A good yet very compact medium format camera

[bonk]

I own the Voigtländer Bessa III (a.k.a. Fuji GF670) and I love it.
The „problem“ with this camera is though that it is both too big and clunky as well too expensive to throw it in my backpack and have it with me everywhere I go every day.

So I am looking for more compact and slightly less expensive alternative. A compact medium format camera with decent optics by todays standards that also works for color photography.

Do you have any hint for me what camera could fit this description?

I was considering on of those compact foldables they made in the 50ies like the Mamiya Six, the Agfa Ventura 66 or the Zeiss Ikon Nettax. They definitely are compact and very cheap. But the optics are probably not so great by todays standards especially for color photography, is this right?

 

[Dan Daniel]

Zeiss Super Ikonta III or IV with a Tessar lens. Not hugely smaller or lighter all in all than your Bessa III but cheaper, no electronics (except the selenium meter cell).

https://www.120folder.com/super_ikonta_iii.htm

This is a constant battle, compact medium format. I have my answer here- https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/6x4-5-rolleicord-and-others-non-slr-daily-cameras.190453/

Most any of these cameras made after WWII will have good coated lenses that give good color images. But probably none will match the lens on your Bessa III so you need to decide how to handle that issue. The Fuji 6x4.5s have lenses comparable in look to your Bessa.

 

[JNP]

Mamiya six folders have splendid optics, and an RF not zone focusing. You can probably doomscroll keyword search Flickr or IG to see pictures made with one. People love their hashtags.

 

[Down Under]

I'm with Dan (#2). Do consider a Rolleicord Vb. It won't fit into a pocket (well, not one of mine, anyway), but it's a light camera, its optics far beyond any of the folders you are considering, and if size is a concern, none of those three folding cameras are exactly pocket sized anyway.

The Vb's Xenar lens is probably the closest in quality optics to that in your Bessa. Mine is a mid 1960s model and produces top quality color negatives or slides. I shoot mostly black-and-white with medium speed films - Ilford FP4 is My current favourite, and I can say I've not had any quality problems with this film at all over many years of using it).

Rolleicord accessories are inexpensive and in plentiful supply. With a 16 exposure kit you'll get excellent 654 (actually 4x5.5) images and with a little care in winding you can stretch your numbers to 17 shots per roll.

All this said, you now own what is probably the best quality medium format shooter available today - your Bessa. If I had that much money to spare, it's one camera I would have acquired long ago. Which says it all for me. In my current circumstances, my Rolleicord Vb is entirely adequate for 90% of my needs.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have a Mamiya 6, the lens are excellent, sharp with good contrast, I've shot a few rolls of color over the years, no issues with my example. I would get a slip on lens shade and an adaptor for a filter, although the lens is coated I found that a UV filter to be useful.

 

[gone]

The 3 folders you show will make beautiful color photos, their optics are great. Better than today's lenses, which are overly contrasty and usually have lousy bokeh. I like the triplets, most people favor the Tessar types. I don't know where the idea that newer lenses are better started, we search endlessly on the auctions for these fine old lenses because they make superior images.

Get something w/ a Heliar on it and you'll blow away almost any camera made, they're on the little Bessas in 6x6. The 6x9 Voigtlander folders are big like all the 6x9 cameras. Not heavy, you can still put them in your back pocket. I once had a very early Voigtlander 6x9 folder w/ scale focus, a wire frame finder and a Heliar lens. The shots from it were amazing........

But, folders are slow to shoot, keep that in mind.

 

[freecitizen]

Perkeo II …. truly pocketable and color scopar lens

 

[Donald Qualls]

Mamiya six folders have splendid optics, and an RF not zone focusing. You can probably doomscroll keyword search Flickr or IG to see pictures made with one. People love their hashtags.

I have a Mamiya 6, the lens are excellent, sharp with good contrast, I've shot a few rolls of color over the years, no issues with my example. I would get a slip on lens shade and an adaptor for a filter, although the lens is coated I found that a UV filter to be useful.

I have a Mamiya Six folder as well. They come with two lenses (Zuiko and Sekor, both 75 mm f/3.5); most have dual format 6x6 and 6x4.5 with captive mask leaves; newer versions than mine have frame counters, and the last couple models are 6x6 only but with shutter cocking by film advance. Focusing is by moving the film plane, so you need to be sure the cover that keeps the film against the gate is present and do a little research to learn how to load the camera -- but both lenses are excellent for B&W and color, the front standard is quite rigid (because it doesn't need to move except to fold), and the RF coupling is well protected inside the body. IMO, it's not only lighter and slightly more compact than the early Super Ikonta B models (I have a 532/16), but both lens choices are better -- enough better to compensate for being 2/3 stop slower (the f/2.8 Tessar in my 532/16 is pretty soft wide open), and the viewfinder/RF is easier to use with glasses. There were apparently a lot of them made, so they're not hard to find and not very expensive.

Early Snack Stop, Mamiya 6, hand held, Portra 400.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

If you could live with 645 format, Fujifilm GA645 https://www.ebay.com/p/54950446

Then there's the more expensive Bronica RF645 https://www.ebay.com/b/Bronica-Rf645/15230/bn_7023318712

 

[Alan9940]

I'm with Dan (post #2). I love my Zeiss Super Ikonta III. But, if you want to go to what would arguably be the smallest MF available take a look at the Voightlander Perkeo's.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Konica Pearl III is likely in competition for the smallest MF rangefinder -- 6x4.5 only folder, and has an excellent lens as well. Other contenders in the 645 format would be the Super Zenobia (relatively rare) and Super Ikonta A (which never had a single-window version, rangefinder was always separate from viewfinder). Pearl III has a frame counter, too -- don't recall if the Super Ikonta A did, but pretty sure the Super Zenobia did not.

 

[BobD]

I own and can vouch for Ikonta, Super Ikonta and Zenobia. All very compact, well made with fine lenses.

 

[Down Under]

If you could live with 645 format, Fujifilm GA645 https://www.ebay.com/p/54950446

Then there's the more expensive Bronica RF645 https://www.ebay.com/b/Bronica-Rf645/15230/bn_7023318712

Alan, you must have big pockets... deep ones too, going by current prices (on Bay) being asked for those GAs.

I've owned two GA645s in my time, and while they produced truly wonderful results, they were "of an age" when their electronic innards were prone to suddenly giving out, with little or no chance of having them repaired. I sold mine before this happened, but several friends, including one who bought my second GA and used it for two years before it went kaput on him, eventually ended up with expensive photo-paperweights.

Ditto the Bronica RF645, which I've looked at (and played with one), but never could afford. Lenses were too expensive for my budget, and the range of optics too limited.

Rollei TLRs, Zeiss Nektars and Voigtlander Perkeos, all of which I own, are mechanical and far more reliable, if a tad more slow to work with, but then as an architect (now retired) I tend to make images of fairly static objects anyway, buildings don't often move when I'm focussing or exposure reading on them, so these lovely cameras are ideal for my needs.

Still, it's good the OP has so many options for a new camera, even if he may need new and bigger pockets stitched to his 'troozers'.

 

[abruzzi]

Alan, you must have big pockets... deep ones too, going by current prices (on Bay) being asked for those GAs.

well, in fairness, the camera the OP currently has is MUCH more expensive than the Fuji GAs:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/164890997917

So "slightly less expensive" isn't hard to find.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Alan, you must have big pockets... deep ones too, going by current prices (on Bay) being asked for those GAs.

I've owned two GA645s in my time, and while they produced truly wonderful results, they were "of an age" when their electronic innards were prone to suddenly giving out, with little or no chance of having them repaired. I sold mine before this happened, but several friends, including one who bought my second GA and used it for two years before it went kaput on him, eventually ended up with expensive photo-paperweights.

Ditto the Bronica RF645, which I've looked at (and played with one), but never could afford. Lenses were too expensive for my budget, and the range of optics too limited.

Rollei TLRs, Zeiss Nektars and Voigtlander Perkeos, all of which I own, are mechanical and far more reliable, if a tad more slow to work with, but then as an architect (now retired) I tend to make images of fairly static objects anyway, buildings don't often move when I'm focussing or exposure reading on them, so these lovely cameras are ideal for my needs.

Still, it's good the OP has so many options for a new camera, even if he may need new and bigger pockets stitched to his 'troozers'.

I was only recommending them, not paying for them.

 

[xya]

If you haven't been to my 120 folders website yet, go there and have a look at the comparison page https://www.120folder.com/compa.htm you will find most of the information you request. I would second the Pearl III if you can live with 4.5x6 and the Perkeo II if you don't need a rangefinder. For a full featured 6x6 my choice would be the Ikonta III and if you want a light meter included, it would be an Iskra 2. But that's difficult to find...

 

[bonk]

If you haven't been to my 120 folders website yet, go there and have a look at the comparison page https://www.120folder.com/compa.htm you will find most of the information you request.

Wow that's a nice website. - By the way: It would be very cool to be able to sort by one ore more columns.

 

[bonk]

Thank's again you all for this super helpful and interesting input.

I definitely want a decent coupled range finder and I plan to use the Reveni Labs light meter on the flash shoe with it. So from all the suggestions, the following three models look most attractive to me (in order of them being mentioned):

Zeiss Super Ikonta III (531/16) with a Tessar lens
Question 1: The only "advantage" of the IV is the integrated light meter, which will not work correctly anymore, so it is probably not worth buying the IV, right?

Mamiya Six
Question 2: There seem to be a lot of different models of the Mamiya Six from different times , which one is the "optimum"?

Konika Pearl III
First I thought, 4.5x6 is a disadvantage, but given the price of film these days it might actually be something to consider.

Question 3: How do these three particular models compare overall and especially in terms of lens/image quality?

 

[Dan Daniel]

Yes, best as I know the IV is simply a III with an uncoupled selenium meter crammed into the top plate. The advantage to the IV over the III is that there are more IVs with Tessars. Many IIIs have Novar lenses (I think that's the name, but not Tessar). The III looks cleaner in my opinion, but see what you can find available and see how patient you want to be and what you want to pay.

I would do some crops of your existing images to see if the basic image quality of 4.5x6 is for you. There IS a difference in gain visibility. Minor, but there. Instead of being surprised when you find a nice camera, just crop some 6x7 film down, maybe drop the contrast and clarity a touch, to get a feel for 4.5x6 from an older lens. I like it myself, and I have specific types of shooting that I use it for- more of a snapshot approach, carry everywhere camera, and I expect a looser and somewhat grainier aesthetic and quality.

 

[Donald Qualls]

If you're willing/able to spend a little more than I did, IMO the "optimum" Mamiya Six would be the model with dual format and frame counter (not sure what the model designation is). The frame counter does either 12 or 16 frames, format masks are still the captive, fold-in type. You still have to manually cock the shutter, but for me (with all the other old manual-cock cameras I own) that's normal, and the dual format is worth more to me than automatic shutter cocking (not to mention auto cocking makes it one step harder to intentionally double expose if I want to).

 

[xya]

If you're willing/able to spend a little more than I did, IMO the "optimum" Mamiya Six would be the model with dual format and frame counter (not sure what the model designation is). The frame counter does either 12 or 16 frames, format masks are still the captive, fold-in type. You still have to manually cock the shutter, but for me (with all the other old manual-cock cameras I own) that's normal, and the dual format is worth more to me than automatic shutter cocking (not to mention auto cocking makes it one step harder to intentionally double expose if I want to).

That's the Mamiya-6 V. Look at https://www.120folder.com/mamiya_six.htm, there is one at 2/3s of the page.

 

[xya]

Wow that's a nice website. - By the way: It would be very cool to be able to sort by one ore more columns.

That would exceed my knowledge in programming which is zero. You may have seen that my sites are pretty basic, no frills. I still do them with KompoZer, basic but easy and quick.

 

[xya]

Thank's again you all for this super helpful and interesting input.

I definitely want a decent coupled range finder and I plan to use the Reveni Labs light meter on the flash shoe with it. So from all the suggestions, the following three models look most attractive to me (in order of them being mentioned):

Zeiss Super Ikonta III (531/16) with a Tessar lens
Question 1: The only "advantage" of the IV is the integrated light meter, which will not work correctly anymore, so it is probably not worth buying the IV, right?

Mamiya Six
Question 2: There seem to be a lot of different models of the Mamiya Six from different times , which one is the "optimum"?

Konika Pearl III
First I thought, 4.5x6 is a disadvantage, but given the price of film these days it might actually be something to consider.

Question 3: How do these three particular models compare overall and especially in terms of lens/image quality?

Q1: yes, it's only an uncoupled light meter which most probably will not work. If you can get them for the same price, it depends whether you want an LV system camera. The IV has the LV system integrated.
Q2: the V (see above)
Q3: IMHO they all are pretty much the same superior quality...

 

[Down Under]

Rollei TLRs, Zeiss Nektars and Voigtlander Perkeos, all of which I own, ...

Oi! Zeiss Nektars, Neckties, Netters, Nutters, Nettars - my mistake!! Sorry.

I was only recommending them, not paying for them.

Obviously... Couldn't find the Emoticons, but Wink Back.

Truly, the OP is spoiled for choice, even more so as he owns one of the finest folders made, the Bessa. Drool.

Enough said about MF and all. I will now be quiet - for the time being.

 

[StanMac]

If you're willing/able to spend a little more than I did, IMO the "optimum" Mamiya Six would be the model with dual format and frame counter (not sure what the model designation is). The frame counter does either 12 or 16 frames, format masks are still the captive, fold-in type. You still have to manually cock the shutter, but for me (with all the other old manual-cock cameras I own) that's normal, and the dual format is worth more to me than automatic shutter cocking (not to mention auto cocking makes it one step harder to intentionally double expose if I want to).

I have the Mamiya Six V, which has the dual counter. I’m still running a roll through it.

Stan