There is an Ensign Autorange 220 which has both formats, 6x6 and 6x4.5, a rangefinder and automatic film advance for both formats https://www.120folder.com/ensign_autorange_220.htm a highly recommendable camera.
Speaking of the 820, I only have the Selfix 820, no rangefinder and automatic film advance, but 2 formats, 6x6 and 6x9 and the huge Xpress lens in a good Epsilon shutter https://www.120folder.com/ensign_820.htm . The albada finder is OK, but I prefer rangefinders.
It *does* look enormous.
View attachment 315412
While we're on the topic of Ensign cameras.
I'm still looking at 6x45 folders, specifically the Selfix 16-20, and wouldn't mind hearing about people's experience with the Ensign albada finders! They look cool but are they any better in practise than, for instance, the Zeiss folding frame finders of the Ikonta 521 and similar?
To my eye, there are two (based on my experience).
- the first in terms of sharpness (that's a little bit clinical) is my Fuji GF670
- the second would be my Zeiss Super Ikonta 532/16 - super sharp and with alot of character
Here is my GF670 stuff: https://www.flickr.com/photos/vivalafilm/albums/72157632507978863
Here is my 532/16 stuff: https://www.flickr.com/photos/vivalafilm/albums/72177720302780410
Speaking of the 820, I only have the Selfix 820, no rangefinder and automatic film advance, but 2 formats, 6x6 and 6x9 and the huge Xpress lens in a good Epsilon shutter https://www.120folder.com/ensign_820.htm . The albada finder is OK, but I prefer rangefinders.
Time to resurrect this thread!
An old train sitting in a siding at Linz am Rhein. Super Ikonta III (Opton Tessar) on expired and cross-processed Fujichrome Provia 400F
I really like this camera, it's compact, light and has a decent lens. Fair warning, though, to those looking to clean underneath the top cover. The rangefinder mirror is mounted on a dinky little tab attached to the rangefinder housing and easily moved out of whack if you touch it. I must have accidentally brushed up against it and subsequently had to bend it back into position and recalibrate the rangefinder which was a bit annoying.
Love those colours and the subject. A great image.
I personally find the leaf distracting but it doesn't spoil it for me.
To be 100% correct, it is the shorter the focal length, not the film frame size that determines the DoF. In theory a 135mm lens for a 5x4 camera will have the same or very similar DoF to a 135mm lens that fits on a 35mm camera. Depending of course the F Stop used.The smaller the film area the more DoF you’d have. So I wouldn’t write off 4.5x6 folders.
Thank you! Framing with the Ikonta's telescopic finder is not 100% accurate and I wanted the line of the windows to extend more than I wanted to crop out the leaves.
There's a Zeiss 6x6 accessory Albada finder. I'm wondering if it would be worth the investment.
Alright, I know this is an annoying question, and I know sharpness isn't everything...but let's say it was. I've been getting started with MF using a Minolta Autocord, which I love in many ways, but a) waist-level shooting is still weird, especially having to adjust my level in reverse, and b) it's too bulky for my camera bag.
I've been scouring certo6.com and 120folder.com, but any mention of lens quality on them is pretty subjective. I've also spent a bunch of time on Flickr, but I find that the sheer number of models and lenses, coupled with bad scanning, makes it a pretty daunting task.
So hopefully you can all offer me some opinions! My criteria would be: 6x6 or preferably 6x9, under $500 (not set in stone), and with the sharpest possible lens, with corners that don't look obviously soft at small sizes. Coupled rangefinder is a plus, but not necessary.
Thanks in advance!
The sharpest folder is the one you put on a tripod. Otherwise the differences are moot.
That's not true. I have a Kodak Special Six-20 I bought for $25, with the Anastigmat Special lens, and its remarkably sharp. I also have a Voigtlander Bessa with the f3.5 Skopar lens, its one of the worst lenses I've ever encountered: no sharpness anywhere until you stop down to f22! Even then, it's not great. There ARE meaningful differences between different manufacturers lenses on the various folding models.
...I'm getting to grips with an Agfa Record 3 6x9 folder and achieving reliably focused images - at least on a tripod (not tried hand-held). I've noticed a couple of things: the film plane is very slightly curved - judging by how a focusing screens 'sits' in the gate. The centre is fractionally away from the rear of the lens. This could be a deliberate design decision and would help tension the film. The optical designer could give the lens a slightly curved field to match. The second thing I've noticed is that best focus is achieved by delaying film advance, to fresh frame, until the photo is ready to be taken. Which I think suggests that the film can gradually 'sag' in the gate. Handled carefully, the camera can perform well - the centre of the frame is sharp at f/8 and the edges going softer. At f/16 it's sharp all over.I never got good results with the Selfix 820. Either the lens (ross xpres) has enormous field curvature, or the film plane is curved..."
Like anything else, one can always find an example to agree with one's beliefs. But anytime something is cherry-picked like that, it ignores the elephant in the room - in this case the fact that skill and technique are far more important than this lens or that lens.
That Skopar was probably fiddled with - maybe one of the elements was installed backwards.
I also have a Agfa Record III. Usually, I advance the film just before exposure. Sometimes, I have advanced the film in anticipation of a shot but have changed my mind. In that case, advancing or tensioning the film slightly just before the next exposure seems to help keep the film flat....I'm getting to grips with an Agfa Record 3 6x9 folder and achieving reliably focused images - at least on a tripod (not tried hand-held). I've noticed a couple of things: the film plane is very slightly curved - judging by how a focusing screens 'sits' in the gate. The centre is fractionally away from the rear of the lens. This could be a deliberate design decision and would help tension the film. The optical designer could give the lens a slightly curved field to match. The second thing I've noticed is that best focus is achieved by delaying film advance, to fresh frame, until the photo is ready to be taken. Which I think suggests that the film can gradually 'sag' in the gate. Handled carefully, the camera can perform well - the centre of the frame is sharp at f/8 and the edges going softer. At f/16 it's sharp all over.
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?