Karat film used a simpler cassette without a central spool that was easier and cheaper to manufacture, and since cameras that used it did not require the ability to rewind the film, Karat compatible cameras could be made cheaper as well. The downside however is that it wasn’t compatible with established cameras like the Leica and Contax, and due to the way the film advanced, no more than 12 exposures could be loaded at one time, down from 36 in Kodak’s film. Film transport mechanism might also suffer from the same grease problems, careful cleaning and re-greasing is needed.

When I compare my results with those I got from Kodak ColorPlus 200 and Fujicolor Industrial 100, I’d say the Agfa Vista Plus 200 gives a more neutral look. So while it may not have affected me directly, it has others. If that’s you, I’m sorry for your loss. It may indirectly get me one day too. The Karat 36's top engravings varied significantly over the years. Initially it was similar to the Karat 12, but the last model did away with the AGFA diamond logo and has script Agfa Karat 36 across the top. Rapid film, much like Kodak’s Instamatic was meant to be a simpler film than 35mm, and cater to novices who thought that extending a film leader across a film plane and attaching it to a take up spool was too much of a burden. Most Rapid models were of the scale focus point and shoot variety, with a few rangefinders, the highest spec of which was a model by Canon with auto exposure, a coupled rangefinder, and a fast 30mm f/1.7 lens. As mentioned, it’s been manufactured by a number of different companies in its lifetime and in a number of locations. Older rolls made by Ferrania were called Agfa Vista 200, without the Plus, with Made in EU stated on the box. The one I shot was Fuji-made, being Plus and labelled Made in Japan.

You may also like…

If there’s one thing I’ve read consistently about Agfa Vista Plus 200, it’s that it was for a long time available in shops like Poundland in the UK. One of the most common faults on the Karat is that the focusing mechanism seizes. The grease used turns to glue. Forcing the focus lever spreads two legs that stabilize the lens and mechanism. On early Karats, the link to the rangefinder on one of these legs is screwed from underneath, making it necessary to partially remove the bellows, but on the 36, the screw is from the top making it easy to disconnect the rangefinder. It is then possible to undo the mechanism retaining ring inside the camera and drop the mechanism and lens out, leaving the bronze focusing mechanism exposed and possible to free up. One recently required heat from a hair drier to loosen the two pieces, but most just require oiling to free up, then cleaning, then re-greasing.

Sources vary as to the introduction of the Karat 12, most stating either 1941 or 1945. The example shown here has a pre-war Schneider Xenar lens dating from September of 1935, indicating that the Karat 12 was probably in production well before 1941. At any rate, due to the war, introducing a new consumer camera as late as 1941 seems unlikely. The Karat IV upgrades the Karat 36 with a more conventional superimposed rangefinder and revised top cover. One variant of the 1958 basic Silette has a different, elevated top plate that announced the style of the later models. Rangefinder mechanism can also become slow or fully sized due to the lubricants becoming stiff. Careful cleaning of the mechanism is needed.

The Silette L, introduced in 1956, has the same body as the viewfinder Silette, but with an uncoupled selenium meter in the top plate. The camera was made with three successive types of meter, with a bigger or smaller setting knob, and a larger or smaller cover flap. The shutter and lens combinations are the same as above, except the cheaper Pronto. Fast forward a decade and a half, and film photography was more popular than ever before. Features like automatic exposure, motorized film advance, and fully flash synchronized shutters simplified film photography to where little to no knowledge of exposure was required to get a good image. Companies like Kodak and AGFA were looking for the next big thing in film, and in 1963 Kodak would strike first with a new format of film called type 126 Instamatic film. Kodak’s new Instamatic film was heavily promoted to help simplify and speed up the film loading process.

Agfa Vista Plus 200 getting discontinued was a real shame, although possibly not unexpected seeing as Fujifilm were the people making it. The Agfa Ambi Silette was first produced in 1957 and discontinued in 1961, a remarkably short four-year lifecycle made even more remarkable when we realize just how good it is to shoot. Shooting the Ambi Today Common observations tend to point out good sharpness and detail in mid-tones and shadows, although highlights are prone to being a touch blown out. The grain is there but not overbearing in any way; especially when you consider you’re shooting, you know, film.Once again, not willing to be outdone by their biggest competitor, AGFA responded with their own competing format which they called AFGA Rapid film. Curiously, rather than design a new and easy to use all in one solution like Kodak did, AGFA simply rebranded their original Karat cassette to cassette system with only one minor change, which was a small tab on the outside of the cassette to identify what speed film was in the cassette. As the name implies, AGFA Rapid film is supposed to be faster to load. I’ve used the 35mm Color-Ambion lens (incredibly slow, with a maximum aperture of f/4) and the more common 50mm Color-Solinar (f/2.8), and both performed well. Performance from the 50mm, in particular, was exceptional. The lens’ built-in depth-of-field scale makes zone focusing a breeze, and the distance scales in feet and meters are beautifully etched and individually painted. Hence, more neutral and natural looking images, albeit still with bold colours and punchy contrast. Strap on your Halcyon angled-glass goggles, because we’re about to condense a hundred-and-fifty years of company history into just three small paragraphs. That’s fast. Sometime in the late 1960’s, when I was attending college, I had added a Minolta Autopak 700 to my otherwise-Nikon 35mm set of cameras. It was OK, cheaper than a Kodak Instamatic 700/800, with similar features. The limits of Kodacolor-X/Kodachrome/Ektachrome/Verichrome Pan in 126 became apparent, since “available darkness” photos with ASA 80-125 film was limited, even with electronic flash.