6x9 cameras

[anthonylg]

With a Horseman you can use most any medium format lens that will fit the lens board and is not too long for the bellows and you get front movement. I dont use a lot of movement, but there are times when shooting 6X9 I wish I had some movement. As I recall the later model Horsemans will take a RB back. The other option for a lot less money is a baby Speed for Grown Grafic with 6X9 back and as sheet film is available in 6X7 a ground glass back for a holder. A speed with a focal plan shutter will allow you to shoot with barrel lens. Then on the higher end a 6x9 view camera, if you shoot on a tirpod why not?

That sounds good too. But I'm not really sure how to adapt lenses on that system... could I adapt other MF lenses to a vh-r for example?

 

[Dan Fromm]

As I understand it (and it is an incomplete understanding), diffraction is a function of negative size as well as aperture. With the size of the 6x9 negative, going down to f/16 or even smaller should not impose significant diffraction. In my own experience, I have often stopped the Tessar on the Super Ikonta down to f/32 and not seen significant degradation; the Color Skopar on the Bessa II only goes down to f/22, but again, I have not seen any problems going down that far.

Lenses diffract. Film doesn't. Lenses that are diffraction-limited across the field at moderate effective apertures are very rare. They're usually worse than that.

Giiven that the diffraction limit is ~ 1500/(effective f/ number) lp/mm at very low contrast and that the lowest resolution in the final print that looks sharp at normal viewing distance is ~ 8 lp/mm, the most a negative can be enlarged before the final print starts looking soft is ~ 200/(effective f/ number). At f/22, the limiting enlargement is ~ 9.5x. That's the ideal case, in reality the limit is lower because of low contrast at the calculated diffraction limited resolution, because the calculated diffraction limited resolution is on-axis and the limit is lower off-axis, and because of additional losses in resolution due to the enlarging lens. I routinely examine my negs at 12x. At 12x everything is soft.

One of larger formats' advantage over smaller formats is that they don't have to be enlarged as much to get the desired print size.

The OP, like many of us, is somewhat obsessed with having the best lenses. This isn't the best of all possible obsessions. Sharpness is overrated. For moderate enlargements or with negatives shot with less than perfect technique all lenses that are good enough (good, better, best, better than best, ...) give indistinguishable final prints.

 

[mnemosyne]

One thing you have to realize when comparing view camera lenses to SLR type lenses for MF is that the size and weight difference is HUGE. The typical lenses for the Horseman in the 65mm to 150mm range are really tiny (40.5 mm or 43mm filter thread, like a 35mm rangefinder lens) and weigh 200~300 g. Compare that to the massive lenses for the Fuji 680 system which weigh something between 600 g and over 1,000 g a piece and have typically filter sizes around 80 to 90 mm (!!). You could pack your VH body, two film backs, three lenses, plus an adequate tripod and all the small stuff and the outfit would probably still be lighter than a simple Fuji 680 body plus WLF with one back and one lens. And you still wouldn't be able to take a picture with your Fuji, as you would also need to carry a massive tripod that is able to support the 4~5 kilograms of weight ... I think if I was willing to put up with that kind of weight, I would rather consider carrying a 8x10 view camera instead ...

 

[ced]

Here with an example from an old folder "Franka Rolfix" with info below the image.
Sorry for the external link...
http://www.ipernity.com/doc/987971/36134601

 

[anthonylg]

The OP, like many of us, is somewhat obsessed with having the best lenses. This isn't the best of all possible obsessions. Sharpness is overrated. For moderate enlargements or with negatives shot with less than perfect technique all lenses that are good enough (good, better, best, better than best, ...) give indistinguishable final prints.

Not really obsessed over having the best lenses, but more with having the lenses I like the best.
But I agree with you, and Bill Henson is one of my favorite photographer and he uses 35mm to make big enlargements, Sally Manny uses very old lenses with many "defaults" etc... etc... Actually I'm more obessed with the colors and contrasts a lens gives

One thing you have to realize when comparing view camera lenses to SLR type lenses for MF is that the size and weight difference is HUGE. The typical lenses for the Horseman in the 65mm to 150mm range are really tiny (40.5 mm or 43mm filter thread, like a 35mm rangefinder lens) and weigh 200~300 g. Compare that to the massive lenses for the Fuji 680 system which weigh something between 600 g and over 1,000 g a piece and have typically filter sizes around 80 to 90 mm (!!). You could pack your VH body, two film backs, three lenses, plus an adequate tripod and all the small stuff and the outfit would probably still be lighter than a simple Fuji 680 body plus WLF with one back and one lens. And you still wouldn't be able to take a picture with your Fuji, as you would also need to carry a massive tripod that is able to support the 4~5 kilograms of weight ... I think if I was willing to put up with that kind of weight, I would rather consider carrying a 8x10 view camera instead ...

The thing is I don't really know this kind of system... The Horseman vhr seems perfect for me but, could i adapt other lenses than the horsemans on it?

 

[Paul Howell]

Mamiya or Fuji will not work, need a lens that will press, view, or techincal cameras, there are lots of lens for 6X9, Topcon, Schnnedier, Kodak, Wollensake, Zeiss, Lindhof, come to mind.

 

[Cholentpot]

Hold on, 220 film is coming back?



I do not have Provia but I do have Velvia. I have not shot it as I do not have anyone locally who can develop it. I know I can send it out but right now, I have more C41 and B/W options in my fridge to use first.



I have both a folder (mine was CLA'd and perfectly working for $150) and a Bronica ETR. Sometimes, I want the folder because it will easily drop in my pocket. Grab it and my phone so I can run the DoF table really quickly. I use my Sekonic for a one time reading and then do not use it from there. Adjustments can be easily done and then let the film eat the lack of speeds. Sometimes, I leave it behind and go with the Bronica which is more exact. It is nice to have choices.

So the claim is. I'm just hoping for the 120 and I'll see it as a bonus if 220 is available.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I hear it's coming back, people on the Large Format Forum are already buying sheet film and claim that 120 and 220 are next.[/QU

I went on eBay and searched Shanghai GP3 the other day and came across one box of 4x5 film dated 2018 and figured it had to be new, but had heard nothing about its insurrection. Now you say 120 and220 is on the way? I sure hope you are right about the 220 cause I still have some 'blad 220 backs and some for my Koni-Rapid too. My Yashica 124G and Pentax 67 would love to be fed some also. None of which are 6x9 so I guess I'm completely off-topic, but very hopeful anyway.

 

[ic-racer]

A few prints on Ilford Multigrade from 6x9 negatives. To the untrained eye, may not be able to distinguish from 35mm, but the astute observer will recognize movements on the Horseman VH-R have been used to correct converging verticals.

 

[ic-racer]

With the rangefinder system, the VH-R can be used hand-held. For example, this print was made from a 6x9 negative that was exposed hand-held from the window of my car.

 

[ic-racer]

Although this print is from a 4x5" negative, I used the 75mm Horseman 6x9 lens to try to get a circular image on 4x5" film. Although that lens has one of the smallest image circles in the Horseman 6x9 Lens System, it only just cut the corners, and I thought it gave a nice effect, so I printed it. I recall back when I first printed this image, a photographer said to me I used too much "Photoshop;" whatever that means. I honestly thought he believed camera lenses project rectangular images.

 

[DREW WILEY]

My Fuji GW690II is completely mechanical, no battery needed. You're supposed to have a shutter tuneup every 1000 rolls, and there's a counter. But
I'll probably die of old age before that. But for my other 6x9 system, namely using roll film backs on my 4x5 cameras, I employ lenses from series
like Nikkor M, Fuji A, and G Claron that yield results which seem optically superior to dedicted MF lenses, especially if you factor in how view camera
movements can be employed at optimal f-stops to control depth of field, rather than just smaller and smaller f-stops.

 

[mike c]

I have had great luck with my Bessa 1 6x9 with the color skopar, just as sharp as the Xenar on the Rolliecord. The Bessa is a great camera once you figure how to handle it, I use a tripod sometimes or sit it on something.Handheld I try to use speeds 1/100 or less, a 1/50 sec is pushing it handheld for me.

 

[mnemosyne]

The thing is I don't really know this kind of system... The Horseman vhr seems perfect for me but, could i adapt other lenses than the horsemans on it?

Also consider the VH, the VH-R minus rangefinder, which is 400 g lighter and also more compact, but restricted to tripod use. You can use any lens with the Horseman that comes in a leaf shutter (or can be adapted to one) and fits on a #00, #0 or #1 shutter lens board. So you are not looking at SLR type lenses, but view/press camera type lenses (LF, but also some specialized for MF) from Nikon, Fuji, Schneider, Rodenstock, Kodak, Horseman and many others...

 

[anthonylg]

Mamiya or Fuji will not work, need a lens that will press, view, or techincal cameras, there are lots of lens for 6X9, Topcon, Schnnedier, Kodak, Wollensake, Zeiss, Lindhof, come to mind.

Also consider the VH, the VH-R minus rangefinder, which is 400 g lighter and also more compact, but restricted to tripod use. You can use any lens with the Horseman that comes in a leaf shutter (or can be adapted to one) and fits on a #00, #0 or #1 shutter lens board. So you are not looking at SLR type lenses, but view/press camera type lenses (LF, but also some specialized for MF) from Nikon, Fuji, Schneider, Rodenstock, Kodak, Horseman and many others...

I have no experience with lenses on that kind of system, but for sure I can find great things. That would be a good alternative to the GX680, and I really like the fact that everything is mechanical. And it is also lighter.
Do you know where I could find informations about how this kind of shutter work, the #00, #0 or #1 lenses and how the lenses can adapt on this kind of system? I'm sorry, I'm very new to LF photography...

 

[Dan Fromm]

Do you know where I could find informations about how this kind of shutter work, the #00, #0 or #1 lenses and how the lenses can adapt on this kind of system? I'm sorry, I'm very new to LF photography...

What's to know? A conventional cock-and-shoot shutter (best known makes, in alphabetical order, Ilex, Compound, Compur, Copal, Rapax/Graphex, Wollensak) has a cocking lever and a release lever. One cocks it with the cocking lever, fires it with the release. A press or self-cocking shutter (best known makes Compur Press, Copal Press, Prontor Press) has a cock/release lever. One fires it by pressing on the release. Both types usually have sockets or brackets that accept a cable release.

Leaf shutters (all of the above) typically have a rear tube with circular cross-section (duh) that's threaded externally. A leaf shutter is held to a lens board by screwing it into a flange that's attached to the lens board with, typically, three screws or by a retaining ring. The retaining ring screws on to the rear of the tube, the board is clamped between the ring and the back of the shutter.

In post #89 above Mnemosyne mentioned #00, #0 and #1 shutters. These are sizes. Although the meaning of the sizes has varied between manufacturers (see http://www.suaudeau.eu/memo/pratique/Les_obturateurs_centraux.html
for a large but incomplete list) modern #00, #0, #1 from Compur, Copal and Prontor conform to the same standard. When posters here talk about #00, #0 and #1 shutters they usually mean Compur or Copal or Prontor.

Most press, technical, field and view cameras have lens boards that can be bored to accept any shutter that will fit. Folding cameras (press, technical, field) are limited to shutters that will fit between the struts. In the case of my 2x3 Graphics, the largest shutter that fits is an Ilex #3.

Anthony, you need an education. Asking questions on a bulletin board like this is a poor way to get one. Buy a book. The books most often recommended on the US large format forum are Steve Simmons' Understanding the View Camera and Leslie Stroebel's View Camera Technique. galerie-photo.com recommends Jim Stone's A User's Guide to the View Camera and Pierre Groulx' La photographie en Grand Format.

 

[Paul Howell]

I agree with Dan, find a introduction to view cameras, the difference is that Horseman like other press technical camera and a traditional viewfinder is the rangefinder. between a 4X5 and 6X9 is scale. My other thought is that if buy a Horseman you want lens that will match the cams for the rangefinder, there are a number of cams for different lens, wide. normal, and tele, so if the Horseman's normal lens is 100mm you need a 100 lens. The Horseman lens were made by Topcon, my experience with Topcon has been very positive.

 

[Nokton48]

Hello, I am in a time where I think i'd like to change my equipment. What kind of 6x9 would you advice me? Is there other choices than the fuji GSW960? I'm also interested in older cameras, it has a softer look but I really liked what I have seen from the old Zeiss Ikonta cameras. Do you know other old 6x9 camera I might be interested in?The only problem is that they have fixed lenses... Ideally I'd love to be able to change lenses and have a wide angle such as a 65mm and a longer lens around 140mm.

anthonylg,

You might consider the Plaubel Makina III and IIIR if you like the look and feel of old cameras. These have interchangeable lenses, and are very finely made. Some may consider them to be antiques but I dearly love using my two Makinas. They also made a 73mm wide angle and 190mm Telephoto that are quite good.

See my Makina thread here:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[anthonylg]

Thanks, I just needed to know about the sizes and the compatibility with the Horseman as it's kind of unusual for 6x9. For the rest I'll stay with MF photo so that won't be a problem.

anthonylg,

You might consider the Plaubel Makina III and IIIR if you like the look and feel of old cameras. These have interchangeable lenses, and are very finely made. Some may consider them to be antiques but I dearly love using my two Makinas. They also made a 73mm wide angle and 190mm Telephoto that are quite good.

See my Makina thread here:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Thanks Nokton. It's a very nice camera but I would be more limited with the choice of lenses... But I'm having a look at your thread, thanks

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Mamiya Press, Graflex XL both come to mind. Both are rangefinders and a bit heavy for the format. The look will be more modern (contrasty and sharp) compared to the Zeiss folders. LF forum has a page on 2x3 cameras. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/roundup2x3.html

wasn't there a 6x9 wit a fixed-lens zoom?That could fit the bill!

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ralphie, might you be thinking of a 70 mm Camerz long roll camera? Some of these had an integral 75-150/4.5 lens. But they shot half frame 6x9, also called 645, and they're not particularly portable. Re portability, IIRC, they ran on 110/60.

 

[michr]

wasn't there a 6x9 wit a fixed-lens zoom?That could fit the bill!

Varifocal and zoom lenses were quite uncommon on larger formats. I don't know of any that were made specifically for a fixed-lens 6x9 camera. There were interchangeable zooms for the Pentax 6x7, but that's not quite what was asked for. I'm genuinely curious about the 6x9 zoom camera, so if you remember/find out what it is, let me know.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I've never heard of one. Fuji does have a 645 with a modest zoom range, trending mid-wide to slightly "normal". And as far as that P67 option is
concerned, those kind of big SLR zooms truly are tanks.

 

[Pioneer]

In order, my best images in 6x9 come from the following cameras;

1. Crown Graphic 4x5 with Kodak Ektar 127/4.7 lens in a Graphic Supermatic shutter. Coupled rangefinder for this lens.
2. Wanderlust Travelwide 4x5 w/Graphlex 6x9 120 roll film back using Schneider-Krueznach Angulon 90/6.8 lens in a Linhoff Synchro Compur shutter. Separate non-coupled rangefinder in accessory shoe.
   
3. Kodak Monitor Six20 w/Anistigmat Special using Anistigmat Special 105/4.5 lens. Separate non-coupled rangefinder in accessory shoe.
   
4. Voigtlander Bessa II w/Color Heliar 105/3.5 lens using 120 roll film. Coupled rangefinder.
5. Agfa Record III w/Agfa Solinar 105/4.5 lens using 120 roll film. Un coupled rangefinder built into camera.

They all do a terrific job.

Enlargements are very easy out to 11x14 with all of them. If I want to enlarge past that I just step up to 4x5 negatives.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Well, mine in 6X9 come from the following in order with best/likeable images first:
Kodak Medalist I & II
Kodak Monitor 620 and like Dan above it has the separate Kodak shoe rangefinder and the "SPECIAL" lens.
Zeiss Super Ikonta C 531/2 with 105mm f3.5 coated Opton Tessar (a really beautiful example)
4x5 Sears Tower with 100mm Wide-Field Ektar lens and roll back.
I have other 6x9 cameras, but these are the ones that I consider "professional" quality. I did own two Fuji 6X9 cameras and would rate both at or near the top of the list. Yes, I rate the Monitor 620 above the Zeiss Super Ikonta, because I like the Kodak lenses rendering on the Monitor better than the Ikonta coated Tessar. The Kodak Anistigmat "SPECIAL" lens is absolutely perfect in my opinion, but I'm only shooting B&W and not color. There is no substitute for a big negative and I like big negatives.