• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

6x9 camera with Pre-Tessar lens?

loccdor said:
The Voigtlander Bessa with f/4.5 Voigtar is a triplet. It's soft until f/11.

Most people do not desire Bessas with these lenses: mine was 85 dollars. Zone focus, popup finder. But they might have put this lens on the RF as well, I don't know.
Click to expand...

Very nice photo.

The RF- or E-Bessa had the unit focusing Helomar 3,5/105, and the later Bessa I the scale focusing Vaskar 4,5/105 (coated). Both presumably a little better than the Voigtar.
 
The problem with the later triplets like the Voigtar, Vaskar, Apotar and Novar lenses is that even wide-open they are to darn sharp for what the OP wants. Yes, not as good as a well designed Tessar, but sharper than what the OP is looking for. I've shot with cameras like the Kodak No. 1 Jr. using 120 film and it's pretty sharp in the center, but sharpness trails off as you move from the center of the frame. Typical of meniscus or achromat lenses. Even stopping down the aperture for greater depth of field still renders soft in the outer frame. Cooke triplets and rapid rectilinear lenses can get pretty darn sharp stopping down for better depth of field.
 
Until I can find a 6x9, I can play with this one which came in the mail today. It frames smaller than I like (4.5x6), and it wants to shoot vertical (not my fav), but for $20(US) I will see how well I can tolerate being limited to one aperture and two shutter speeds.

 
Thanks for sharing your concern. You may very well be right about some pre-tessar lens designs being too good for what I want.
 

Good point, yes at f/16 that lens is sharp right to the corners (for its age).

JPD said:
Very nice photo.
Click to expand...

Thanks!

I have a flickr contact who experimented with putting a reversed Holga lens on a folder. It creates a lot of softness and coma in the corners, quite charming pictures in my opinion.
 
There is current thread, well an old thread updated today concerning the conversion of the Tourist from 620 to 120. I re-spool, takes just a few minuets.
 
I think a lot of the look is due to film too. I have my grandfathers folding Zeiss from the late 1930's, and the negatives he made in the 1940's look quite different to what I get running modern film through the same camera.

The Zeiss is a 75mm scale focus lens in 645 format, I suspect a lot of the "softness" you see in older photos is actually out of focus. When the lens is focused the images are quite sharp. For images closer than infinity it's easy to be slightly out of focus.
 
FWIW, a changing bag is fine for the one handed 120-620 respooling - but I understand the reluctance.
And I agree - it may be tough to get what you seem to be asking for on a 6x9 negative using modern film unless the lens is either poorly focused, filtered toward softness, or at least slightly damaged.
120 film is only 125 years old, and most lenses in that time were more than up to the task of giving reasonably detailed "postcard" size prints.
 
I'm not the best person for this as I've been spoiled by the Fujinon in my Fuji 6x9. Even Tessars seem too characterful to me sometimes.
Craig said:
I think a lot of the look is due to film too. I have my grandfathers folding Zeiss from the late 1930's, and the negatives he made in the 1940's look quite different to what I get running modern film through the same camera.
Click to expand...
Down to the film with the oldest character/formulation would be Adox CHSII, Fomapan 100/400 and perhaps the Lucky BW films get close?
 

why are you excluding 5x6 folders. They offer most of what you're after.
 
BITD - film was much slower and so lenses were often shot wider open thus throwing the background out of focus (adding "3-dimensional character" (add smiley as needed) ), and aberrations will be less corrected (adding an overall "softening effect" (add another smiley)).

Like most on the forum, I have far more lenses than I rationally need. I can't tell which lens was used for what shot - I guess all my lenses have no character (or, possibly they are just taking after their owner).
 
It’s not pre-tessar but I have a Plaubel Makina (Type I) with an Anticomar/2.9 with a very distinct soft rendering (on top of the light leaks and expired film I used).


I like the look enough that I’ve spent some time looking for a matching shutter to move the cells onto a 2x3 press camera. But I wonder if this is starting to get at what you’re looking for?

On the plus side the makina’s are by all accounts excellent cameras and later ones had a coupled rangefinder.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5065.jpeg
    1.3 MB · Views: 54
  • IMG_5066.jpeg
    1.3 MB · Views: 66
  • IMG_5067.jpeg
    1.2 MB · Views: 59
  • IMG_5068.jpeg
    1.8 MB · Views: 60
How about an Agfa Billy Record 120 folder?

Agfa Billy Record 7,7​

  • Type: vertical folder
  • Manufacturer: Agfa
  • year of launch: 1933
  • Films: 120 roll films, 6×9 exposure format
  • Lens: Agfa Anastigmat Jgestar 1:7.7/100mm (three optical elements)
  • Shutter: Prontor (Alfred Gauthier, Culmbach), speeds 1/25 - 1/100 sec.
  • Aperture: 1:7.7-1:32
  • Weight: 560 g
  • Dimensions: 165×88×37mm (closed), 165×108×131mm (open)
  • Price: 30 Reichsmark in Germany, 185 Francs in France


Agfa Billy Record 8,8​

  • Lens: Agfa Anastigmat Jgestar 1:8.8/105mm, or Jgestar 8.8/100mm
  • Shutter: Agfa Automat, speeds 1/25 - 1/100 sec.
  • Aperture: 1:8.8-1:16


Agfa Billy Record 4,5​

  • year of launch: 1935, since 1940 with double exposure protection, since 1945 with Prontor S shutter
  • Lens: Apotar 1:4.5/105mm or Solinar 1:4.5/105mm
  • Shutter: Prontor II, speeds 1 - 1/150 sec.
 

I have the Billy Record 4.5 ... "too good" for the OP ! Maybe an earlier model takes softer photos?
 
Actually, even better than the Agfa Billy is the US Camera Rollex 20 Folding 120 Roll Film Camera - if you want a very simple lens! Of course it just has a simple shutter and probably lacks apertures, but you could easily make your own water house stops out of black cardboard!
P.

 
ChrisGalway said:
I have the Billy Record 4.5 ... "too good" for the OP ! Maybe an earlier model takes softer photos?
Click to expand...

As you state, the three element lenses on the Billy are actually very good, but perhaps the f/8.8 lenses aren't? I have never tried one of those!

P.
 
nanthor said:
box type that are 6x9
Click to expand...

Ensign box camera had models for 6x9. Might still be too sharp for him. The corners are definitely blurry though.



 
pdccamerqs said:
Actually, even better than the Agfa Billy is the US Camera Rollex 20 Folding 120 Roll Film Camera - if you want a very simple lens!
Click to expand...
I think it’s basically the same camera as the Foldex 20, which I’ve had quite a bit of fun with. Fixed focus, fixed aperture, fixed shutter speed (except for B), and a meniscus lens. They certainly match the OP’s quest for a certain type of “bad” image quality, and I’ve found some results from mine that I liked quite a bit. Sometimes nothing is in focus, but sometimes you get selective focus that works well. They’re cheap as the proverbial chips too.

-NT
 
nanthor said:
Off hand I don't know of any box type that are 6x9
Click to expand...

The very first 120 camera — the Kodak Brownie No. 2, is a 6x9 camera (2 1/4 x 3 1/4) with (I believe) a single element meniscus lens. I don’t know how usable they are today, but it would give an old look.
 
I have a Kodak Brownie Special 616 box camera with uncoated 105mm f/13 meniscus lens, and the results are plenty sharp. You have to look for worse lenses to get those dreamy effects...
 

Risky. Most have bellows made of Swiss cheese.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register