Kowa Six and accessories--Good deal??

[Andrew T]

So I'm planning on meeting up with this guy on Monday to get a MF setup.
It's a Kowa Six with waist level finder, normal and wide angle lens (says he paid $300 for the 55mm lens alone), Gossen Luna Pro-F light meter (not the newer digital style), a Slik tripod with quick release head (not sure which model), and filters. He said he would do $250 for the set and that everything is in good working condition.

The thing is, I would have to drive an hour each way to meet up with him. I'm mostly just interested in the camera and lenses since I already have a nice Sekonic meter and Bogen tripod, but thought I might be able to unload the ones he's including and get some of my money back?

Does this seem like a reasonable deal for the equipment? I thought so, but wanted to run it by some more knowledgeable folks first. Thanks for any help guys, I really appreciate it.

 

[elekm]

That seems like a good deal, as long as the camera works.

I found this site about the Kowa Six. You might want to read user comments regarding mechanical reliability.

When you look at the camera, make sure that the advance moves smoothly.

 

[David Brown]

Yes. But make sure the camera and lenses are working. Kowas are great and usually under-appreciated. But, they have a tendancy to jam when not handled correctly (not unlike some more expensive "similar" cameras).

The Luna Pro-F is a good meter. The Slik is probably OK, depends on the model what's it's worth.

 

[gphoto120]

I have a 6 that I bought for the same reason as you...low cost and good reviews. Your price sounds quite reasonable. In 3 years of moderate use I haven't had any film advance problems that others warned me about. I later added a Kowa Super 66 . Ross Yerkes in L.A. is a very good source for info, repairs and also accessories and parts. I don't have his number right now. pm me if you want it. Good luck!

 

[railwayman3]

I recall a close friend having a Kowa 6 in the 1980's and having recuring mechanical problems with the body (he was/still is a very careful and competent photographer, so I doubt he would have mis-used it). He was rather disappointed, having saved-up for it, and particularly as the lenses were top-class. He swapped for a Rollei outfit, IIRC.
With this in mind, I'd personally check the camera very carefully, having in mind it could be 30+ years old and maybe had professional use.
If it's OK, you could be getting a fair buy, though.

 

[Andy38]

Hello ,
I have A Kowa Super 66 with 55mm and other lenses ; I also have 500CM with 50mm Zeiss (CT*) and other same lenses .
No difference between lenses : they all are very sharp .
You can buy later the non expensive and also sharp 85mm .
Remove lens and look at mirror edges (if you don't know , ask the seller how to do , because it's not easy...) : if they are with black sticky mould on , seal must be changed ; but it's not difficult .
Kowa Six is IMHO more robust than Super 66 because it has not interchangeable film magazine ; jamming problem comes from it , with incorrect removal .
I think it's a good deal .

 

[mikebarger]

My first real MF system was a Super 66 and 6 with the usual lens kit 40mm, 55mm, 85mm, 150mm, and the 200mm (or 250mm can't remember). I had Ross Yerkes service both bodies and didn't have any trouble with either.

The Kowa bodies are good, but they are not a Hasselblad in terms of reliability. While neither body ever gave me any problems, they just didn't seem as robust as my Hassy gear.

Lens are equals, I don't like saying that considering I've paid a lot more for my Hassy lens, but it is the truth. The 40mm is great, and I always wanted to try the Kowa 19mm.

Meter finder on the 66 worked well.

All in all a good system. I would have Ross look over a unknown body though. He is the David Odess of Kowa's.

Have fun.

Mike

 

[Andrew T]

Wow, lots of really good info guys, I appreciate it a lot!

Being able to get into a decent MF setup for a lower price is what appeals to me. I'm a photo student and can rent out 645AFDs and RZ67s and ultimately, would love to have an RZ67, but can't afford a Mamiya/Hassy quality outfit yet. I'm just tired of having to drive 30 minutes one way to pick up gear and only having a day or maybe a weekend to actually put film through it...

I appreciate the info on those things to look out for regarding the mechanical issues, the lens removal/mirror edge thing, and film advance. I'll make sure to check these things out when I meet up with the guy. According to him, the camera has been well cared for and hasn't had any problems so I'm keeping my fingers crossed. Also, thanks for letting me know about Ross out in L.A that specializes in these cameras. If everything goes well and I end up getting it, he could be a really good contact to have.

Thanks again guys, and if anyone has any more info, keep it coming, it's really been helpful!

 

[canonman]

Let us know how it ended up! Good deal though, if everything works well.

 

[paul ron]

$250 is a good price adn you'll love the camera. I recently bought one with 3 lenses and like you I had my doublts. It turns out to be a well made camera that like any old piece of equipment, need a delicate hand in her old age. MIne is working perfecly with absolutely no problems. I can see why it's called the poor man's Hassy, but I don't understand the poor part. The lenses are quality built. The shutters are beautiful pieces of work n the glass it superb. The negs I've been getting out of it are sharp n crispy, no slotch.

 

[mikebarger]

Has anyone actually held a 19mm for the 66?

Mike

 

[Andrew T]

Well I got it, and it's been great so far! I think $250 for the body, 85mm and 55mm lenses, light meter, 4 tiffen filters, and an OLD "Slick Master" tripod was a pretty fair deal. He even threw in some expired color film which will be fun to experiment with, though I usually shoot B+W.

Just finished processing my first roll though, and a couple frames came out completely unexposed. I'm having a hard time figuring out what I did wrong and there aren't many resources out there for troubleshooting these cameras. I was wondering if anyone might have an idea what went wrong or could get me the contact info for Ross Yerkes out in L.A so I could ask him?

 

[davela]

A good deal, yes, even if you have to CLA the lenses. The 55mm is hard to find.

 

[paul ron]

More than likely, user error. Try another roll before panicing.

How are your pics so far?

 

[Andrew T]

The shots that do come out are gorgeous, but there are a couple problems that are really beginning to frustrate me.

I shot another roll last night, just processed it, and the same thing happened with the two blank frames. Not only that, but I noticed the first three frames are really dense. The first time I thought I might have just overexposed them, but I'm not so sure anymore because its not just the image part that is dense, it's the whole width of the film. From top (where the film info and frame numbers are) to the bottom, the first shots are nearly bulletproof.

Has anyone had these problems before, or knows what might be causing them? It's really getting to me because I love this camera but can't keep putting rolls through it with these inconsistencies! Help!

 

[thornhill]

Andrew.

I cannot help you with the under-exposure issue.

Do the dense frames happen with both lenses? I've noticed that Kowa lenses
that are in need of a CLA tend to get a lazy shutter. By that I mean that during the firing sequence the lens shutter is first wide open for focusing, then closes completely, then opens for the exposure and then it should close immediately and completely after the exposure is finished. Sometimes they don't close right away. It's quite easy to see if you look through the unmounted lens (in either direction) while dry-firing the shutter.

You could try phoning Ross Yerkes Camera Repair in LA at 323-256-1018. Nice guy who can probably sort you out. I think I read that Ken Ruth at Bald Mountain is also good on Kowas but I've never dealt with him.

Nice cameras. Good luck..

Derek



[
QUOTE=Andrew T;900392]The shots that do come out are gorgeous, but there are a couple problems that are really beginning to frustrate me.

I shot another roll last night, just processed it, and the same thing happened with the two blank frames. Not only that, but I noticed the first three frames are really dense. The first time I thought I might have just overexposed them, but I'm not so sure anymore because its not just the image part that is dense, it's the whole width of the film. From top (where the film info and frame numbers are) to the bottom, the first shots are nearly bulletproof.

Has anyone had these problems before, or knows what might be causing them? It's really getting to me because I love this camera but can't keep putting rolls through it with these inconsistencies! Help![/QUOTE]

 

[Andrew T]

Thank you very much for the reply. I didn't really think about a lazy shutter being the issue, but I suppose it is possible. Inspecting it myself, it seems like the shutter operates correctly and closes immediately when the exposure is finished, but I am no professional. I'm still not sure how that would explain the blank frames though, because with those, it seems like the shutter is simply not firing at all. And also why it only seems to happen on the first three frames?

I have so far only shot the two rolls with the standard 85mm lens. Perhaps I'll try the 55mm and see if the same problems occur. I'll have to give Ross a call and see if he might have any further advice for me or may be able to fix the issue, but I'd love to be able to work it out myself without having to spend more than I did for the camera itself!

Thanks again, I'll keep updating as I try the different lens.

 

[mabman]

By chance are these couple of frames always at the beginning or end of the roll? I see you mentioned you've used MF gear before, but in my own experience with new cameras I've made the mistake of not figuring out where I needed to align the arrows on the backing paper before starting to wind and shoot.

Just a thought.

 

[Andrew T]

The dense frames are at the beginning of the roll. I've always made sure to align everything properly before closing the back but almost spaced it out when I was loading film last night! I will double check that I'm doing it correctly though, good thought mabman.

Gonna be processing the roll shot with the 55mm lens later today, I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

 

[Andrew T]

So the roll shot with the 55mm is a disaster.

Again, the first three frames came out bulletproof. But instead of having 2 blank frames, ALL were blank except for one! I can't believe I wasted a roll of film and hours taking photographs for one neg.
I have no idea what the deal is. Taking the lenses of the camera and firing them, they seem to operate just fine. Why don't they work mounted to the camera? Why are my first three frames always bulletproof?
I'm going to call Ross on Monday (I'm assuming he wouldn't be available on a Sunday) and see if he has any idea what might be happening. I'm just at my wit's end, I feel like I got scammed!

 

[outwest]

When you go through the firing sequence with the back open, what do you see? I'm trying to remember if the Six is the one that has the little lever along the edge that the back pushes in when it is closed in order to make things work. If it is, just open the back and press the lever in manually so you can fire it and see what is happening.

 

[outwest]

Of course, you can also fire the shutter manually with the lens off the camera. Cock it by rotating the two studs counterclockwise, release it by pressing the small button and rotate the two studs clockwise. Set the lens at a slow speed so that you can watch the shutter open and close. There should be no hesitation. Also be sure not to set the VXM lever to V (leave it at X). The old timers are almost always gummed up and will cause problems. These shutters are 40 years old now and the original grease may be drying up. The optics are great by any standards.

 

[Andrew T]

Well the problem has been fixed... Kind of.

I was playing around with the lenses off camera and saw that both worked perfectly when fired manually, no trouble at all. So I'd cock the shutter on the lens, mount it to the camera, fire the shutter, and it works fine. But just that once. When the shutter was cocked again by turning the film advance knob, the mirror would slap up and everything seemed to be working, but the shutter simply stayed closed. I couldn't figure it out, I was thinking I was going to have to take the lens off and manually cock the shutter for each individual frame!

So I talk to the guy that sold me the camera and he says something strange about the mounting of the lens. Apparently, you cock the shutter on the lens (as usual before mounting it), line it up on the body, and twist the lens itself as you twist the locking collar (clockwise if you're looking into the lens). I mess around with this technique and finally have the shutter opening each time! The weird thing is, when mounting the 85mm lens, you have twist the lens the same direction as the locking collar, and with the 55mm, you have to twist the lens the opposite direction to get the shutter to actually open every time.

So now that I have the shutter firing consistently, I went out to shoot and sure enough, it seems to be functional. No blank frames.

Since I still had no idea what was causing the extreme overexposure of the first three frames on each roll, I taped up the back of the camera before shooting, and those frames did indeed came out normally this time. I have no idea why the issue would just be with the first three frames though? Especially since I've shot each roll at night, it didn't make sense that they were light leaks...

Now that it's working (not really like it's supposed to be, but still...), I'm not sure what to do with it. Just deal with these strange quirks and work around them, or actually get the camera working like it should be.

 

[Andrew T]

Talked to Ross today, he said that the body probably needs a CLA and he also said there's a modification that he does to all the winding mechanisms that he includes. That would run $140 for the body plus S&H.

Also told him about the problem with the overexposure of the first three frames and he said it sounded like a sticky shutter mechanism. $120 for him to go over the lens. Seemed like a real nice guy though, and I've only heard good things about his work.

I understand that the camera would be working fantastically if I had him service it, but can't figure out whether this outfit is worth pouring that much money into, especially on a student's budget... Perhaps those who have used this system or still do could give me some advice?

 

[Jerevan]

I can't vouch for this system, never having used it. It looks very cool though and seems to be a good workhorse. I am thinking like this: if you CLA it, you have a camera that you like, understand and know will be working as intended.

If you don't CLA it, you'll have to buy some other used camera, which might put you in the same situation that you are in now, i.e CLA to make it work as it should. Eventually, I have understood that for me, maintaining (as in sending for a CLA) and using what I actually have is far more productive and fulfilling than being a camera consumer. And yes, I am still learning that lesson, but I am getting there.