1960's Film Cameras - what lens was popular?

bl0at3r

bl0at3r

Messages
3,911
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
Yes
I have just started a photography project that I have called timewarp, which revolves around attempting to recreate old photos taken in the 1960s of historical or interesting landmarks in and around UK towns and villages.

Literally only taken 2 or 3 shots but am keen to press on and have lots in the pipeline - biggest issue I am finding is trying to identify what focal length was used (as well as where the original photographer stood!)

I've heard a lot of talk about 35mm - so as a starting point I am trying the equivalent of 35mm and 50mm with my nikon crop body and lumix m43 but it seems that the perspective/distortion is not right.

Was there all the lens choices we have now back in 1960 ? Or was there a 'Favorite' lens / focal length used at that time?
 
Last edited:
I was using 35mm in the 60's and I would say that 50mm was the norm for most people.
 
Normal lens for 35mm film cameras in the 60s was 50mm (or occasionally 45mm). Often referred to as 2 inch and 1 3/4 inch?

35mm was cobsidered a wide angel, and 28mm almost ultra-wide.

85mm was recommended for portraits, and 135mm was a "telephoto" !!
 
Distortion patterns are always going to be different, you can't stop that because your crop body is not using the same part(s) of a lens that a 35mm film or full frame camera would.
You can faff with PS perspective/distortion correction or whatever to get it as close as you can but it will be a faff.
Simply zooming to equivalent angles of view won't do it, in all likely hood shots from the crop will be straighter than the 35mm originals you are trying to recreate..
 
My understanding is perspective is dependent on viewpoint rather than the focal length of lens. Any mismatch in the images after cropping to match the original are down to the differing viewpoints of the 2 images.
 
The most common lens were a 28mm wide angle, a 50mm "standard" and a 135mm telephoto followed by a 200mm, although a lot of street photography was done on 35mm lens.
Portrait photographers tended to favor 85 or 105mm.
I still have most of my old film kit.
 
swanseamale47 said:
The most common lens were a 28mm wide angle, a 50mm "standard" and a 135mm telephoto followed by a 200mm, although a lot of street photography was done on 35mm lens.
Portrait photographers tended to favor 85 or 105mm.
I still have most of my old film kit.
Click to expand...

Except 35mm was a newer format in the 60s and a lot of people were still using larger formats. :)

The instamatic we had in the early 70s was 127, replaced later by a 110:nuts:
 
The other thing that you could try is that the images were possibly taken with a plate camera and converging verticals removed. I'm not sure if removing converging verticals in PP will give the same effect as having the lens shooting the scene in a horizontal plane. You could try shooting with the camera horizontal and cropping down to see what difference it makes.
 
Phil V said:
Except 35mm was a newer format in the 60s and a lot of people were still using larger formats. :)

The instamatic we had in the early 70s was 127, replaced later by a 110:nuts:
Click to expand...

The instamatic was introduced in the early 60s and was the 126 format.

The 110 pocket instamatic was introduced in the early 70s.

127 film was a roll film, generally 4 x 4cm images.
 
mortimerhill said:
The instamatic was introduced in the early 60s and was the 126 format.

The 110 pocket instamatic was introduced in the early 70s.

127 film was a roll film, generally 4 x 4cm images.
Click to expand...

126/127,:) I was only a bairn. But the principle remains, that format changes do actually make a difference to the final image, which 'equivalent' focal lengths can't reproduce.

The best clue for format is to look at the aspect ratio. Once you've settled on that, you can start with focal lengths, then dof, then processing.

To fake an old 60s film look you'll need to pp the image to alter the colours.
 
Box Brownies were still popular in the 60s, at least among railway enthusiasts!
 
I shoot a 20 prime quite often, it always surprises me the amount of extra distortion there is from my 35mm F3 than a D200.
35mm is a larger image circle, it covers right up to the edge of the lens, areas affected most by distortion.
The crop is smaller circle and uses a more central portion of the lens where distortion is less.
So I dunno how you are to shoot close to an original with a crop camera and not have too much edit to do.
Saying that though, a 50 isn't that wobbly on film, but it must be an issue if you've already noticed it..
 
Film camera wise a lot where using TLR camera's (twin lens reflex) this could explain some of the differing perspective as with a waist level view finder they where generally shot from waist level, so you could try dropping down to a crouch and taking from that level and see if it helps.


On another note there are a lot of old photographs of essex towns and villages, it would be great to see someone do a then and now comparison with the recent ones shot and edited into a similar style.
 
iancandler said:
On another note there are a lot of old photographs of essex towns and villages, it would be great to see someone do a then and now comparison with the recent ones shot and edited into a similar style.
Click to expand...

Hi Ian, if you click my link 'timewarp' in the 1st post, you will see that I have started - albeit a collection of 3 shots so far, but I intend to also do a b&w/ sepia comparison with the then and now shots too :thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top