Franka Solida 6x6

[Rumbo181]

What a surprise!

I've just checking the threads and found this particular one!

This morning I took a Yashica Mat 124 for a walk in "El Rastro" (Flea Market). I use to take my cameras out of the shelf from time to time as a part of the maintenance process. However the good quality of this camera, I found my folding cameras more convenient for the kind of pictures I take and somehow I missed them this morning.

And then, I spotted a cheap Franka Solida I "Made in Germany - US zone", and I bought it a few hours ago. Dusty, but with all stutter speeds working (I suppose slowly, I'll check them later), lens without scratches neither hazy nor fungus, and no pinholes... Everything seems to work.

Let's see when I check it more thoroughly, but by now, it's promising.

By the way, I always shoot at maximum speed to avoid trepidation. Regarding distance, in a short time is easy to get used to it, and in case of doubt I use a laser range finder. For exposure, I use a TTArtisan light meter. At the end it is easier to use all this than telling it.

 

[MattKing]

Dusty, but with all stutter speeds working

I like this - it made me smile!
But I expect you mean "shutter speeds" .
Good and fun find.

 

[MattKing]

Is the distance scale in meters or feet (or both)?

 

[Rumbo181]

I like this - it made me smile!
But I expect you mean "shutter speeds" .
Good and fun find.

LOL

Thank you for telling me.

It's the first time the corrector makes a fine joke instead of a bloody mess.

Besides, I wouldn't know how to measure speeds in a stuttering shutter!

Is the distance scale in meters or feet (or both)?

Only in meters.

If it were only in feet, I wouldn't have bought it. I think for us, thinking in meters is instinctive. I suppose in Canada it’s instinctive to think in feet.

 

[MattKing]

Only in meters.

If it were only in feet, I wouldn't have bought it. I think for us, thinking in meters is instinctive. I suppose in Canada it’s instinctive to think in feet.

Depends on how old you are.
Younger people are educated in meters, and all the road signage is metric.
I'm of the generation where the switchover started, so I can make mistakes in both systems.
The older generation - older than me, and I'm nearly 70 - have been successful in keeping pounds and ounces along with metric measurements on the signs in the grocery store - sale prices per pound in the flyer ads and the signs in the meat counter - while the labels on packaged produce like vegetables and meat are expressed in grams or kilograms.
Also, the influences of that massive US market just over the horizon - in my case, just 13 urban blocks south of here - shows itself in many ways. As an example, a lot of the packaged stuff has grams on the package, but the package size clearly is based in pounds. Thus the 907 gm package of coffee beans I purchased this morning (2 lbs, for the US market)!

 

[Rumbo181]

Depends on how old you are.
Younger people are educated in meters, and all the road signage is metric.
I'm of the generation where the switchover started, so I can make mistakes in both systems.
The older generation - older than me, and I'm nearly 70 - have been successful in keeping pounds and ounces along with metric measurements on the signs in the grocery store - sale prices per pound in the flyer ads and the signs in the meat counter - while the labels on packaged produce like vegetables and meat are expressed in grams or kilograms.
Also, the influences of that massive US market just over the horizon - in my case, just 13 urban blocks south of here - shows itself in many ways. As an example, a lot of the packaged stuff has grams on the package, but the package size clearly is based in pounds. Thus the 907 gm package of coffee beans I purchased this morning (2 lbs, for the US market)!

I'm afraid that I would be always short on coffee in Canada.

Anyway, it has its advantages. You have an understanding of magnitude in whatever system you use.

For me it's different -for all of us in Europe, I suppose. Yes, 6 feet are roughly 1 meter (90 cm. actually), this is easy, but how long 50 feet is?, a lot or a little?, you have to do a mental calculation to get an idea.

The first camera I bought in "El Rastro" was a Voigtlander Vito B, with scale in feet. It was a "blind camera" and you had to focus setting the distance. At the beginning I thought that it was of no importance, because I was more than able of doing the calculations, but at the end of the day, it learned that one thing was the math and other the "feeling", and that the feeling matters.

 

[loccdor]

When I have to zone focus I imagine my body falling forward with my feet staying in the same place. That gives a ballpark around 6 feet or 2 meters.

The Olympus Pen D's minimum focus distance is only an inch or two longer than my outstretched arm (0.8 meters), so that's handy too for closer shots. When I do portraits with it I reach out and almost touch the person's face

Rumbo, hopefully your Solida I doesn't have the bothersome problem with faulty double-exposure prevention as mine does. It results in missed shots when the camera doesn't think you've advanced.

 

[Rumbo181]

When I have to zone focus I imagine my body falling forward with my feet staying in the same place. That gives a ballpark around 6 feet or 2 meters.

The Olympus Pen D's minimum focus distance is only an inch or two longer than my outstretched arm (0.8 meters), so that's handy too for closer shots. When I do portraits with it I reach out and almost touch the person's face

Rumbo, hopefully your Solida I doesn't have the bothersome problem with faulty double-exposure prevention as mine does. It results in missed shots when the camera doesn't think you've advanced.

Yes, I use a trick very similar, thinking in the length of known objects as a reference. I use to shot at f:8 at least, so the margen of error is wide. When distance is very critical, for instance in a very close shot with narrow depth of field, I resort to my laser rangefinder.

Aparently, double exposition prevention mechanic in this camera works well, but I haven't finished its cleaning: Not only removing dust but also taking the top cover off and cleaning the pieces inside, and then lube. I have to measure its actual speed -surely 1/200 will be around 1/100- in order to correct mi exposure calculations. I have to check the lens infinity -it's well collimated or not?- and if not maybe it would be worthy to adjust the shutter as well, as I would have to remove the first glass ... Everything is simpler with this kind of cameras and very rewarding. When everything is done, I'll do the final check of actually shooting with her.

I got some pictures of the double-exposition prevention system in

Useful if you want to know what are you going to find in advance...

 

[Dave Lusby]

For convenience, remember that 3 meters is very close to ten feet. So 1.5 meters is 5 feet.
Anything more than 10 feet away will likely be in focus, as depth of field will cover any error. And shooting closer that ten feet with a 120 folder with zone focus is a crap shoot.

 

[Donald Qualls]

6 feet are roughly 1 meter (90 cm. actually), this is easy, but how long 50 feet is?, a lot or a little?

Well, actually, 2 meters is about 6 1/2 feet. And 50 feet is close enough to 15 meters. Of course, I took engineering courses around 1980, so as someone else posted not long ago, I learned to make mistakes in both systems with equal comfort, and I still carry most of the useful conversion factors in my head.

 

[MattKing]

And shooting closer that ten feet with a 120 folder with zone focus is a crap shoot.

Depends. 3.5 feet, IIRC, with a 6x6 Baby Bessa, handheld and probably ~f/11:

Picnic

• MattKing
• Jun 30, 2015
• 5

For the Geometry MSA - a detail of a park picnic table, and the shadows it creates in the sun.

 

[hoganlia]

LOL

Thank you for telling me.

It's the first time the corrector makes a fine joke instead of a bloody mess.

Besides, I wouldn't know how to measure speeds in a stuttering shutter!



Only in meters.

If it were only in feet, I wouldn't have bought it. I think for us, thinking in meters is instinctive. I suppose in Canada it’s instinctive to think in feet.

Nope, in some of them are in feet but most metric.

Mine, a 111e, is lots of fun... my first time out I was so bamboozled and I lost half a roll.... annoying, but it made me slow down and think. Mine has an uncoupled distance gauge which I don't rust that much. I have a laser meter now and that's comforting, except in strong sunlight.
I really like it... and my photos so far have been great. Most of them. Well, lots...

 

[Donald Qualls]

I don't have them in the gallery here, so can't post 'em at the moment, but I've got multiple negatives from a 6x9, 105/4.5 Skopar scale focus camera where things like rake-lit texture of flower petals are clear and sharp -- hand held, too, at distances close to minimum focus (abou 4 feet with that camera). Scale focus is not that difficult...

 

[Rumbo181]

Thank you all for your contributions — it's quite a funny thread!

However, I think it's becoming a little bit centrifugal. Maybe, for the benefit of present and future readers, it would be convenient to summarize it:

• @Harry f3, @edzer, @outwest, @loccdor, @halfaman, @RalphLambrecht, @nosmok and myself are happy owners of Solidas (I suppose @blee1996 is happy as well, but he’s in another league).

• By the way, “Solida” means “robust” in Spanish — and indeed it is. Solidas are solid performers; of course, some more than others depending on the lens, but never disappointing.

• No, my camera doesn’t have a stuttering shutter, although it’s very likely that its speeds are a bit slow.

• I have to give it a little spit and polish (a.k.a. a CLA) before loading a roll and start shooting (@Vetus, thank you for your link to old folders — I found it very useful).

• Yes, as @hoganlia says, almost every German camera maker from the late ’40s–’50s — including Franka — sold cameras with either metric or imperial scales, but…

• …it so happens that my camera’s scale is metric, and I’m happy because…

• …although it’s trivial to convert from metric to imperial and vice versa, I naturally think in metric, whereas…

• …some of you are “bilingual” when it comes to using metric or imperial measurements — bravo!

• Each of us has his own way of dealing with scale focusing — some with great ingenuity — and we’re all comfortable with it. But…

• …external rangefinders (laser, maybe) and light meters tend to be good friends of these cameras, because…

• …you can get very decent pictures with them at any distance — from the minimal focusing distance on up, of course.

• We all love our cameras and are very proud of them.

• Finally, @MattKing, I would probably run short on coffee sometimes if I lived in Canada (I usually buy 1-kg coffee bean packets), but I’m sure I could live with it — and your country more than makes up for it!

I hope I didn’t forget anything or anybody in this summary. If so, my apologies!

 

[RezaLoghme]

New to this forum and finding a wealth of info. Shoot 35mm but have a chance to get Franka Solida lll at a very good price and just wanted to get info about the camera. Can't really find a lot of info on the internet. Ease of use are they built well. This will be my first attempt with med format. Also what is a good B&W film to start with. Thanks Harry

What is a "good price" then

 

[Harry f3]

The good price for me was 50.00 US. Pick it up at a flea market here locally. Also just finished my first roll of Fomapan and the resulting neg. were very acceptable for the first shoot. Did loose a few frames to not being use to the operation of the camera.

 

[hoganlia]

Thank you all for your contributions — it's quite a funny thread!

However, I think it's becoming a little bit centrifugal. Maybe, for the benefit of present and future readers, it would be convenient to summarize it:

• @Harry f3, @edzer, @outwest, @loccdor, @halfaman, @RalphLambrecht, @nosmok and myself are happy owners of Solidas (I suppose @blee1996 is happy as well, but he’s in another league).

• By the way, “Solida” means “robust” in Spanish — and indeed it is. Solidas are solid performers; of course, some more than others depending on the lens, but never disappointing.

• No, my camera doesn’t have a stuttering shutter, although it’s very likely that its speeds are a bit slow.

• I have to give it a little spit and polish (a.k.a. a CLA) before loading a roll and start shooting (@Vetus, thank you for your link to old folders — I found it very useful).

• Yes, as @hoganlia says, almost every German camera maker from the late ’40s–’50s — including Franka — sold cameras with either metric or imperial scales, but…

• …it so happens that my camera’s scale is metric, and I’m happy because…

• …although it’s trivial to convert from metric to imperial and vice versa, I naturally think in metric, whereas…

• …some of you are “bilingual” when it comes to using metric or imperial measurements — bravo!

• Each of us has his own way of dealing with scale focusing — some with great ingenuity — and we’re all comfortable with it. But…

• …external rangefinders (laser, maybe) and light meters tend to be good friends of these cameras, because…

• …you can get very decent pictures with them at any distance — from the minimal focusing distance on up, of course.

• We all love our cameras and are very proud of them.

• Finally, @MattKing, I would probably run short on coffee sometimes if I lived in Canada (I usually buy 1-kg coffee bean packets), but I’m sure I could live with it — and your country more than makes up for it!

I hope I didn’t forget anything or anybody in this summary. If so, my apologies!

Perfecto amigo mío.

I'll be out with my solid new friend and a laser metre next week trying portraits. tengo ganas.

 

[hoganlia]

The good price for me was 50.00 US. Pick it up at a flea market here locally. Also just finished my first roll of Fomapan and the resulting neg. were very acceptable for the first shoot. Did loose a few frames to not being use to the operation of the camera.

Yep, getting my head around the settings was a challenge as well. I sometimes think I need to make a check list for some of my more "special" cameras.

 

[hoganlia]

I don't have them in the gallery here, so can't post 'em at the moment, but I've got multiple negatives from a 6x9, 105/4.5 Skopar scale focus camera where things like rake-lit texture of flower petals are clear and sharp -- hand held, too, at distances close to minimum focus (abou 4 feet with that camera). Scale focus is not that difficult...

Interesting. I do need to learn scale focus. I am a very late arrival to analogue, and the Franka Solida is my first range-finder.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I do need to learn scale focus.

Fifty-some years ago, I did a number of macro shots of tiny flowers (1-2 mm across the blossom) -- with a Pony 135 and a close-up diopter, and a little math and careful measurement. Scale focusing isn't a matter of getting lucky; with care and planning you can do anything you'd do with an SLR.

 

[hoganlia]

Fifty-some years ago, I did a number of macro shots of tiny flowers (1-2 mm across the blossom) -- with a Pony 135 and a close-up diopter, and a little math and careful measurement. Scale focusing isn't a matter of getting lucky; with care and planning you can do anything you'd do with an SLR.

It definitely is on my to-do list. Thanks for the comment and the encouragement

 

[Rumbo181]

Perfecto amigo mío.

I'll be out with my solid new friend and a laser metre next week trying portraits. tengo ganas.

I shot a roll with mine last weekend. Not as sharp as my Yashica Mat-124, but pretty decent.

Scale focusing may seem like a disadvantage at first, but I think it’s quite the opposite.
You don’t have anything distracting your composition in the viewfinder, and the focus scale actually helps you decide where to place the depth of field.

For example, you could take a portrait at 3 meters with f/8, setting the focus scale so that the depth of field ends around 4 meters. This way, everything in front of the subject is sharp, and everything beyond 4 meters is nicely blurred.

I find it very straightforward.

When fiddling with these folder cameras, I follow a sort of checklist:

1. Get a sense of the composition through the viewfinder.
2. Measure the light with a light meter (usually fixed at 1/200 or 1/100, depending on the situation, to avoid camera shake) — and memorize the reading.
3. Estimate or measure the distance to the subject with a rangefinder — and memorize it.
4. Set the aperture on the shutter, using the light meter reading you memorized.
5. Set the focus on the lens; knowing both distance and f-number, you can use depth of field to your advantage.
6. Advance the film until the next frame number appears in the red window. This way you’re almost ready to shoot without being bothered by the double-exposure prevention mechanism.
7. Cock the shutter. You shouldn’t see the cocking lever at the top of the shutter through the viewfinder.
8. Recompose.
9. If you’re closer than about 2 meters, compensate for parallax by aiming slightly higher.
10. Take a steady stance, hold your breath, and squeeze the release — shot! I usually check that the cocking lever has returned to the top position afterward.

It may look a bit long, but it’s actually very easy. Practice without film a dozen times and you’ll see it becomes almost automatic. Anyway, if you waste a couple of blank frames at the beginning, it’s no great tragedy.

¡Disfruta de tu cámara!

 

[hoganlia]

I shot a roll with mine last weekend. Not as sharp as my Yashica Mat-124, but pretty decent.

Scale focusing may seem like a disadvantage at first, but I think it’s quite the opposite.
You don’t have anything distracting your composition in the viewfinder, and the focus scale actually helps you decide where to place the depth of field.

For example, you could take a portrait at 3 meters with f/8, setting the focus scale so that the depth of field ends around 4 meters. This way, everything in front of the subject is sharp, and everything beyond 4 meters is nicely blurred.

I find it very straightforward.

When fiddling with these folder cameras, I follow a sort of checklist:

1. Get a sense of the composition through the viewfinder.
2. Measure the light with a light meter (usually fixed at 1/200 or 1/100, depending on the situation, to avoid camera shake) — and memorize the reading.
3. Estimate or measure the distance to the subject with a rangefinder — and memorize it.
4. Set the aperture on the shutter, using the light meter reading you memorized.
5. Set the focus on the lens; knowing both distance and f-number, you can use depth of field to your advantage.
6. Advance the film until the next frame number appears in the red window. This way you’re almost ready to shoot without being bothered by the double-exposure prevention mechanism.
7. Cock the shutter. You shouldn’t see the cocking lever at the top of the shutter through the viewfinder.
8. Recompose.
9. If you’re closer than about 2 meters, compensate for parallax by aiming slightly higher.
10. Take a steady stance, hold your breath, and squeeze the release — shot! I usually check that the cocking lever has returned to the top position afterward.

It may look a bit long, but it’s actually very easy. Practice without film a dozen times and you’ll see it becomes almost automatic. Anyway, if you waste a couple of blank frames at the beginning, it’s no great tragedy.

¡Disfruta de tu cámara!

¡Vaya sorpresa!

Thanks so much for this most amazing post. It's so helpful and interesting. I am going to print the ten points and keep them close to the camera. I have an outdoor session next Wednesday with one of my "models" and I will work through the steps exactly as you have outlined. Luckily, Witi my model is a good friend and very, very patient. I have already told her that this is the first time I am doing portraits with this particular camera. She really enjoys modelling in analogue and with my strange old cameras. It will be fun. I know I lost a couple of frames through not paying attention to exactly those things you mentioned. I'll post the link to my flickr page, the first five black and whites were from my first day out with the Franka Solida and quite acceptable I think.

Joe Hogan

Explore Joe Hogan’s 789 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

Estoy muy, pero muy agradecido amigo mío por el tiempo y esfuerzo que has tomado....

Joe

 

[Rumbo181]

Joe Hogan

Explore Joe Hogan’s 789 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

Joe

Beautiful pictures.

Here are my oldies — I haven’t uploaded anything to Flickr in years.

Rumbo181

Explore Rumbo181’s 613 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[hoganlia]

Beautiful pictures.

Here are my oldies — I haven’t uploaded anything to Flickr in years.

Rumbo181

Explore Rumbo181’s 613 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

Ai que bueno... gracias... igualmente que lo más nuevo es 2015, me hace ilusión a explorar.

I dumped Instagram about four or five years ago, I still have the account but I have never been back. Flickr is making some kind of truncated come-back and I enjoy posting new and old on Flickr from time to time. Also meeting some interesting people. Do you know Flickriver? It's great if you are looking at film stock, lenses, cameras, techniques. I'm trying double exposures at present and it's an easy way to check out work af other photographers very quickly. It's basically a Flickr search engine.

Flickriver - A new way to view Flickr photos and more...

Flickriver - view images as a 'river of photos' and more...

www.flickriver.com

a proposito, I am now following you in Flickr even though you aren't there. Que diver!