Favourite 6x9?

[1kgcoffee]

Thinking about getting a 6x9 camera. What are some of your favourites?

As far as preferences go, the ability to focus without guessing would be nice, not a wide angle and personality of the lens. Does not need to be clinically sharp but should have decent contrast and sharpness.

-1kgcoffee

 

[ic-racer]

Got really excited about 6x9cm a few years ago. I was using a bunch of Kodak folders from the "Kodak Tourist" era. But I really wanted sharp lenses and a rangefinder. I found the Horseman system perfect for my uses. At the time the Horseman was pretty inexpensive; less than the modern Fuji/Bessa folder or vintage german folders with rangefinders.
The Horseman is literally a folder also, but it is pretty big and heavy for a pocket! It has a rotating back so its body size is that of a 9cm x 9cm camera.
The perspective controls on the Horseman are nice, but then you are tied to a tripod also and not much farther from hauling a 4x5.

Ilford MG FB

 

[BAC1967]

I was recently trying to find a good 6x9 camera as well, I had same concern as far as focus. I'm sure the Horseman is great for focusing but not portability. I settled on a Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 531/2. I like rangefinder focusing so I thought this would be a good choice with the Zeiss glass. I've only put one roll of film through it so the jury is still out.

Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 531/2 by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

Admiral Theater by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

 

[destroya]

fuji gw690. great lens that has the perfect balance of sharpness, contrast and color rendition. just shot 4 rolls with it yesterday in san francisco.

while i prefer the 65mm lens you said no wide angle, so the 90mm lens is perfect

 

[Dan Fromm]

2x3 Century Graphic. 2x3 Cambo SC-1.

Not what you said you wanted, bag of beans, but what I use. I have an Ensign 820 that fits a large pocket, much prefer the Graphic. But I like flexible cameras (= system cameras), find using just the one permanently attached lens too restrictive. Tastes differ ...

 

[Two23]

I really like my Voigtlander Bessa RF with 105mm Heliar lens. It folds up and can be carried in a coat pocket.

Kent in SD

 

[removed account4]

mine is a 3x4 graflex slr with a graphic 23 (2x3 back) .. but sold it ....
now im back to either the not as portable graphic23 series D (4x5) slr and
laverne or the 3.5 tessar, and/or the agfa sureshot ( i think its 6x9? ) ...

 

[blockend]

I used a Mamiya Press with 6 x 9 frame, lovely camera, excellent lenses, but seriously heavy. Now I can only shoot 6 x 9 on my MPP with roll film insert. My 120 enlarger only goes to 6 x 7, so printing 6 x 9 is out and I'm happy to use a 6 x 6 folder and carry it in a pocket.

 

[DWThomas]

By default my favorite 6x9 is my Ercona II (early 1950s East German Zeiss Ikonta), my other 6x9 is a Kodak Brownie Target Six-20 box camera which has the distinction of being my first new camera, a gift nearly seventy years ago!
The Ercona carries a 105mm f/3.5 Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar which gives a good account of itself. The camera does not have a rangefinder, but I don't find that much of a limitation -- there are small rangefinders that slip in an accessory shoe (which I own but never use). Focus is marked in meters -- but hey, meters -- yards -- close enough!

In this day of cell phone cameras it has drawn some attention.

A couple of samples, more visible on and thru links at my PBase gallery Ercona II page.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Kodak Medalist, I or II.

 

[Craig]

One of the Fuji GW690III cameras. Easy rangefinder to focus, and an amazing lens. Relatively light and easy to carry too.Quite reasonable off Ebay from Japan.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Mine is the Fuji GW690III rangefinder:

 

[Bill Burk]

I’ve got two folders. A Bessa II with color scopar and a super Ikonta with Tessar.

They both do the trick.

I really lucked out. The Bessa was unrecognized at the secondhand shop. And the Ikonta ... fun story. I found someone who could repair them, budgeted for the repair and found the worst beat up looking one on eBay and bought it for nothing, had it drop shipped to repairman who fixed it.

He said he’d never do that again. But I have the ugliest working Ikonta that does what a 6x9 camera should do....

Later it helped me (with that Risley prism) tell my optometrist what formula to plug into my eyeglasses. I’d struggled for years with double vision that just couldn’t be solved with the old “is this better or worse” technique. Soon as I could dial it in like a rangefinder I got the most comfortable prescription I’ve ever had. the prism assembly comes off pretty easily and you can play with it... though reattaching springs when putting it back together is a trick.

 

[Craig]

Mine is the Fuji GW690III rangefinder:

That's what I have too. Makes a great travel camera. If I was to improve it, I would like a light meter and interchangeable lenses.

 

[MattKing]

This is explicitly outside your criteria, but I did spend only $25.00 for my scale focusing, 620 requiring Kodak Tourist...

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

I use a Horseman VH when traveling (by plane) and want movements. To "equal" 4x5 the lenses really need to be top notch, so only have a few. Although 6x9 I typically use RB67 backs. No heavier, and about the same bulk as a Hasselblad outfit with one or two lenses. Slower, but more versatile.

I also like the Zeiss Ikonta folders. Have two, but not 6x9, they're 1930s 6x4.5 and 6x6 format with Tessar lenses. Wouldn't mind having a 6x9 version.

Ruby Mountains in northern Nevada a week ago. Horseman VH with a 65mm Biogon type lens, Fuji Acros Neopan.

 

[locutus]

I used to have a Horseman VH-R and found it a neither 'here nor there' solution.

Handheld shooting was possible but not that great, a Fujifilm 690 is by far more practical for that, and when shooting on a tripod i quickly found i could just as well shoot a 5x4 camera.

The biggest annoyance with use as a viewcamera was that roll film holders (2x3 sheetfilm isn't that practical) require removal of the ground glass instead of slipping underneath like a sheetfilm or Sinar/Cambo holder.

 

[jtk]

I used to have a Horseman VH-R and found it a neither 'here nor there' solution.

Handheld shooting was possible but not that great, a Fujifilm 690 is by far more practical for that, and when shooting on a tripod i quickly found i could just as well shoot a 5x4 camera.

The biggest annoyance with use as a viewcamera was that roll film holders (2x3 sheetfilm isn't that practical) require removal of the ground glass instead of slipping underneath like a sheetfilm or Sinar/Cambo holder.

Just now going back to 6X9 with my long-owned Century Graphic 23. 80/2.8 Rodenstock Heliar, 135 Schneider Xenar, 254 Tele Arton. The easy-focusing 80/2.8 allows minimal view camera movements, the 135 offers far more than enough (not enough for 4X5), 254 offers little. It's relatively easy to hand hold due to shape and light weight and the folding works well in a pack or case.

I do happen to have some sheet film and modern holders but prefer roll film for ease of processing. Yes, the roll backs are awkward for view camera style shooting. I have several roll backs so it's easy to choose color or B&W depending on the shot.

I scan this film myself with a 10yr-old Epson flatbed and Betterscanning.com focusing film holder...resulting inkjet prints rival 16X20 from condenser enlarger for sharpness and Photoshop allows far more subtle dodging/burning etc than does an enlarger.

 

[Besk]

I have a miniature Crown similar to Dan Fromm's. That, with a 100mm and a 65mm lens is not that heavy to carry around. The plus is that you have
some (limited) movements, particularly rise, when needed. I use a 6x9 Horseman back with it plus 6x7 and 6x6 backs.

The Mamiya Press cameras are heavy but have the advantage of a combined rangefinder & viewfinder.

 

[nbagno]

Only have one, and that's the Fuji GW690III so it's my favoriate :-D View media item 48912

 

[Paul Howell]

I like my Mamyia Universal, heavy but easy to handhold with the grip, all the lens are sharp. When shooting 4X5 I now carry a Kodak Tourister, a latter model with a 4 element Tersser style lens.

 

[bvy]

Only have one, and that's the Fuji GW690III so it's my favoriate :-D View media item 48912

Did you crop this? Looks more like 6x12.

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

I used to have a Horseman VH-R and found it a neither 'here nor there' solution.

Handheld shooting was possible but not that great, a Fujifilm 690 is by far more practical for that, and when shooting on a tripod i quickly found i could just as well shoot a 5x4 camera.

The biggest annoyance with use as a viewcamera was that roll film holders (2x3 sheetfilm isn't that practical) require removal of the ground glass instead of slipping underneath like a sheetfilm or Sinar/Cambo holder.

My VH (no rangefinder) is a lot lighter and much more compact than my equivalent 4x5" (metal Wista). Both of my lenses (Schneider 100mm APO Symmar and 65mm Horseman ER) are very compact, and can stay on the front standard when folded.

I don't use sheet film for 6x9; I use roll film. To focus I use the Horseman 90-degree finder which has its own ground glass, so no need for a focusing cloth or loupe. Takes just a few seconds to switch from finder to film back.

I have found that to take full advantage of the large 6x9 negative one must use a tripod. Even at 1/250th hand-held, there's going to be enough camera shake to erase the advantage of 6x9 in terms of absolute sharpness. For hand-held you might as well use 6x6 or smaller, which is what I do. In my opinion in terms of sharpness you're wasting film by hand-holding a 6x9.

 

[johnnyh]

For pocketability with 105mm lens my favourite was the Bessa RF with Heliar or Skopar. Then the Kodak Medalist when it doesn't need to be pocketable and I am re-rolling between 120 and 620 spools.

 

[grimp0teuthis]

+1 for the Mamiya Universal Press (or Super 23 for that matter). It is big and heavy, but it is tough and reliable, has a good combined viewfinder/rangefinder, great interchangeable lenses, and a bunch of other accessories. I've heard the film backs have particularly good film flatness but I've done no tests so I can't confirm they're any better than average.

Also, they're cheap!