How to clean / polish lens Agfa Record?

[Rogier]

While taking new shots with this camera the shutter jammed.
So I took it upon me to take the entire lend from the body and take completely apart.
While doing so I examined all 3 lens elements and am pleased to say that the steel blue shine is still present on all of the elements. I worked more on the "oil" like stain on the front element and have been able to remove most of it :-)


As with taking the test shots I have a problem with the 220 film. Its the very first time that I use this film (my 3rd MF roll in my lifetime..) and noticed that it does not have the numbers printed on the back that help me find the next frame.
Guess I will be wasting some film by guessing how manny turns between each exposure plus some extra just to make sure.

[oftheherd]

Unless you have something I am unaware of, those old cameras didn't take 220 film. As you mentioned, there is no paper backing. I would worry how light tight the red window is. That is, the one used to view the numbers on 120 film. It is even possible minor leask which would be stopped by the paper backing might get through to the film without the backing. Point being, I just don't see any worthwhile way or reason to use 220 in these old cameras. If you do figure out a way, let me know.

Stay with the 120. There is more film variety anyway.

[Rogier]

I was unaware of this difference between 120 and 220 I thought it was just a longer film.
Will rip it out of the camera and dump it.
Thanks for saving me time, effort and some money for development :-)

[FallisPhoto]

Originally Posted by Abbazz

According to Gerjan van Oosten's book, modern photographic multicoating was not really a Pentax invention. Here's the quote:

Gerjan van Oosten, The ultimate Asahi Pentax Screw Mount Guide 1952-1977, ISBN 90-76537-02-X

Cheers!

Abbazz

No, they didn't invent multicoating, but they did invent the process that made it possible. You can't multicoat with soft lens coatings. The second coat just dissolves or blisters the first.

[FallisPhoto]

Originally Posted by oftheherd

Unless you have something I am unaware of, those old cameras didn't take 220 film. As you mentioned, there is no paper backing. I would worry how light tight the red window is. That is, the one used to view the numbers on 120 film. It is even possible minor leask which would be stopped by the paper backing might get through to the film without the backing. Point being, I just don't see any worthwhile way or reason to use 220 in these old cameras. If you do figure out a way, let me know.

Stay with the 120. There is more film variety anyway.

There is no film advance stopping either, or double exposure prevention, so there is no way to tell where one frame ends and another begins. I'd expect at very least to see big gaps between frames, and at worst, frames overlapping and double exposures. You need that backing paper to see the frame numbers and keep track of them.

[oftheherd]

Originally Posted by Rogier

I was unaware of this difference between 120 and 220 I thought it was just a longer film.
Will rip it out of the camera and dump it.
Thanks for saving me time, effort and some money for development :-)

No problem. Easy mistake when your aren't used to MF film. Just a shame the folks where you bought it didn't mention it. I just bought some dated film, and the clerk, who didn't know me, was quick to let me know what it was. I thanked him of course. I will use it in my Super Press 23, not a folder.