Boots 35AF – This Boots is made for shooting

By Julian Tanase

And that is what it does. Yeah, I know, but I couldn’t help myself not to bring Nancy in this story. Fun fact, it is the only camera in my small collection to have a panoramic switch. I bought it from Boots, 1993 or 1994, I believe. The store in Watford was pretty well stocked up with film and some 3 models of point and shoot cameras (they even had a couple of 110 models). And yes, the 110 format was kind of popular too, as far as I remember. The compact cameras fashion of the 80s was still very much there in the 90s, going out by the 2000s or so.

This camera comes from an age when the point and shoot were seen everywhere; many times, there was a small queue to purchase film and to bring films for processing in the Boots pharmacies. The digital kiosks which are now a must for even corner shops were not yet public, for the digital was in its infancy. My computer still had a floppy disk, and the internet (for me) was a couple of years away, and when it came, it came in the form of my first subscription to Freeserve (anyone remember those days?). I recall strolling Sunday afternoon in the Cassiobury Park was a chance to see all sorts of cameras, and the point and shoot ones were ubiquitous.

An interesting camera, about which I have read mixed reviews. It would appear that while some people bought this fully knowing it’s a Sunday one, so to speak, some other people bought this camera expecting it to be on the par with a Nikon or a Canon, which they’re obviously not. This is a simple point and shoot thing, drop a film in, snap around, take the film to the lab (sorry, to Boots), get some decent photos to show for your pains and repeat during your next holiday. That’s it. Anything more than that, you will need a different camera, if you’re expectations are higher than your regular point and shoot thing. So, why the disappointment? I mean, it’s this type or a disposable one.

Anyways, I do recall the main reason why buying it: the panoramic function. Never had a camera that could do this, so I was intrigued. For the price I paid, I got a decent thing, with some really good options: red eye reduction, an automatic winder / rewinder of the film, drop-in cassette and auto loading the film leader, a very good flash and (barely) readable frame counter. Nice in the hand, and good plastic. A viewfinder with a center-spot comes in handy, and the panoramic guide lines are there to, well, guide you.

This Boots 35AF lens is not a Summitar, but it’s not a piece of a shabby glass either; this is a Ricoh 34mm, at 1:4,5, with automatic shutter. Prone-ish to flare, but it delivers what is supposed to deliver. By the way, the DX code reader is present on this camera. A mid-roll rewind button, together with the self timer, both on top plate. Made in Taiwan (ROC), if you really must know this. And as already said, really sturdy thing it is too.

A ready lamp is on the back of the Boots 35AF, and this stays on for about a minute or so, after you close the lens cover. I guess is a way of offering the chance to immediately shoot if you need to do so, without waiting for the flash to charge. Obviously, once a minute has passed, the lamp goes off, but once you open the lens cover, the camera is instantly ready to shoot, lamp coming on immediately.

The frame format could be changed between normal and panoramic, by means of a switch on the top side. The panoramic thing was made possible by a horizontal extra frame inside the film lens housing, sliding in front (for the panoramic) and going back right under the lens (for the normal). I hope this makes sense.

The photographs affixed here are taken on Agfaphoto APX 100 film. As the cassette didn’t have any DX code label on it (a reload), I am surprised at how decent the camera treated the film. Not being able to discern between film sensitivities other than reading the DX, this film came quite all right, I guess.

And of course, an example of the camera’s panoramic mode.

One gets mixed feelings getting back to using the oldies like this Boots 35AF. if you were shooting film in the late 80s early 90s, you know what I mean, for sure. It’s nice to let yourself taken back to those days when digital was just a minute article in magazines, without much apparent impact on our future lives. Boy, were we wrong, for what an impact it had.

But we still have the film. Life is good.

Share this post:

Find more similar content on 35mmc

Use the tags below to search for more posts on related topics:

Contribute to 35mmc for an ad-free experience.

There are two ways to contribute to 35mmc and experience it without the adverts:

Paid Subscription – £2.99 per month and you’ll never see an advert again! (Free 3-day trial).

Subscribe here.

Content contributor – become a part of the world’s biggest film and alternative photography community blog. All our Contributors have an ad-free experience for life.

Sign up here.

About The Author

By Julian Tanase
I am a traveller, entrepreneur, author and amateur photographer. A long time user of classic cameras and film, attracted mostly to photojournalism. I try to instigate people to see rather than look.
View Profile

Comments

Geoff Chaplin on Boots 35AF – This Boots is made for shooting

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

CompuServe I think provided my first email, after bulletin boards, and before that .... letters in envelopes. Fortunately I missed the point-and-shoot stage and by the early 80s I think I had managed to acquire a Pentax ME Super which served me well for many years with a variety of not-so-expensive lenses. I agree, pretty decent images from the Boots camera based on what you show - good contrasty lighting and B&W, How was colour? and low light without flash?
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Julian Tanase replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

Thanks, Geoff. Haven't shot any colour film with this one, alas. Curious myself on what would look like :) .

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

James-T on Boots 35AF – This Boots is made for shooting

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

I think most of the P&S cameras of that era treated all film without a DX code as ASA100. So the default was correct for the film.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Eric Norris replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

Yes, the vast majority of DX-coded cameras use 100 as the default. If you're bulk loading FP4 or similar film and don't have an empty canister coded for ASA100, just put a piece of tape over the DX area. The camera will not be able to read anything and will set itself at 100.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Julian Tanase replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

James, never knew that, as my experience with these point and shoot was rather short lived. But is always good to learn, right? Thank you !

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

rick on Boots 35AF – This Boots is made for shooting

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

Never underestimate the power of a point and shoot. Love them. Carry one whereever I go....
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Julian Tanase replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

Well said, Rick. I always carry an XA2 in my bag, just to be on the safe side. Excellent little thing!

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Keith Drysdale on Boots 35AF – This Boots is made for shooting

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

I have been shooting a series of point and shoot zoom compacts from this era and find that they do give decent results for very little manual input. I was convinced that these P&S cameras all defaulted to 100 ASA if there was no DX code until I checked my two latest acquisitions, which both default to 25! Your photos give a good idea of the surprising quality some of these cameras are capable of producing, even with their slow lenses. Great article.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Julian Tanase replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

To be honest, I was myself surprised at the quality of the pics, although of course I have seen better from such small things.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Keith Drysdale replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

And I have seen a lot worse from Boots branded cameras. In the 60s they stuck their brand on some pretty mediocre cameras from Beirette, but by the 70s they were rebranding decent point and shoots from Ricoh (like yours) and Konica. Dixons bought the Chinon name and I recently acquired a Chinon P&S zoom from this period and got some great results from it.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

David Hill on Boots 35AF – This Boots is made for shooting

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

Seems a perfectly decent P&S.
But, err, “Boots”. That’s a camera store? Department store? Pharmacy? I mean, help us understand the context here …
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Richard Becker replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

To anyone born before the early 1990's Boots=Photography. You bought cameras there, bought film and accessories, took in films for processing and printing, they also developed slides and cine film. When you moved beyond snaps and holiday photos you would go elsewhere if you could afford to, or else stand with nose pressed to the camera shop window before going to Boots to buy their own branded film. Though I think that was also where I first came across Fuji film. Yes they were also a pharmacy, but there was a time when chemists were almost the only place that sold film and processing chemicals.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Julian Tanase replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

Thank you for your reply, Richard. I was about to explain this myself, but your comment is much better than whatever would've been mine :) . Yes, Boots was all of that, and more. Very convenient shops, as I could buy me films and getting prints without having to march through half of Watford visit Jessops ( I do hope you remember this one too, right?). Sunny days they were...

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Richard Becker replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

I'm still using a Jessops branded developing thermometer and other bits. But Jessops were in Brighton and had to wait until I could drive. Capital Cameras in Crawley was the place to go, nearer, and they had everything, including a whole wall of different films.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Julian Tanase replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

My double reel tank is Jessops, also some of my old equipment, like the light meter they sold (which was a Vivitar 45, but branded Jessops. And yes, I remember the shop in Brighton, bought quite a number of rolls in there when visiting in the summer, and I used to hunt for the bargain basket (usually kept near the exit doors).

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Dave Powell replied:

Comment posted: 11/10/2024

I'm impressed by your camera's images, Juilan! And back on this side of the pond, I was lucky enough to snag a large Jessop's belt-pouch camera bag at a yard sale. Good quality, that!

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *