I have actually had a close and personal check on the camera I was looking at. Not for me I'm afraid just too heavy . I find my F4 plus lens a chore and this one is heavier. A lot heavier! The film wind on was sound and worked perfectly and had a receipt for a full service dated only this last January. I was seriously tempted, but the weight was the final persuader. Sadly I turned it down.
When I was a wedding photographer I used a Koni 100 and Rapid M for a brief period. It was a dream come true for me since it was my first interchangeable back camera. It was a little bulky compared to my later Hasselblad cameras, but much, much quieter than my Bronica S2a. From what you are saying about bulk means a lot of medium format cameras are ruled out. You don’t say you have any preference as to size such as 6.45cm, 6x6cm, 6x7cm or 6x9cm. Actually it sounds like you might be a really good candidate for a high class glass folder. That way you could use both your Nikon F4 and the folder on the same outing, which is what I do often. The selection of older folding cameras is almost limited, but finding the right one for you is another matter. I’m a hoarder/collector when it comes to cameras and have a fair amount of knowledge about them as well. I have 50+ folders in my stash and have ran film through many of them. Some are as good as any camera made now and some are certainly not. I also have Hasselblad, Pentax 67, Koni-Omega, Mamiya, Rolleiflex as my more modern medium format cameras, but find myself using some of my older folders just as much. My all time favorite cameras are the Kodak Medalist II, Kodak Monitor 620 w/ Kodak red Special lens, Zeiss Super Ikonta C with coated Opton Tessar lens in that order. The nice thing about some of the older folders is you can still try them out fairly cheap. The one area they are lacking in is for shooting wide angle and tele. Of course a nice 6x9cm/2 1/4x3 1/4” negative will give you a wider looking view and a crop will give you the tele view. If you find something in the old folder line and have a question you can PM me and I’m always willing to help. JohnWI have actually had a close and personal check on the camera I was looking at. Not for me I'm afraid just too heavy . I find my F4 plus lens a chore and this one is heavier. A lot heavier! The film wind on was sound and worked perfectly and had a receipt for a full service dated only this last January. I was seriously tempted, but the weight was the final persuader. Sadly I turned it down.
MattWe had a family friend when I was growing up who had a studio and did a lot of weddings. I was entertained by his description of his new to him Mamiya RB67 and Koni-Omega wedding camera kit as his small cameras. Of course, he had transitioned from his previous kit - the formals from 8x10 in the studio to RB67 either in the studio or on location, and casual and reception photos from Speed Graphic to Koni-Omega.
So everything is relative.
I always figured that the "pocket" there meant long outer coats or saddlebags.A good example is the word “pocket” from the late 1800 to early 1900. The pocket cameras from that era won’t fit in any pocket that I know of
When I was a wedding photographer I used a Koni 100 and Rapid M for a brief period. It was a dream come true for me since it was my first interchangeable back camera. It was a little bulky compared to my later Hasselblad cameras, but much, much quieter than my Bronica S2a. From what you are saying about bulk means a lot of medium format cameras are ruled out. You don’t say you have any preference as to size such as 6.45cm, 6x6cm, 6x7cm or 6x9cm. Actually it sounds like you might be a really good candidate for a high class glass folder. That way you could use both your Nikon F4 and the folder on the same outing, which is what I do often. The selection of older folding cameras is almost limited, but finding the right one for you is another matter. I’m a hoarder/collector when it comes to cameras and have a fair amount of knowledge about them as well. I have 50+ folders in my stash and have ran film through many of them. Some are as good as any camera made now and some are certainly not. I also have Hasselblad, Pentax 67, Koni-Omega, Mamiya, Rolleiflex as my more modern medium format cameras, but find myself using some of my older folders just as much. My all time favorite cameras are the Kodak Medalist II, Kodak Monitor 620 w/ Kodak red Special lens, Zeiss Super Ikonta C with coated Opton Tessar lens in that order. The nice thing about some of the older folders is you can still try them out fairly cheap. The one area they are lacking in is for shooting wide angle and tele. Of course a nice 6x9cm/2 1/4x3 1/4” negative will give you a wider looking view and a crop will give you the tele view. If you find something in the old folder line and have a question you can PM me and I’m always willing to help. JohnW
I agree Matt. I remember seeing ads of a heavily mustached man with a bicycle wearing a long overcoat with big, I mean big, pockets. In his hand looked to be a camera the size of a Kodak 3A and the ad mentioned pocket. I wonder what the term “mini” meant back then? JohnWI always figured that the "pocket" there meant long outer coats or saddlebags.
I agree Matt. I remember seeing ads of a heavily mustached man with a bicycle wearing a long overcoat with big, I mean big, pockets. In his hand looked to be a camera the size of a Kodak 3A and the ad mentioned pocket. I wonder what the term “mini” meant back then? JohnW
I agree that some older cameras have seen better days, but some of the much better built older cameras, like the Medalist I and II will be working long after I’m gone. They are like the famous TimeX watch ad, “Take a licking and keeps on ticking”. Everyone has their preference when it comes to photo gear and for me there is not one camera that tics all the boxes. Some come close, but none are perfect. It is certainly fun trying to find that perfect camera Combo. JohnWI prefer a camera with different focal length lenses so a folder is not really what I could work with. It is not the bulk, I can get around that, it was the weight. 8 pounds wether it is a small camera + lenses, or a large camera with lenses is still 8 pounds. Besides, the folding cameras you suggest are at least 60 years+ old and will have seen better days. My F4 goes with me when I am out walking goes with 3 Nikon lenses a 20/35. 28/85 and a 80/200. You can probably get lighter ones but unlikely to have Nikon optical quality or the same focal length range.
No perhaps the Koni-Omega was a temptation but really would not fit in with my preferences.
The 58mm lens has an angle of view of 61º. It also takes Series VII filters. Mine came with the auxiliary viewfinder for the 58mm lens.Thanks guys. Your comments on the wind on makes me want to see and handle it before | hand over any money. If I work out what field of view the 58mm lens takes in It is possible to find seperate viewfinder from a 35mm camera which may do at a push. A 35mm Leitz finder won't be far off the mark. The large negative is what attracts me for B&W work. with Pan F there should be no grain visible even on a 12x16 .
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?