Nice video, fantastic results and a surprisingly sharp lens considering its a brownie. I respool 122 film myself from aerial film so i can use similar postcard format cameras the way they were intended then darkroom print on the back of postcards! its a nice process that gives off great results!
Better check your research. 122 aka postcard format wasn't at all the largest film -- not even the largest paper-backed roll film. That would have been the 1897 version of 110, five inches wide with a four inch frame length (six exposures, as far as I know). There was also 104, same width and frame size but probably a different spool and/or frame number window. The runner-up was 109, four inches wide with a five inch long frame, probably also six on a roll. 122 was the same width as 116/616, but the longer frame and same frame number window position meant they couldn't be combined as 120, 117, and 128 were by the early 1950s. BTW, that "pretty good lens" is a simple meniscus, not even achromatic -- but those are still decent at f/11 and smaller (your camera probably has f/13 and f/18 for its two apertures). Definitely a deal for only $5. BTW, I remember being able to buy 116, 616, and 122 film at most drug stores after I learned to use an adjustable camera and develop my own film (1969). The last of those, 116 and 616, were discontinued in the early 1980s.
122 doesnt have the same width as 116 and 616, talk about lack of research on your behalf. 122 spools are much larger than most more common formats and was discontinued in the 70s. and yeah id consider it a pretty good lens considering kodak didnt change the design of it for 70 years... adding on 110 wasnt even the largest roll film, kodak type 54 film was, being 7in wide being used in the no 5 cartridge kodak and Graflex rollfilm holders to take 5x7 pictures.
@@ClementinesCoins You're correct about 122 -- it and 124 were 3 1/4 image width, vs. 2 3/4 for 116/616. And let's not forget the various Cirkut films -- paper leader and tail like 220, but up to 10" wide.
