Tuesday, August 18, 2026

Five Below UP-Tech 35mm Camera


Sometimes an inexpensive, no-frills camera is all you need.

I was recently gifted an Up-Tech 35mm point-and-shoot camera sold by Five Below. The camera comes in a simple white box that looks a little like a very inexpensive imitation of an iPhone box. Inside you'll find the all-plastic camera and a very basic instruction pamphlet.

The price? $7.00.

And your $7 buys you about as simple a 35mm camera as you can imagine.

The Up-Tech is a reusable, fixed-focus 35mm film camera with essentially no exposure controls. There is no autofocus, light meter, adjustable shutter speed or aperture. There isn't even a flash.

Its basic specifications are:

  • Lens: 28mm plastic fixed-focus lens
  • Aperture: Fixed at f/8
  • Shutter speed: Approximately 1/100 second
  • Film: Standard 35mm
  • Film advance: Manual
  • Film rewind: Manual
  • Exposure counter: Yes
  • Flash: None
  • Hot shoe: None

Five Below lists the camera at approximately 3.8 × 2.6 × 1.3 inches, so it really is small enough to toss into a pocket, purse or backpack.

That's about it.

And in some ways, that's part of its appeal.

Load the camera with film, advance the film, point the camera at something and press the shutter button. There are no settings to think about and nothing to adjust.

Putting a Roll Through It

Just for fun, I loaded the camera with a test roll of Harman Kentmere 200 to see how it would perform.

Because the aperture and shutter speed are fixed, your choice of film speed and available light become the camera's exposure controls. ISO 100 or 200 film should be usable outdoors in reasonably good light, while faster film may provide a little more flexibility under overcast or darker conditions.

Obviously, none of this is terribly precise. With a camera this simple, you're relying heavily on the exposure latitude of the film.

As expected, the resulting photos were somewhat soft, particularly toward the edges of the frame. That's hardly surprising considering we're dealing with a simple plastic 28mm lens.

My particular camera also produced a noticeable vertical light leak near the center of several images. Whether this is typical of the camera or simply a defect in my copy, I don't know.

Another characteristic worth keeping in mind is the viewfinder. Reports from other users suggest that the viewfinder doesn't show the entire area captured by the wide 28mm lens, so you may end up with considerably more around the edges of the photograph than you expected.

Here are some of the images from my test roll:






cImage showing the occasional light leak 

Better Than I Expected

The photographs were actually not all that bad.

Remember, this is a $7 camera.

Nobody is going to confuse photographs from the Up-Tech with images made using a Leica, Nikon or even a decent 1990s autofocus point-and-shoot. Sharpness is limited, the lens is plastic, exposure is fixed, and quality control may be questionable.

But it does produce recognizable 35mm photographs.

And there's something entertaining about that.

Who Is It For?

Will I use this camera regularly?

Probably not.

But I can think of several situations where a camera like this could be fun.

It might make an interesting first film camera for a beginner or child because there is virtually nothing to learn beyond loading, advancing and rewinding the film.

It could also make a great outdoor party or wedding favor. Load several with inexpensive film, hand them out to guests and let everyone document the event from their own perspective. You might end up with some wonderfully unpredictable photographs.

It would also make a decent little "car camera." Load it with film, throw it in the glove compartment and have it available whenever you unexpectedly want to take a photograph.

Without a flash, however, its usefulness indoors is limited. Even with faster film, I'd consider this primarily a daylight camera.

There's another practical consideration: processing a roll of film can easily cost considerably more than the camera itself. That makes the economics of a $7 film camera somewhat amusing.

Final Thoughts

The Five Below Up-Tech isn't a good camera in the traditional sense.

It's an extremely simple plastic camera with a fixed 28mm lens, fixed aperture, fixed shutter speed and virtually no controls.

But perhaps that's the wrong way to judge it.

For $7, you get a reusable 35mm camera that fits in your pocket and actually takes photographs. It strips film photography down to its absolute basics:

Load. Advance. Point. Shoot.

Sometimes that's enough.

Not bad for $7.

Saturday, August 15, 2026

Film Negatives - Flat or Curl (Updated August 15, 2026)

Flat Negatives Are Your Friends

Photographic film negative curling can be an issue if you develop film yourself. During the digitizing or printing workflow your negatives will need to be scanned, photographed or used in a darkroom enlarger. Having film negatives "flat" is important. Even the slightest curling / cupping of the negative can make the film difficult to put into a scanner holder, keep flat on the scanner glass or keeping the entire photo in focus. You WANT your negatives to be as flat as possible for good results.

Different film stocks "curl" / "cup" to various amounts or remain flat while drying. How you dry your negatives (i.e., hanging with a weighted clip on the bottom) or your drying conditions (i.e., humidity level) will also impact how much a negative does or does not dry flat.

Here are a couple examples of flat and slightly curled negatives. Your results may be similar or much more cupping / curling.

Fomapan 400 dries flat

Fujicolor Superia X-TRA 400 has a moderate curl. This negative has been back-rolled

There are DIY ways to flatten curled negatives. You can cut your negatives, sleeve them and put them under a weight (like a book) for several hours. You can back-roll the negative before cutting and keep it back-rolled for a few hours until flat, etc.

Again, what ever process you use, the simplest is to use film (WHEN POSSIBLE) that dries flat.

To help you decide, here is a list of films I've used / developed and how they "typically" end up when dried.  Please note, this list covers just 35mm film. 120 film curls more or less the same but if it curls it tends to curl more than 35mm. AGAIN AS A CAVEAT, your experience may vary.

  • Aerocolor 100 - flat
  • ADOX HR50 - flat
  • Agfa APX 100 - flat
  • Agfa APX 400 - slight curl
  • Arista EDU 100 / 200 / 400 - flat
  • Arista EDU 100 DX - flat
  • Arista EDU 400 DX - flat
  • Berger Pancro 400 - slight curl
  • Camera Film Photo (CFP) 500T The Film - flat
  • Candido 200 - flat (Vision2 200T remjet removed)
  • Candido 400 - slight curl (Vision3 250D remjet removed)
  • CFP Kiki Pan 320 - flat
  • CineStill BWXX - slight curl
  • Dubblefilm Jelly - flat
  • Eastman Double-X (5222) - flat
  • EFKE 100 - curls
  • Fomapan 100 - flat
  • Fomapan 200 - flat
  • Fomapan 400 - flat
  • FPP Mummy - flat
  • FPP RetroChrome 320 - curls
  • FPP Wolfman 100 - flat
  • Fujicolor Pro400H - light curl
  • Fujifilm Provia 100 - curls
  • Fujifilm 200 - slight curl
  • Fujifilm Fujicolor Superia X-TRA 400 - curls
  • Fujifilm Fujicolor Superia 800 - flat
  • Harman AZURE - slight curl
  • Harman Kentmere 200 - flat
  • Harman Kentmere 400 - flat
  • Holga 400 - flat
  • Ilford Delta 100 - flat
  • Ilford Delta 400 - flat
  • Ilford FP4 - flat
  • Ilford HP5 - flat
  • Ilford Ortho 80 - flat
  • Ilford PanF Plus 50 - flat
  • Ilford PAN 400 - flat
  • Ilford SPX 200 - flat
  • Ilford XP2 400 - flat
  • JCH Streetpan 400 - flat
  • Kiki Pan 320 - slight curl
  • Kodak Double-X - slight curl
  • Kodak Ektar 100 - flat
  • Kodak Ektachrome 100 - flat
  • Kodak EliteChrome 100 - curls
  • Kodak EliteChrome 200 - curls
  • Kodak Ektapan 100 (T-Max 100) - flat / very slight curl
  • Kodak Ektapan 400 (T-Max 400) - flat
  • Kodak Gold 200 - slight curl
  • Kodak Gold 200 in 120 - curls
  • Kodak Kodalith 6556 - flat
  • Kodak MAX 400 - curls
  • Kodak Plus X 125 - slight curl
  • Kodak Portra 160/400 - flat
  • Kodak Portra 800 - flat
  • Kodak T-Max 400 - flat / slight curl
  • Kodak T-Max 3200 - flat / slight curl
  • Kodak Tri-X - curls
  • Kodak Ultramax 400 - flat
  • Kodak Vision3 250D - flat
  • Kodak Vision3 500T - flat
  • Kodak X-Pan 125 - slight curl / flat
  • Kono Moonstruck - flat
  • Kosmo Foto Agent Shadow - slight curl
  • Leica Monopan 50 - flat
  • Lucky SHD100 Pro - flat
  • Lucky SHD400 - flat
  • LuckyPan 400 (old formula) - flat
  • ORWO UN54 - flat
  • Rollei Infrared 400 (AGFA Aviphot Pan 200) - flat
  • Rollei Retro 80s (AGFA Aviphot Pan 80) - flat
  • Rollei Retro 400s (AGFA Aviphot Pan 200) - flat 
  • Rollei RPX25 (AGFA Aviphot Pan 80) - flat
  • Secret Sauce Color 100 (Aerocolor 100) - flat
  • Shanghai GP3 - curls
  • Street Candy 400 - slight curl
  • Silberra Ultima - flat
  • Ultrafine 100 - flat
  • Ultrafine Finesse 100 - flat
  • Ultrafine Finesse 400 - flat

I'll update this list as I get feedback from others or have personal experience with other films.




Wednesday, August 5, 2026

Lucky Black-and-White 35mm Film


China Lucky Film is a Chinese manufacturer that produces a range of affordable black-and-white photographic films (also produce color films). I have been using Lucky film regularly as one of my everyday 35mm black-and-white options.

I purchase Lucky film online from REFLX Lab in Shenzhen, China, usually in 100-foot bulk rolls. The three Lucky films I have used are:

  • Lucky SHD 400
  • Lucky SHD 100
  • Lucky SHD 50, sold under the Kangsong SHD 50 name

Lucky SHD 400 and SHD 100 are available from REFLX Lab in 35mm cartridges, 120 rolls, and 100-foot bulk rolls. Both films can also be found in 35mm cartridges through a limited number of other retailers. Other retailers I've used as reference include:

  • Bellows Film Lab
  • Brooklyn Film Lab
  • Midwest Photo
  • Tuttles Camera
  • Legacy Photo Lab

Lucky SHD 50 appears to have more limited availability. I have only found it in 100-foot bulk rolls from REFLX Lab, where it is sold as Kangsong SHD 50. It appears that the film is no longer manufactured nor commonly available in individual 35mm cartridges.

Why I Use Lucky Film

The primary attraction of Lucky black-and-white film is its price. It is particularly economical when purchased in bulk and loaded into reusable 35mm cartridges.

As an example, based on current bulk prices from REFLX Lab a 36 exposure roll equals:

  • Lucky SHD 400 = $3.61
  • Lucky SHD 100 = $3.61
  • Lucky SHD 50 = $2.78
I've found only Arista films in bulk have a price in the same range.

I would describe the overall image quality as acceptable to good, although not exceptional. For me, that makes Lucky a useful everyday film—something I can shoot regularly without worrying about the cost of each frame. It is also a practical choice when testing a camera (short rolls), experimenting with a developer, or photographing subjects that may not justify using a more expensive film.

Despite its affordability, Lucky film does have several drawbacks:

  • Quality control can be inconsistent, particularly with SHD 400 in my experience.
  • The 100-foot bulk rolls I have found are primarily available through REFLX Lab in Shenzhen. Shipping costs are currently very affordable.
  • The film can exhibit a noticeable amount of light piping.
  • I find that Lucky SHD 400 is best at 200 ISO and Lucky SHD 50 at 25 ISO

The quality-control problems I have encountered with SHD 400 have included occasional black spots and lines appearing on the negatives. These defects have not appeared on every frame, but I have seen them across several bulk rolls, making them more than an isolated occurrence.

Light piping can also affect the first few frames of a roll. This is especially important when bulk-loading the film, since light entering through the film base can travel farther into the cartridge than it would with some other black-and-white films. Advancing several extra frames after loading can help reduce the likelihood of losing an important photograph.

Even with these limitations, I continue to use Lucky black-and-white film regularly. Its low price makes it an appealing everyday option, and when the film is free of defects, it is capable of producing pleasing photographs.

In future posts, I’ll post a closer look at Lucky SHD 50, SHD 100, and SHD 400 individually, including how I expose and develop each film and the results I have experienced.

Sample Images

The following photographs are examples taken with the different Lucky black-and-white films I have used.

Lucky SHD 400 at 200 ISO








Lucky SHD 100










Lucky SHD 50 at 25 ISO











Tuesday, July 21, 2026

How To Remove Remjet: An Update

Eastman Kodak’s Vision3 color motion-picture films can also be used for still photography. The biggest difference between traditional color-negative film and most Vision3 film is the remjet backing.

Rem-jet is a black, opaque layer applied to the back of the film. It helps prevent halation, protects the film from scratches, and reduces static electricity as the film moves through a motion-picture camera. Unlike the anti-halation layers used on conventional still film, remjet must be removed during processing.

If you develop your own film, there are two practical ways to deal with it:

  • Remove it manually after processing
  • Use a prebath before development

I will explain both methods below.

Bulk rolled Vision3 35mm film

Why Photographers Use Vision3 Film

Vision3 has frequently been repackaged into standard 35mm cartridges for still photographers. Historically, there were two primary reasons for doing this:

  1. Repackaged motion-picture film was often less expensive than conventional color-negative film.
  2. It remained available during periods when traditional color film was difficult to find.

The color-film market has changed considerably during the past few years, however, and those changes are affecting the availability and appeal of repackaged Vision3 film.

Among the changes:

  • Kodak has restricted direct sales of bulk Vision3 film, making it more difficult for small repackagers and individual photographers to purchase large rolls for still-photography use. I previously purchased 400 to 1,000 foot rolls myself, but that has become much more difficult.
  • Color-film production and supply chains have improved. Conventional color-negative film is more readily available, and several products are now priced competitively with repackaged Vision3.
  • Kodak has introduced a new Vision3 structure that replaces the traditional remjet backing with an anti-halation undercoat, or AHU. This layer performs the anti-halation function without requiring the traditional remjet removal stage during processing.

As the AHU versions gradually replace the older products, Vision3 film with remjet will likely become less common. However, it remains available for now, both as newly packaged film and in photographers’ existing inventories.

A Few Things to Know Before Using Vision3

If you currently own Vision3 film with remjet—or are considering buying some—keep the following points in mind:

  • ECN-2 is the intended process. It produces the color, contrast, and tonal characteristics Kodak designed the film to deliver.
  • C-41 processing is also possible. Many home processors use C-41 chemistry and obtain good results, although the color and contrast may differ somewhat from film processed in ECN-2.
  • Some repackagers remove the remjet before selling the film. Unless the seller specifically says that it has been removed, assume the film still has it.
  • Not every commercial laboratory accepts remjet film. Use only a lab that specifically states that it processes ECN-2 or remjet-backed film. Rem-jet can contaminate equipment and chemistry intended for conventional C-41 film.
  • AHU versions do not require remjet removal. Confirm exactly which version you have before sending it to a laboratory.

Whether you process the film at home or use a commercial laboratory, traditional Vision3 film must have its remjet backing removed as part of the processing workflow.

Two Ways to Remove Remjet at Home

The two methods I use are:

  • The manual “rub-off” method
  • The prebath method

Both work, although I prefer the prebath method when I am processing several rolls.

Method One: Manually Removing the Remjet

In my opinion, this is the easiest and least expensive method because it requires no additional chemistry.

After the film has been developed, fixed, and thoroughly rinsed—but before the final rinse—soak it in warm water for about one minute. Water in the general range of 95°F to 102°F works well for me.

Remove the film from the developing tank and, while warm water runs over it, gently rub the rem-jet from the base side of the film. This is the shiny side, opposite the duller emulsion side.

You can use:

  • A gloved thumb or finger
  • A clean, soft microfiber cloth

The softened black backing should wipe away relatively easily. It can be messy, so I recommend wearing disposable nitrile gloves and working over a sink that can be cleaned afterward.

I normally wipe the film twice to make sure all the backing has been removed. I also hold the film up to a light and examine both sides. Any remaining remjet usually appears as black streaks, patches, or specks.

Once it is clean, give the film its normal final rinse and hang it to dry.

Negatives after and before the remjet is removed

A Word of Caution

Be careful not to rub the emulsion side. Wet emulsion is delicate and can be permanently scratched.

I have accidentally scratched negatives while using this method, so use very light pressure and avoid repeatedly handling areas that are already clean.

Method Two: Using a Prebath

A prebath softens the rem-jet before development so that most of it can be removed through agitation and rinsing.

A rem-jet prebath may be:

  1. Included with an ECN-2 processing kit
  2. Purchased separately
  3. Mixed at home from a published formula

I mix my own prebath based on a Kodak formula, and the required chemicals have been relatively easy to obtain.



The DIY Prebath I use

Always follow the directions supplied with your particular prebath. The general procedure is:

  1. Load the undeveloped film into the developing tank.
  2. Add the prebath.
  3. Agitate for the specified time.
  4. Pour out the prebath.
  5. Add warm water and agitate thoroughly.
  6. Pour out the rinse water containing the loosened rem-jet.
  7. Repeat the rinse if necessary.
  8. Continue processing in either ECN-2 or C-41 chemistry.

The discarded water will usually be gray or black because it contains the loosened backing.

A comparison - film on L has remjet and film on R doesn't

Some prebath solutions can be reused, although their useful life depends on the formula, the number of rolls processed, and the manufacturer’s instructions.

Be aware that some home ECN-2 kits do not include a rem-jet prebath. In that case, you will need to purchase one separately, make your own, or remove the backing manually after processing.

I have had very good results with my homemade prebath. Even so, I inspect every roll before the final rinse. If I see any remaining residue, I gently wipe the base side with a clean microfiber cloth while the film is still wet.

Final Thoughts

I regularly use rem-jet-backed motion-picture film because I like its look, the range of film speeds available, and the distinctive results produced by its daylight- and tungsten-balanced versions.

The tungsten stocks can be especially interesting when used creatively under daylight or mixed lighting, although they may produce a noticeable blue color cast unless corrected with filtration, scanning, or editing.

Removing rem-jet adds an extra step to development, but it is not especially difficult once you become familiar with the process. Do not let the backing discourage you from experimenting with Vision3 film. With a little preparation and careful handling, it can produce excellent still photographs.

Tuesday, July 14, 2026

Pentax 17 - First Impression


Every once in a while, a camera comes along that reminds me why film photography continues to attract new photographers while keeping longtime shooters interested. The Pentax 17 is one of those cameras.

A friend recently loaned me a Pentax 17, and after putting a couple of rolls through it, I came away with a generally positive impression.

First Impressions

The first thing I noticed was just how enjoyable the camera is to carry. It’s remarkably lightweight and compact enough to slip into a pocket, purse, or backpack. That helps it compete with the cellphone, which has the obvious advantage of almost always being with you.

The Pentax 17 is also extremely quiet. Its shutter produces a soft, unobtrusive sound that makes the camera comfortable to use in museums, restaurants, for street photography, or anywhere else you don’t want to call attention to yourself. The camera even includes a dedicated food-photography zone setting, reflecting the way many people now photograph and share their daily experiences.

The camera has a fixed 25mm f/3.5 lens, which gives a field of view roughly comparable to a 37mm lens on full-frame 35mm. That is consistent with many compact point-and-shoot film cameras I’ve used. Modern lens design has obvious advantages, and the Pentax produced negatives with good sharpness and pleasing contrast.

It’s a simple detail, but I liked the film reminder holder on the back. I also appreciated the ISO range of 50 to 3200, which covers nearly all commonly available films. The dial has marked settings for ISO 50, 100, 200, 800, and 3200, along with intermediate settings for 125, 160, 400, and 1600. The ISO dial also has a locking mechanism, which is a thoughtful feature.

I was surprised by how much I liked the zone-focusing system compared with manual focus or autofocus. During my test, I used the mountain setting most often. I missed focus on only one or two images, and those were the result of my own errors rather than the camera.

Kodak Aerocolor 100

Kodak Aerocolor 100

A Familiar Experience with a Modern Twist

Although the Pentax 17 is a new camera, it doesn’t try to imitate a modern digital camera. Instead, it embraces the slower, more deliberate pace that many of us enjoy about film photography.

If you’ve used classic half-frame cameras such as the Olympus PEN series or Canon Demi models, much of the shooting experience will feel familiar. At the same time, the Pentax benefits from modern manufacturing, a dependable exposure system, and a newly designed lens.

For photographers discovering half-frame for the first time, the format offers several advantages. First, it effectively doubles the number of exposures on a roll of film, reducing the cost per image for both film and processing.

Second, the default half-frame image is vertical, which feels familiar to anyone accustomed to viewing photographs on a phone or social media. Turn the camera vertically, however, and it produces a horizontal composition closer to the traditional 35mm format.

What I Didn’t Like

My initial impression also identified several features that I think could be improved.

The first issue is the maximum shutter speed of only 1/350 second. That can be limiting in bright sunlight, particularly with faster film or when the camera selects a wider aperture than desired. The camera provides exposure compensation from –2 to +2 stops, but that does not eliminate the underlying shutter-speed limitation.

Since most of my photography is outdoors, including street and landscape photography, I would generally pair the Pentax 17 with ISO 100 or 200 film.

The mode dial and zone-focus ring both felt looser than I expected. Although each has click stops, both were easy to move inadvertently. I found myself regularly checking the settings to confirm that nothing had changed, particularly after pulling the camera from a pocket or camera bag. A lock on at least the mode dial would be a welcome improvement.

The film advance lever also left me wondering about long-term durability. It functioned properly throughout my time with the camera, but compared with many classic mechanical cameras, it felt somewhat delicate. Time will ultimately tell whether that concern is justified.

Finally, the shutter release seemed to have a very slight lag in all modes and very little travel. This wasn’t an issue for most of my photographs, but there were a few occasions when the shutter did not seem to react immediately.

Is the Price Fair?

One criticism I’ve seen online concerns the camera’s price.

Personally, I think Pentax priced it reasonably. This is a newly designed and manufactured film camera that, overall, feels well built. Its image quality is substantially better than that of readily available disposable cameras, and it offers nearly all the features a casual photographer would need.

More importantly, buying a new camera means getting a warranty, modern electronics, available service and support, and the confidence that everything should work as intended. That is worth something.

If we want companies to continue investing in new film cameras, we also have to recognize that they cannot be priced like used equipment manufactured fifty years ago.

Final Thoughts

After spending a couple of rolls with the Pentax 17, my overall impression is quite positive.

It is lightweight, compact, quiet, and equipped with a very good lens. More importantly, it is simply enjoyable to use.

Would I change a few details? Certainly. I would like firmer controls and a more substantial-feeling film advance lever. Those refinements would make an already good camera feel even better.

The Pentax 17 isn’t trying to replace anyone’s favorite vintage camera, nor should it. Instead, it offers something increasingly rare: a thoughtfully designed, newly manufactured film camera that encourages people to slow down and enjoy the process of making photographs.

For me, that is a welcome addition to today’s film-photography landscape.

Here are a few examples of images I took during my test.

Kodak Aerocolor 100

Kodak Aerocolor 100

Kodak Aerocolor 100

Kodak Aerocolor 100

Kodak Aerocolor 100

Kodak Aerocolor 100

Kodak Gold 200

Kodak Gold 200

Kodak Gold 200

Kodak Gold 200

Kodak Gold 200

Kodak Gold 200