older 6x9 folders - still up to scratch on modern colour film?

[pellicle]

Hi

I'm presently musing with getting a 6x9 camera such as a Voigtlander for carrying in the backpack and supplimenting my 4x5 camera (when I don't want to have to set up / pull down / use a substantial tripod). Some recent advice and a read of this link sugests that I might be well enough off with something like this.

The size of things like the Agfa Billy (backed up with a hand held light meter) seem highly appealing if they make good sharp images.

A quick look of my portfolio (there was a url link here which no longer exists) will let you know what sorts of prints I like to make. Typically if I'm going to print something I'll want to be able to make something like 70cm wide or so, and still have it acceptably sharp. All the prints in there have bee made sizable enough to stand 20cm from and not find anything looking too soft.

I also realize that these cameras do not have interchangeable lenses, so I'm planning to get something about the same angle of view as (say) a 105mm on my 4x5


Thanks

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

No problem using color film in an old folder, but the film flatness won't be as good with the 6x9 folders as with a more modern camera or a more solidly built 6x9 back for a LF camera. I've posted some B&W and one color example from the Voigtlander Bessa II in this thread on photo.net--

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005uz5

The Fitzgreen Halleck shot shows one of the potential focus pitfalls with this camera. Once you experiment a bit, you can find out where the hazards are and how to avoid them.

 

[Fotoguy20d]

There's a large spread in quality of 6x9 folders. And, I suppose, there's very little to prevent you putting a better lens on one, assuming you match the focal length of the original. The Kodak Monitor (uses 620 film unfortunately) uses a variety of cheap lenses but can also be found with the very nice, coated (luminized in Kodak speak) 105mm anastigmat which is comparable to an Ektar 101mm in quality. The Billy (or at least the one I have) uses a Jgestar lens and has only a limited focus range (near or far) but, for a working man's camera of it's day, it can take a decent photo, but I don't know that you can print it at better than 2 feet wide.

Dan

 

[Murray@uptowngallery]

Hyvaa paiva & hyvaa kuvia! (sorry, no special characters on my keyboard)

The Agfa Record III with Solinar is another decently respected lens (4-el single coated, I think, Tessar or derivative). But Agfa's have poor belows longevity (maintenance likely necessary at some point). The folding mechanism on my Record III is sturdy. Zeiss Ikon's have good sturdy mechanisms too.

I have never seen a folder with a wider-than standard lens. Most are also used with 'Series' (V, VI) unthreaded filters needing (usually) push-on filter holders.

One trick for improved film flatness is don't wind the film to the next exposure until you have opened the bellows. The bellows opening can create a vacuum and draw the film away from the pressure plate.


Murray

 

[Dan Fromm]

Pellicle, I'm very much of two minds about pocketable folders. On the one hand, they can be relatively compact and light. On the other, they come, for the most part, with so-so lenses, some have questionable rigidity, and like all cameras they punish unsteadiness when shot handheld.

I have, sometimes use, two of 'em. Ensign Selfix 820 (6x9) with 105/3.8 Xpres. Perkeo II with 80/3.5 Color Skopar. Both at least semi-respectable. The Perkeo is a little gem, and is actually pleasant to use even though its finder is squinty and seems to show a bit less than the lens sees. The Ensign takes a large pocket and is heavy, has a wonderful finder. Thing is, neither is competitive on image quality with a Century Graphic and 101/4.5 Ektar. Better lenses than the 101 Ektar can be mounted on the Century, with pocketable folders we're stuck with the original lens.

Your goal -- printing 70 cm wide -- pushes 6x9 fairly hard and the lenses fitted to folders typically have so-so edge sharpness. If it were my money and my aching back, I'd think seriously about using a 2x3 Graphic (haven't measured but I do own a Century and a Crown, believe the Century is lighter) with a modern 100 mm or so plasmat type lens or 100/6.3 WF Ektar. That or the 4x5 with a 6x9 back and the appropriate lens.

I don't see the point of replacing a crappy lens on a 6x9 folder with a slightly better one. Doesn't seem worth the expense and effort.

You wrote "I also realize that these cameras do not have interchangeable lenses, so I'm planning to get something about the same angle of view as (say) a 105mm on my 4x5." That's about 2/3 normal, i.e., around 65 mm on 6x9. All of the old pocketable folders were fitted with normal lenses. End of that discussion.

If you want to use that short a lens on 6x9, your options are limited. I believe there's a fairly modern Fuji folder (GSW690?) that will do what you want. Said to be a fine camera, too. There's the uncommon but findable Envoy, which has a 63/6.5 Cooke Ser. VIIb. Or there's a Century Graphic with a 65/8 SA or Ilex. I use the Ilex, it is a fine lens.

Good luck, have fun, make haste slowly,

Dan

 

[pellicle]

gosh ... so much so fast

I expected that film flatness would not be 'vacuum sinar' flat, but sorta thought that f16 or f22 might get around that. I had expected to 'take with a grain of salt' the focusing dial distances, and intended to make a bit of ground glass and take a peek with a x10 loupe under my dark cloth (camera on tripod) for a feel of the focus distances and general sharpness when I got one.

Point on the billy well taken.

WRT widness, I'd thought that 100mm would be wider, but doing some quick calculation I now see that its more in order of 52° which is the slightly wide side of standard (please correct my maths if I'm wrong). Hmmm ... this might work in my favour with some 'panorama style' stitching of negatives to make something like 5x11 (when edge rectilinear effects are worked out of the joined pictures). Still, works out easier than using my 4x5 camera.



BTW, with my 90mm Fujinon I've never really been satisfied with the results, but recently discovered that my camera has a 'weak spot' in rigidity right at that focal length! I've since added a drinking straw and 2 clamps to my kit to stabilize my front and back standards (with noticeable improvement). It didn't seem to need much strength only some damping ... go figure.

the images on photo.net were very informative, however my recent experiences over there have been a little too "usenet" for my liking, so I'm cautious there now.

thank you everyone

 

[Frank R]

Be sure to visit www.certo6.com. Jurgen is the subject of the article you read. He restores and sells a lot of folders.

 

[Christopher Walrath]

I've got an old Wirgin 6x6 folder with a 3.5 Wollensak Anistigmat lens and have run a couple rolls of color through it. Though primarily used for B&W, the color photos turned out nicely.

 

[argus]

Here's an avid user of a 6x9cm Ercona II... I mostly put slide film in it
Dead Link Removed

It's not very light, but acceptable in a backpack.

G

 

[Paul Goutiere]

Pellicle,

There is of course the Super Ikonta C (with coated Opton tessar) which is 6x9 and has quite a passable lens particularly at apertures smaller than f8. It is lightweight and folds up into a tidy package. It can be focused by it's coupled rangefinder, which is handy. I have used mine with good success up to 12" x 18". The prices for these seem to be all over the place but it is a very nice camera if you get a good one. I always use a tripod, lens hood and cable release. I will often take mine with me on backcountry hikes.

There is another camera that is often overlooked and that is the Moskva 5, also 6x9. The lens is coated, the shutter is very robust and accurate and the coupled rangefinder works well. The camera will sell for less than $150.00 on Ebay. Search: (moskva,moscou,moscow,moskba,mockba) 5 Camera.
It is a FSU camera and may be easily available to you. I have one of these and I'm very impressed with the utility of it. If you get a good one, you will be pleased. It is more rugged than the Super Ikonta but if it did get lost or broken it is easily repaired or replaced.
Again use a tripod and lens hood. This is worth a try.

 

[thuggins]

I picked up a Olympus Chrome Six II off "that auction site", in perfect working condition. Olympus was concerned about the film flatness issue, and introduced a film tensioning device to correct this on the next model (Chrome Six III). However, their own research indicated that this was really only an issue at the larger apertures. These come with Zuiko lenses, so any concern over lens quality is moot.

 

[isaacc7]

I am now using a folder a lot for the first time. Over here, portability is a must so I've been pretty happy. My Seagull certainly doesn't make images quite as sharp as my Horseman, but I can't really complain. You can see some images at my flicker site hrough my webpage.

 

[pellicle]

I am now using a folder a lot for the first time. Over here, portability is a must so I've been pretty happy. My Seagull certainly doesn't make images quite as sharp as my Horseman, but I can't really complain. You can see some images at my flicker site hrough my webpage.

Hi Isaacc

keen to see what they might look like I navigated through to your flickr site and found all that I could see were digitals (sony). Can you point me towards some which are from the folder?

 

[DBP]

There's an example of what the Moskva 5 can do here (there was a url link here which no longer exists). I've been quite happy with mine, except for the peculiarities of having the shutter release on the left. Oddly, that seems to bother me more on the Moskva than on the Exakta.

Frankly, I think you would be hard pressed to find something that will give better results in that size without adding significant size or weight. And to get a wide angle lens you'll need to look at something with interchangeable lenses. A few paths to consider are: 1. a 6x9 technical camera like a Linhof or Horseman (neither light nor small, and quite pricey) 2. a Graphic with a roll film back (lighter, but still bulky) or 3. a Series 1 Graflex (I don't know if the lenses are interchangeable, or whether you could retrofit something, but they are surprisingly small and light for a 6x9 SLR).

 

[Dan Fromm]

DBP, Graflexes aren't compatible with wide angle lenses. The problem is that there are no retrofocus lenses that cover their formats; short lenses of normal construction will foul their mirrors. Remember the state of lens design when Graflexes were young. SLRs are great, but ...

 

[ic-racer]

Just a few observations comparing a 6x9 Kodak Tourist to a 6x9 Horseman

Horseman lens = f4.5 Super Topcor (Horseman) 105mm
Kodak Lens = f4.5 Anaston 105mm

Horseman Price = $800
Kodak Price = $20

Both lenses at f16

Comparison of side by side 16x20 enlargements:

The central area has similar sharpness in both enlargements.
There is less contrast with the Anaston lens
The far edges of the image are less sharp with the Anaston lens.

So, there is an advantage to a better camera, but the $20 Kodak was a great performer. The differences were not that great. If you cropped out the edges and printed an higher contrast paper it would be difficult to tell them apart.

 

[elekm]

If you're shooting mostly landscape, a plain Ikonta with a Tessar will serve you very nicely.

If you want the ability to focus, the Super Ikontas offer that but with a step up in price.

The issue with most folders is that most should be serviced before they are used. That includes cleaning the lenses, cleaning the shutters and ensuring that there are no holes in the bellows. Holes in bellows aren't uncommon but for the most part aren't usually the primary issue with an older folding camera.

A 6x9 camera presents the problem of stability. I've not had any issues with film flatness with my Zeiss Ikon folding cameras, which were built to a higher standard than some (although not all) folding cameras.

I have some reviews and photo samples of the 6x9 Ikonta and 6x9 Super Ikonta (C cameras) on my site (http://elekm.net/cameras.html).

 

[Chazzy]

And to get a wide angle lens you'll need to look at something with interchangeable lenses.

Why not a wide, fixed-lens Fuji 6x9 rangefinder?

 

[DBP]

DBP, Graflexes aren't compatible with wide angle lenses. The problem is that there are no retrofocus lenses that cover their formats; short lenses of normal construction will foul their mirrors. Remember the state of lens design when Graflexes were young. SLRs are great, but ...

I was thinking in terms of retrofitting a retrofocus lens from a modern heavier and bulkier SLR, like the FUJI G690.

 

[DBP]

Ooops?

Why not a wide, fixed-lens Fuji 6x9 rangefinder?

Because I forgot they came in wide angle.

 

[P C Headland]

I've not had any problems with film flatness with my 6x9 folders. I make sure the tension springs are creating enough drag on the film when winding, and always wind immediately before taking a picture. I use all sorts of colour neg and slide film, as well as my more usual B+W.

There is a big variation in quality obviously, plus some are "left-handed" like the Moskva 5. Most come with a 105 or 110mm lens, but the French Telka came with a 90mm lens (a pretty good one too).

There are some very capable 6x6 folders around, and these may be a better option. I find them easier to hand-hold, and I prefer the square format. You could look at something like an Iskra, Certo Six, Mamiya Six (folder), Agfa Super Isolette or Zeiss Super Ikonta. All of these have coupled range finders.

I've got some folder images here on Apug and over on flickr.

 

[isaacc7]

Hi Isaacc

keen to see what they might look like I navigated through to your flickr site and found all that I could see were digitals (sony). Can you point me towards some which are from the folder?

Sorry, I've got a mix up there with the digital, pinhole, and the folder. If you go to my main flicker page(http://www.flickr.com/photos/isaacc7) there's a search window in the top right. Type in Seagull and you should bring up all of the folder pictures I have. The scans aren't great, but you should be able to get a good idea...

Isaac

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

I have used several different folder cameras, mostly AGFA models, and restored a few of these. While not that easy to work on, they can be quite reliable once repaired, because they are simple. One of my best images, of a Ferrari F355, was done with a $US10 AGFA, with 105mm f4.5 lens and Compur Rapid shutter. This was used for advertising, though I did manage to make one large RA-4 print from this, which shows that it held details quite nicely.

I use a Präzisa rangefinder in the accessory shoe on the top of my AGFA, then transfer the distance to the lens. I have used a small ground glass to calibrate the lenses on my working folder cameras, and like you considered, that was done with a 10x loupe. The trick I used was to fix a split prism focusing screen off a 35mm Nikon onto a card at the film plane, and that made focusing easier.

There is one other automotive pic on my website done with the same AGFA 6x9 folder. There are also a couple shots from a much older 1937 AGFA Jsollette, though that one is 6x4.5 or 6x6, depending upon the position of the inside flaps. While the 645 folder allows more shots on a roll, and has greater film flatness, in reality I have not found film flatness to be an issue with the 6x9. As long as you do not let the front suddenly spring open, you have little to worry about. if you do let the front spring open, there can be enough vacuum inside the bellows to suck the film into the film chamber a bit; so open and close your folder camera carefully.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

 

[Trask]

For a lot more money, you could pick up a Plaubel Makina 6X7, which is available with either an 80mm Nikkor or a 55mm Nikkor (both fixed). I've got the wide-angle version, and like it a lot. Built-in meter, rangefinder, recent build (well, the 1980's). Easy to toss on your shoulder and take a stroll.

 

[patrickjames]

You could buy a Voigtlander Bessa II with a Color-Skopar lens. If you are doing mostly color these will be wonderful. You should be able to get one for under $200 if you are patient. I like the old uncoated ones better since I shoot black and white. My favorite folder right now is a Welta Weltur from the 30's. It does 6x4.5 but it is really small and has a coupled rangefinder/viewfinder. If you are looking for a more modern folder you should be able to find a Fuji GS645, but that does only 6x4.5.

Patrick