folders, folders, folders

[Neanderman]

Now you got me wondering; which triplets are the great ones?

I have an Ikonta folder with a Zeiss Novar Anastigmat that is amazing!

 

[Chazzy]

Jurgen Kreckel keeps saying that he gets great reports about triplet lenses in folders, but my brain is still attached to the idea that a Tessar-clone is a better bet. Seeing some prints made from Novars and similar lenses might change my mind. Folders with triplets certainly go for more reasonable prices on eBay, so that is something of an incentive.

 

[Kevin Roach]

Hey Russ

I have a very wobbly Moskva V with a nice lens. maybe we should get our two cameras together somehow.

 

[FallisPhoto]

Ok all you folder fans, If you had just $100. to spend on an old folder.Which one would it be and why?

Well, I have an Ansco Speedex Special R (w/Apotar), an old Bessa (w/dialset Compur shutter and Voigtar -- looks like a cookoo ought to pop out of the front every hour), a newer Bessa (w/Color Skopar), a Bessa II (w/ Color Skopar), a Perkeo I (w/Color Skopar), a Retina II (w/Xenon), a Agfa Isolette II (w/Apotar), a Pho-Tak Foldex 30 (w/Cassar), a Zeiss Super Ikonta 532/16 (w/Tessar), a Zeiss Nettar 515/2 (w/Tessar), a Voigtlander Avus (w/Scopar) and a Balda Super Baldina (w/trioplan). All cost under $100 (I tend to buy cameras that need help, do a lot of tinkering and restore them), but my favorites would be the Ansco Speedex Special R, the Bessa II and the Super Ikonta (not that I would give ANY of these up).

 

[FallisPhoto]

The Tessars ARE a little better than the Cooke triplets, but that said, some of the triplets are surprisingly good (Apotars, for example) and you'd be paying quite a lot more for very little improvement.

 

[sanking]

I, too, love 6x6 and 6x9 folders, although I've bought many that weren't up to snuff. The Moscva was in mint condition but the lens was pitiful. All three Novar lenses were shall we be kind, 'sub-optimal." Tessars have been spotty performers as well.


Russ

\



Russ,

The lenses on my Moscow 4 and 5 holders are quite decent perfomers. Not as good as modern Fuji and Mamiya glass by any shot, but not bad. I wonder if the rangefinder might have been out of adjustment on the camera with the "pitiful" lens?

Sandy

 

[Paul Goutiere]

I have been experimenting with some folding rangefinders for some time now. Nothing more exotic than Moskva 4 & 5 and Super Ikonta C and B.

I have found the Super Ikonta B (532/16) the easiest of these to use with it's combined viewfinder/rangefinder. Startlingly, for me, the images from this camera favorably comparable to my Hasselblad. The camera is sturdy and so far very reliable. I really like this camera.

The Super Ikonta C is also an excellent camera once you get past the Albada finder which I'm afraid makes it very hard to compose a image. (I wish I new how to fix these wretched finders, and why does the SI "C" cost so much)

The Moskva 4 (early type) and 5 appear to be reasonably comparable, image wise, to the Super Ikonta C but the finders are far superior to the Ikonta C. (No Albada finder on the Moskvas!) The shutters on the Moskvas, once CLA'd sound terrific and are quite accurate. The glass may be actually an improvement to the coated Tessars in terms of contrast.
No, the glass from my old cameras will not really compare to modern glass. Egonomics are better on the more recent cameras, as well, I'm sure but I've yet to find a camera type with more portability with such a large negative. Also the absolute simplicity of the mechanisms of these cameras provides reliability and ease of repair.
And, silly old me, I really like the look of this stuff.

 

[FallisPhoto]

Goutiere,

Besides, they just plain look sexy.

 

[mabman]

I picked up an Agfa Isolette III from Jurgen Kreckel last year - beautifully restored. On his recommendation I just went with the Apotar lens - honestly, it takes great pics, I highly doubt I'd benefit from anything more. Once again the equipment quality exceeds the skills of the photographer

I think my next purchase will be either a folder or a TLR, but one with automatic film advance (eg, not reliant on the "red window" to line up the next frame) - it's the one thing I'm not crazy about in the Isolette III - it's inconvenient, especially in low-light, and it means I have to take my eyes off the action for a bit.

Oh, the other thing I like about it is you get to freak out people with digital cameras - I enjoy keeping the folder closed, walking up to someone, and doing my best Crocodile Dundee impression - "THAT's not a camera" - push release button, bellows snap out - "THIS is a camera!"

 

[Ole]

... Oh, the other thing I like about it is you get to freak out people with digital cameras - I enjoy keeping the folder closed, walking up to someone, and doing my best Crocodile Dundee impression - "THAT's not a camera" - push release button, bellows snap out - "THIS is a camera!"

Now that you mention it, I did notice a strange drop in the number of visible digitoys when I opened my Speed Graphic in the main square in Asti...

and the few that remained disappeared when I put an 1880's brass lens on it!

 

[sanking]

Now that you mention it, I did notice a strange drop in the number of visible digitoys when I opened my Speed Graphic in the main square in Asti...

and the few that remained disappeared when I put an 1880's brass lens on it!

If you get a kick out of the reaction of the digiboys to your old equipment you should see them when I set up my new 5X7 metal Canham camera. This really intimidates them because the camera is obviously both new and very complicated, and they don't have a clue as to what it does. But the camera is so damn cool in its design that it screams of being contemporary. And when I tell them that I usually scan the 5X7 negatives in 48 bit color at 3175 dpi and the resulting file is about 2.0 gig in size I think they really began to question to value of their 10mb Canon Rebel and creates a bit more respect for the qualities of real film.

Sandy King

 

[thebanana]

And when I tell them that I usually scan the 5X7 negatives in 48 bit color at 3175 dpi and the resulting file is about 2.0 gig in size I think they really began to question to value of their 10mb Canon Rebel and creates a bit more respect for the qualities of real film.

Ouch. You're EVIL, Sandy

 

[sanking]

Ouch. You're EVIL, Sandy

Hi Banana,

OK, I admit to being a bit evil in this. But the only thing some folks understand is how many mps there is in the file. Their range of comfort is about 8-20 mps.

When I suggest to them that my 5X7 negaative, when scanned in RGB at 3175 dpi,, will produce a file around 2 gb in size, well, it is fun to see the lights going off in their heads trying to process the pixel oveload.

Sandy King

 

[Russ Young]

Sandy-
"The lenses on my Moscow 4 and 5 holders are quite decent perfomers. Not as good as modern Fuji and Mamiya glass by any shot, but not bad. I wonder if the rangefinder might have been out of adjustment on the camera with the "pitiful" lens?"

Alas, no. I tested it in an ancient Fife kirkyard with rows of headstones. Not sharp in ANY plane, sigh. Looks like bad element spacing perhaps. Bummer because I like the rest of the camera.

Russ

 

[steven_e007]

I'm a bit late to this discussion - storty of my life ;-)

But I'm pretty nuts about 6 X 6 folders.

Something that I don't think has been mentioned yet in the "tessar type versus triplet" comparison is that the Novar's achilies heel is not so much the fact that it is a triplet, but rather the fact that it is a lens that uses front cell focussing.

It is impossible to get good correction of lens aberations and vary the distance to the front element for focussing. The Novar is not a bad attempt at a lens of this type - although I think it is really a Rodenstock design and only inherited the Zeiss name when Zeiss Ikon absorbed the cameras manufacturers who were using it in the 1920s and 30s. Triplets where the whole lens is moved for focussing, such as some of the cooke triplets and the japanese yashikor can be very sharp when stopped down a bit. Similarly I think some of the four element tessar designs have a supplementary front element for focussing when used on folders, which degrades the image and has inferior contrast and flare due to the extra glass surfaces compared to a conventional tessar in a helical focussing mount or on adjustable bellows.

I think this may be the reason why TLRs usually outperform folders of similar vintage and value, as most TLRs focus by adjusting the lens to film distance (except for the lubitel types) and most folders use front cell focussing.

Even so, a coated 2.8 Novar in good condition can be nice and contrasty and reasonably sharp at about f5.6 or f8. I have compared two 6 X 6 Zeiss Nettars side by side, one with a Novar and one with an Opton Tessar - the Novar is contrastier and just as sharp in the centre, but loses it at the edges when wide open. The Tessar was better at full aperture, but the differences where not that dramatic.

Neither would come close to something like my Mamiyaflex in a lens resolution test, but then I can't get a TLR in my pocket!

Steve

 

[ic-racer]

6x12 folder

I have about 10 folders and using the 6x9 ones got me into 6x9 Horseman. Now that I have the Horseman, I don't use the folders anymore. However, I did just get a 2 1/4 by 4 1/4 folder. Looks close to a 6x12 format. I'll have to spool up some film and try it out.

 

[Mike Kovacs]

Its not only front cell focusing that hurts the performance of folders. Also important is that the lens standard remains rigid and fixed in the exactly correct position each time it is unfolded.

In moving to a unit focus design, some designers found that it impacted the lens standard issue to an even worse degree than having front cell focusing.

Also, when you unfold a bellows camera like a folder, the bellows can suck the film inwards. 6x9 cameras are notorious for this. I try when possible only to advance and shoot after the lens has already been erected on my postwar Ikonta 521/2 (105/3.5 Tessar).

Anyhow, I don't think you will find many people to argue that the professionals of the day preferred press cameras and TLRs and passed on the more consumer orientated folding medium format cameras.

 

[Paul Goutiere]

Anyhow, I don't think you will find many people to argue that the professionals of the day preferred press cameras and TLRs and passed on the more consumer orientated folding medium format cameras.

I can personally attest to this, I am somewhat dismayed to think that now I can attest to this but I can.
I worked for two newspapers when I was a young guy. One paper used Speed Graphics and the other Mamiya C33, C22 and a Rolleiflex.

The Graphics were really large, tough and heavy and but having to lug them around with those film holders, and the "electronic" flash was a considerable burden. These were very versatile cameras, and in the right hands produced some really enviable work, but I believe they hindered many photographers because of their size. (No I was never personally responsible for any really enviable work)
The Mamiyas and the Rolleis were better, but not by much.

One of the reporters that I worked with had his own camera. It was a Super Ikonta B. He beat the hell out of it. The thing fitted in his trenchcoat pocket (yep, trenchcoat) whereas the only thing I got in my pockets were film holders. His little flash was in his other pocket. This guy was a fantastic photographer. He taught me more than photography but also how to drink beer and talk to girls.
I like to think that his use of that lovely little Super Ikonta, precluded what I saw follow.
When I was no longer in the newspapers I began to notice 35mm stuff, motor drives etc. Now, news Photogs are using something else, something that uses "digits" or whatever.

 

[sanking]

In another thread I posted some results from testing of Mamiya 7 lenses. At the end of that thread I mentioned that as an aftersight I also tested in similar conditions my Fuji GW690III rangefinder, and a Moscow 5.

"BTW, from the same tripod set-up and as a curiosity I tested Acros with a Fuji GW690III (90mm lens) and a Moscow-5, with 105mm lens. I tested the 90mm Fujinon EBC at f/4, 5.6, 8 and 11, the 105 Industar at f/5.6, 8, 11 and 16. I have developed the film but not yet read the results. I will post them later this evening in the medium format section in the long running thread on folders."

What I found was that the 90mm Fujinon EBC of the GW690III tested about the same as the 80mm lens of the Mamiya 7. At f/8 the Mamiya lens tested at 80 lppm, the Fuji at 65 lppm. The target was at 10X the focal length of the two lenses so any difference may be due more to the difficulty of using a rangefinder to focus so closely.

The lens of the Moscow-5 was a real surprise, in that it tested at about 50 lppm at f/16, though a lot less at f/5.6 and f/8.

With both the Fuji and the Moscow-5 the resolution increased as I stopped down the lens, indicating that accurate focus was more important than lens quality.

From these tests I conclude that the Mamiya 7 has a great rangefinder system, the Fuji GW690III a very good one, and the Moscow-5 fairly mediocre. However, on a tripod and at f/16 the Moscow 5 lens at 50 lppm is capable of superb results, especially considering the large 6X9 cm negative area. The lens is coated and contrast is very good.

Sandy King

 

[IloveTLRs]

I've got three folders.
Retina 1a (just barely a folder I guess)
Minolta Semi-P
and my favorite, an Agfa Billy-Compur. A pocketable camera that does 6x9 negs

 

[k_jupiter]

I read these threads like an addiction. I laugh when I read something that means the author doesn't believe a real photograph can be taken with a 30 dollar camera, i.e. Zeiss Nettar 518, but must be acquired with a $2000 Hassy or at least a several hundred dollar Nikon or what not.

My theory is... you're not a photographer if you can't take that award winning photo with a 30 dollar folder. You're crap hiding behind your equipment.

Now don't get me wrong. I am as much of an equipment junky as resides here on APUG. I love looking at a perfectly focussed, exposed, developed and printed 4x5 negative taken with my Fuji 150 LF lens. I love getting the shot with my collection of Tessar LF lens, or with my rb67 or c220 fine glass, never having to guess how much to fudge the shutter speed because the springs on some of these damn things are so old...

But... when I go out with a Nettar or a Voightlander folder, if I didn't get the shot... it wasn't the camera's fault. I screwed up. Either in conception or execution. History with these cameras has proven, they can make the shot within their capabilities. It's my job as a photographer to know the limitations of the equipment and still get the image on film.

So all, enjoy the freedoms given to you by these folders. Down at f11, if you didn't get the shot... it wasn't Jena to blame.

tim in san jose

 

[Confusion Circle]

I hate photo enthusiast forums like this. In the past year, my camera body count went from 2 to 9! Just got my hands on a 620 Hawkeye Junior, HIT miniature camera and an AGFA Standard. Must learn self control...I'm running out of excuses to tell the missus. The "What? I've always had that" line isn't working anymore.

 

[k_jupiter]

I hate photo enthusiast forums like this. In the past year, my camera body count went from 2 to 9! Just got my hands on a 620 Hawkeye Junior, HIT miniature camera and an AGFA Standard. Must learn self control...I'm running out of excuses to tell the missus. The "What? I've always had that" line isn't working anymore.

Start inventing recently deceased previously unknown great uncles who willed them to you.

When you get up to 45 or so, let me know. I have group for you. Cameras Anonymous, for all those who have more cameras than me. Because I don't have a problem.

tim in san jose

 

[Dan Fromm]

I hate photo enthusiast forums like this. In the past year, my camera body count went from 2 to 9! Just got my hands on a 620 Hawkeye Junior, HIT miniature camera and an AGFA Standard. Must learn self control...I'm running out of excuses to tell the missus. The "What? I've always had that" line isn't working anymore.

What is your rationale for this assemblage?

 

[Frank R]

Because I don't have a problem.

I don't have a problem, I can stop anytime.

That's right... I can stop anytime if I wanted to, because I am in control of my......hey, look at the shiny new Mamiya 6 that just came in the mail!