next »

[connealy]

Slim has had an eventful couple of days in Albuquerque.
First there was lunch at the Barelas Cafe with three lovely ladies.





Then, there was a trip to the Aquarium.





And, finally, a stroll through Old Town.





The Ultra Wide & Slim was loaded with 800-speed Walgreen's film.  The rating seemed a bit over-blown, as the film really performed better in moderate to bright light rather than in low light levels.  In contrasty low light, there was a lot of grain and noise, but that may have been partly the fault of the drugstore scanning.  In any case, it seems like 200-400 is a better choice for this camera.

[mdcarma]

Neat shots. That last one is a classic "free my people" shot.

[Julio1fer]

Nice shots.

Isn't the Slim a fixed aperture-speed camera at 1/100 in f11 or thereabouts?

[connealy]

...Isn't the Slim a fixed aperture-speed camera at 1/100 in f11 or thereabouts?

That's about it; basically a tiny, plastic box camera.

There's a page on my web site about the Vivitar plastic cams I've used over the past couple years.  The others are rather more substantial in their construction, with a panoramic option and a built-in lens cover.  The Ultra Wide & Slim dispenses with those features, and also has a paper-thin shell with everything packed into the absolute minimal space to house a full-frame camera.  In fact, when you look at the size of the thing, it seems impossible that a roll of 35mm film would fit into it.

The other notable feature of the camera is the ultra-wide lens which Wayne determined to consist of two elements.  I believe it likely the elements are molded in acrylic in an aspherical design.  The thing is exceedingly sharp.  About the only obvious fault in the images is some darkening at the corners.  I think that may not be a lens aberration, but rather just light fall-off across the flat plane similar to what you would see in a wide-angle pinhole camera.

[Gene M]

I love the motel stuff.

[Wayne]

Yep, love that old signage and the shark Mike.

The other notable feature of the camera is the ultra-wide lens which Wayne determined to consist of two elements.

Well it's got at least two - there's something on either side of the shutter anyhow. It's an amazing performer really for such an inexpensive, tiny thing. Have loaded mine up, but yet to put it through it's paces.

[ImageMaker]

It's very likely exactly two elements, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.  Long, long ago (like 120+ years ago) a lens design came along called "Periskop" which consisted of two deeply curved meniscus lenses, concave sides in and spaced approximately with the inner surface of each at the inner center of curvature of the other, with the stop centered between; it was special because the two elements were the same glass, identical curvatures, and though pretty slow (f/11 max, sound familiar?), the thing would cover an incredibly wide angle (for such a simple prescription -- around 120+ degrees total, as I recall) with no distortion and a perfectly flat focal plane.  Similar lenses have been seen in various box cameras, "folding box cameras" like the Kodak Vigilant Jr. (where it was called a Kodet) and Ansco Speedex Jr. (where it had no name), as well as the low-end versions of Polaroid pack-film cameras (which were still capable of quite acceptable prints) made into the 1970s.  It wouldn't surprise me at all to see a version of the Periskop still in use in the wider angle single-use cameras, much less in the Ultra Wide and Slim.

FWIW, the lens in my first Speedex Jr. (which had a good bellows and was perfectly focused) was good enough that at f/22, you could count bricks in a chimney a block away on a 6x6 negative; I'd have put it up against a low-end triplet at the same aperture...