Pho-tak Model 1 Twin Lens Reflex Camera

Pho-tak Model 1 Twin Lens Reflex Camera
Photo thanks to Allen Stover
Visit home page (formerly at http://cameras.simplenet.com before 2/2003)BR> [email protected]

See my posting below for notes on this camera. If you are looking for a low cost TLR for use, see recommendations on our Twin Lens Reflex pages and budget guide to medium format. My main reason for adding this page is to demonstrate that you can buy a medium format camera such as this TLR for little more than the cost of a cheap disposable 35mm camera (e.g., ~$10).



Photo notes:

This is in great shape and the shutter works. Made in 1953. Clean it up and take pictures. Has flash sync.


Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999
From: Robert Monaghan [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: photak foldex-20 Re:Camera

Hi - sorry to say, these lower cost, non=collectors cameras don't have a lot of info on them, in general; the foldex series were made in the early 1950s, foldex, foldex 20, foldex 30 - some used 120 others 620 film (intro by Kodak). Most used an Octivar or Steinheil lens. Current used price for good condition is only about $15-25.

Pho-tak Corp was based in Chicago Ill. most models were from the early to mid 1950s (1953 Reflex 1, 1950-54 eagle eye etc.) - may have made some models for Macy Stores (ie Macy 120 is similar to Scout 120 flash by photak which was made for the boy scouts of America..) Photak went on to do some other photo stuff like developer kits and so on, eventually got bought out and disappeared...

can't help you a lot on the original price from 1950s; my guess would be circa $10-20 US, but remember inflation since then so that's over $50-100 in today's dollarettes ;-)

regards bobm

On Tue, 27 Apr 1999 [email protected] wrote:

> Dear Sir.
>
> My son is doing a research project and must find information about the
> Foldex-20 camera.  He needs to know the year it was made and how much it
> would have cost if original.  We found the picture of the camera we have but
> cannot find any information.
>
> Thanks--Don Savage   [email protected]