Page Contents
Minox A, Mamiya Super 16 and Edixa 16
Three outstanding designers have developed three distinctly different products for the same market segment. The result is three extraordinary cameras. But why are they so different, and what are the differences between them? And how did I arrive at this selection?
All three are fully mechanical cameras without exposure meters. They are among the smallest and highest-quality cameras of their kind. Each follows a recognizable product philosophy and was conceived, designed, and brought to production readiness by a single designer.
The Mamiya Super 16 is the smallest 16 mm camera in the world. The Edixa 16 is the smallest 16 mm camera with the largest negative format. Launched between 1950 and 1962, they were sold in significant numbers. The Minox was sold and became known worldwide, while the Edixa was more present on the German market and the Mamiya on the US market.
The cameras were also selected with a view to their practical use today (2026), with a wide range of film materials available. This ruled out all models that only work with perforated film. This ultimately allows their photos to be compared directly with each other.
The creators
Since the three cameras under consideration were conceived and designed by highly distinguished individuals, their settings also provide important clues as to how they viewed the task at hand. It is interesting to note how strongly the personalities of the designers are reflected in the cameras:
Walter Zapp – The Visionary – Minox A
Zapp uncompromisingly subordinates everything to his idea of the smallest possible camera with the highest image quality. Logically, everything must be executed with maximum precision and perfection. He accepts the resulting high costs. Details such as the consistent spacing of the negatives on the unperforated film, the viewfinder that swivels with the distance setting, and the rounded housing without protruding parts that protects the viewfinder and lens from dust are non-negotiable for him.
Seiichi Mamiya – The Pragmatist – Mamiya super 16
Mamiya focuses on what is feasible and finds ingeniously simple solutions that result in user-friendly and robust designs. He follows classic engineering principles by striving for high quality while always keeping an eye on costs. For example, he does not take miniaturization to extremes, but opts for a simple design that is extremely robust and easy to maintain. If you look closely, you will find original and well-thought-out details everywhere, such as the arrangement of the three (!) housing screws on the underside, which allow the camera to stand on any surface without wobbling.
Heinz Waaske – The technology enthusiast – Edixa 16
Waaske suggests that he had great fun solving technical problems. Although he developed many camera models, including some very successful ones as the famous Rollei 35, he himself did not particularly enjoy photography. He probably preferred to indulge in his world of technical precision engineering, where he sought his sense of achievement. This may have contributed to the camera’s somewhat challenging operating concept, but its technology is beyond reproach.
Size and weight
When it comes to miniature cameras, size and weight must of course be given the highest priority. What else could be the motivation for using such cameras? All three cameras are so small that they can be held in one hand.
Nevertheless, there are significant differences in both size and weight. The Minox is by far the smallest. It can easily be hidden in the palm of your hand, just as Walter Zapp envisioned from the beginning. The other two cameras also fit in one hand, but they don’t disappear into it. They are easily twice the size. Nevertheless, they are still very small cameras.
Size
Weight
In terms of weight, the Minox is the clear leader in terms of absolute values. However, if you relate the weight to the volume (the “density” of the camera), the Edixa is on par with the Minox at 2 g/cm³. The Mamiya is slightly higher at 2.4 g/cm³. The robust stainless steel housing comes at a price here.
Of course, absolute size and weight are certainly decisive factors when you are out and about with your camera and carrying it in your pants or jacket pocket. However, you also have to take into account what you will ultimately achieve in terms of photographic results. In addition to image quality—which will be discussed later—the negative format is an important parameter. This is because, especially with miniature formats, it can be a limiting factor when enlarging images.
As you can see, the negative frame size differs considerably between the three models. The Mamiya (10 x 14 mm) has 60% more surface area, while the Edixa (12 x 17 mm) has more than twice that of the Minox (8 x 11 mm).
I have therefore compared the size of the cameras (volume) to the size of the respective negative format. This parameter allows conclusions to be drawn about the quality of the designs. The smaller the number, the larger the negative you get relative to the camera’s size.
Minox and Edixa have roughly the same values, meaning both provide a similar frame size relative to their camera volume. The Mamiya’s ratio is about 32% higher. This indicates that its larger size does not result in a proportionally larger negative.
Conclusion on size and weight
The three cameras are comparable, but still significantly different. Minox is clearly ahead in terms of absolute values. The Edixa is on par when you take into account the much larger negative format. The Mamiya is significantly larger and heavier than the Minox without offering a correspondingly larger negative format.
Coming soon: Lenses and exposure values
This chapter will focus on the photographic performance of the three cameras.
