126 or 110 - was just an overall good idea that failed in execution. Without the use of a pressure plate holding the film flat during exposure, it was plagued with inconsistent results. When you add into the mix all the cheapo cameras that used it, well, it was hit and miss at best. I think Pentax got everything they could out of the format with this camera though. If they’d released it about 5 years earlier, it could’ve been a huge hit. As it turned out though, they were late to the game and couldn’t compete with the (much more consistent) 35mm point and shoots that were being introduced. But it’s still a fun camera if you temper your expectations :-)

I'm a lab tech and I hate 110. I can absolutely confirm I've never seen such good results come in (yes there are still people shooting it, on point and shoots with expired film). Now I'm tempted to buy the pentax auto and the orca film and see if I can get anything good!

You should try it out. Lomography also sells color stocks in 110, too. Haven’t used one yet, but I have some ready to go.

Thanks! This camera pushes the 110 format about as far as it can go. It’s certainly not bad for what it is.

The vast majority of 110 cameras had a fixed shutter speed and often a fixed aperture too, meaning they rarely captured a correct exposure without flash. The lab tech would have to rely on the latitude of the film in order to produce a legible print, hence most 110 prints looked terrible. The Auto-110 of course had a proper electronically controlled aperture and shutter and should in theory nail exposure every time.

You nailed it about how crappy the usual 110 are/were. Not really much of a camera.

It really is quite an upscale body for such a maligned film format. But I think the P110 gets just about everything it can out of that film.

Exactly. Realizing the limitations can absolutely improve your results. To me, the 18mm wide for this camera is the biggest disappointment. Hard to focus because every little detail is so small in the finder. My favorite lens, though, is the 50mm tele. Perfect range. And the 70mm isn’t bad either.

That’s an interesting idea, but I’m with you on that. Add the fact that its flash capabilities are very limited makes that a questionable choice of gear for the job, IMO. It was noble attempt on Pentax’s part, but that format was probably already half dead by the time they released this.

Thank you! That is quite the compliment, and I do appreciate it. I had no idea what to expect as a result once I decided to do this video. It was a fun one. For the 110, there is no manual control. It’s totally automatic. So I’d say it did a pretty good job on the exposures. There was only one shot that I think was influenced by backlighting, but it wasn’t off by very much. “Moon pies bigger than the 110”….lol

You are indeed wise in the ways of the P67! Admittedly, I’ve spent much too little time with it. But from this point on, I pledge not to be stymied by the MLU switch. I’m planning a shoot with it in the next few weeks to support a stand-alone episode for it. Your words of wisdom will come in handy, I can already tell. Thanks for watching! And cheers!

Yep, that would fix that issue for sure. Thanks for the tip!

Glad it served as a pleasant reminder. Thanks for watching!

Yes, I should’ve put a few more of the side-by-side shots in there. It was an interesting comparison, for sure. Thanks for watching!

It was a fun comparison. I expected little to nothing from the 110, but it didn’t do too bad. As for the Dome Building shot, yes cutting the flagpole off was intentional. And I hated doing it, because that certainly leads your eye out of frame. But, it’s a rather tall pole, and including it’s entirety forces the main part of the subject (the dome) down too far in the composition. And I thought that would be even worse since there was no wind to blow the flag. It was just hanging there. If it had been flying, it would’ve helped balance it out. Great question!

I did pick up some color film for the 110 - just haven’t shot it yet. I’ll probably do that when I get to the stand-alone episode for it. I’ll have one coming up with the P67 in a few weeks, and I plan to do some color with that one, too.

Thanks for watching! I don’t think the 110 was very successful. It was a noble attempt by Pentax to instill some credibility to that format. But it was sort of late to the party. I think most people had moved on to 35mm point-and-shoots and, heaven forbid, the Kodak Disc format would soon take aim at the mini-cam market.

Good to know! Seems like battery doors on some of this old gear wasn’t engineered well enough. Now we’ll add the 110 winder to the list.

Many thanks for the accent appreciation! As they say, it is what it is, lol. Yes, Pentax really hit just about every format except Large, and gave it their best shot while doing so. Minolta comes next closest - since they also had two 110 SLRs, albeit without interchangeable lenses. I wonder if Pentax had any 126-film cameras? I’ll need to check that. But those cameras were just like most other 110s with a single shutter speed and not much aperture control (if any). With those awful cameras, the 110 format was doomed anyway. I think larger negatives will have greater capacity for an expanded tonal range to some degree and greater capacity to capture detail. Once you get as small as 110, the relative size of the grain to the subject may start to play a part and obscure the fine details and variation in tones. Or maybe that’s just an illusion that I think I see sometimes. When they first released the Auto 110, Pentax took out a full-page ad in the photo mags and included a full-page enlargement made on Kodachrome. Man I wish I could run some 110 Kodachrome through this thing!

@@vintagecameradigest minolta auto zoom has a good autoexposure tho for what I’ve seen, you should definitely revisit those little cameras too if you get a chance. I’ve come to grow quite fond of weird stuff like that because it leans the camera toward a niche. 126 film seems to be an American phenomenon so I would be surprised but at the same time I wouldn’t be with all the cool stuff Pentax has made. Cool thing about pentax and Minolta is you can go wayyyy back to the 30s and 40s prewar they were already making cool cameras, so there’s tonnes of old stuff just floating out there :3 you should do a video comparing all the middle formats too, like 35 vs large format and drop in a few 6x7 examples too to compare with x3

@@vintagecameradigest I wish we could shoot Kodachrome at all :( I’ve heard various attempts to get the development going DIY but Kodak used some crazy stuff for this or something because I haven’t seen confirmed results yet

Yes, that sounds like a suitable solution. It’s funny that I’ve not experienced that before. But like I said, I usually have it in a shoulder bag that has plenty of space around the camera. I had this backpack packed full.

I second this

Yes, film of any format isn’t going to be easy on the wallet. So far I’ve only shot the B&W film with this camera, so I’ve done the processing myself. I’m not sure where I’d have to send color 110 for processing. But I’d like to try some color in it at some point. I’ve also read about the adapters for these lenses for M4/3. I can’t imagine how tiny they’d look on a regular camera body.

Thanks! I think part of the hate directed to 110 film (even in its day) was due more to the crappy cameras and not necessarily the film. I mean you used to be able to buy 110 Kodachrome. How awesome would that be in this thing?? But, yes, 99% of 110 cameras were junk.

Thanks! It was a fun one!

Nice! I’ve never seen one of those. Thanks for sharing!

That would, indeed, probably help keep my hands clear of it. Might need to add one to the kit!

Thanks! I think Lomography makes just about all the available 110 these days. I’m glad to have it, too!

Thank you! Yes, the reputation of the 110 cartridge isn’t “stellar”. Just like the 126 cartridge, it was handicapped by the inability to keep a flat film plane (no pressure plate). But with this camera, I think Pentax was able to squeeze just about everything they could from the format. But were still plagued by the film flatness issue. I was also surprised at how similar the shots were. Of course, you’d see a MUCH bigger difference on printed enlargements.

It is a fun camera, no doubt. And, yes, it is pretty easy to focus. The viewfinder seems pretty big and bright. Other than the proliferation of plastic in it, I agree it’s well-made overall. And the images are pretty good for the size.

Thanks! When viewed on the small screen they don’t look too different. But try to get an 8x10 out of each of them? Well, therein lies the difference :-) It was a fun comparison, though!

Thanks! I was treading dangerously by not using a tripod with the P67. But I was encouraged by being able to use the Kowa Six handheld at 1/125 waaaay back in the first episode. I figured if THAT camera didn’t cause me camera shake I should be good with the 6x7. It was a risk that could’ve turned out badly. Thankfully it didn’t. I am usually aware of the focal length/shutter speed rule of thumb, and I do believe there’s truth to that in a lot of cases. But even though the P67 is huge and the mirror slap sounds like a gun going off, it really does have decent vibration control. That’s interesting about the Hasselblad MLU. That sounds like a major pain.

Thanks to you, your channel, and your inspiration concerning vintage gear, I have now purchased a whole "new" vintage film Hasselblad system again. Over the past 3-4 weeks, I have been purchasing "legacy" Hasselblad gear, one piece at a time - mostly from eBay, with a couple of items from KEH. I just completed my "dream" system a couple of days ago. I now own a beautiful 501CM body, A12 back, 45 degree prism finder, and Zeiss lenses - 40, 50, 60, 80, 150, & 250. Plus...a refrigerator full of fresh 120 film. My bank account is still smoking a little bit, but I am extremely happy having all this equipment in my possession again. I've owned it all in the past, but this time it will stay with me for the rest of my life! My only related issue is that this gear has gained a whole lot of weight since the last time I owned it! I got it all into one large camera bag, but I struggled with it all day. I need to come up with a plan B for toting it all around. I did shoot my first roll of film yesterday (Tri-X). I cannot express the thrill & excitement of actually holding this camera in my hand and tripping the shutter. At least not since I kissed Carol Kirchheiner in the 11th grade!

Man, that IS exciting! Not the part about Carol, but the Hassy. Although, I can understand the similarities…😁 Seriously, though, that is an absolutely amazing kit. I’m feeling a bit jealous. I once owned a very old 500C with one 80mm T* and a couple of the old 12 backs. I do wish I had it back. But I’ll just live my Hassy fantasies vicariously through you, now!

You can definitely tell by the negatives, too. You *might* be able to get a decent 8x10 out of the 110 negs, but I’d be afraid to go any larger. But you can get the camera and 4 lenses in a tiny camera bag.

Yeah, grainless images are not to be expected from this combo. It would’ve been interesting to shoot some 110 Kodachrome in it from back in the day. But those slides would’ve been tiny! All in all, the Orca isn’t a bad film. I hope to run a color roll through it for the next review.

@@vintagecameradigest I still think they were neat looking, interesting pictures. I actually like the contrast that came out of them. Both cameras and film stocks had their strengths.

They certainly do!

Those little Pentax lenses are pretty good. However, my least favorite is the 18mm wide-angle. It’s hard to focus properly since all the details are so small in the image. Thanks for watching!

Glad you enjoyed it! Frustration is just part of it sometimes. I usually learn something from it in the end, though. AND glad you got to experience the wonder of the Moon Pie!

It would certainly make a good conversation starter when you travel. Most people have never seen - nor heard of - one. That review should be coming up within the next few!

The ORCA is ASA 100. I’ll have to check out the Meopta and Steki. Thanks for the tip!

The cap I have came off another old Yashica TLR - a 635 I think. So, it does fit just fine. Sorry you’re having such an issue finding one. There are certainly very minor variations in distance between the lenses among TLRs. And it only takes a couple of mm to really make a difference.

I found a slew of used Yashica OEM caps on eBay. I'm gonna select one and buy it. See if it fits any better.

Good luck!

You are right.

Yes, the early models lacked the MLU. But I’d say the addition of that feature is a benefit. Plus, given the option between the two models, the MLU version will be more likely to be repaired if necessary.

@@vintagecameradigest - I recently had both of my non-MLU bodies completely rebuilt by a technician who has been repairing them for over 30 years. I complained that they weren't MLU and he said I was lucky they weren't. According to him it is just something else to go wrong. I actually wish I had one of each.

That would certainly solve the problem. Great advice!

Nevermind ... Im stupid lol... I had a blonde moment and im not blonde lol.. So the mirror stays up? So you can not see the image in the view finder lol.. Yeah that is kinda lame lol.

:-)) yep, the mirror stays up and therefore no image in the finder. Someone else mentioned the “don’t wind until you get ready for the next shot” solution. Makes perfect sense. And I always wind after a shot. Always have. Never learned any better, lol.

Yes, I think it was just an odd combination of Pentax wanting to get a piece of the 110 market but not wanting to make a crap camera. So the Auto 110 was probably overkill for most users. Now, it IS a very small system, but not necessarily “pocket-able” when you add the additional lenses.