Sharpest 120 Folder?

[xya]

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!

120folder.com, it's me. yes, quality and sharpness ARE pretty subjective. and then there is the fact that these cameras are 60-70 years old, maybe more. the may have suffered or not.

concerning the sharpness: the makina 67 DID impress me a lot, no doubt, but it's pretty heavy. I recently made a comparison between an agfa record III solinar, a bessa rf heliar and a moskva 5, all very fine, but not impressing to me.

6x6: all of my 3 mamiya 6 were fine, but did not impress me at all. impressing were: super ikonta III and IV (except light meter, I tried 5 different cameras, all meters failed), a balda super baldax, a certo 6 (except rangefinder and shutter), an iskra and some of my certo super sport dollies.

also impressing were the 6x4.5 konica pearl III and IV and the fuji GA's, which are no folders, but pretty small.

there is an iskra2 with working meter in the mail, fully serviced, from russia. we will see in a few weeks.

this is just my 2 cents, and it's just my humble opinion...

 

[LittleParallelograms]

In my opinion, when it comes to folders most of them are decently sharp simply due to the negative size. A Meritar lens I tried was soft, but maybe it was just a bad example. What is actually hard to find in an old folder is good color and contrast. The Iskra is the best I've seen in that department, as well as being sharp wide open.

 

[Besk]

the best compromise in weight, sharpness, cost and dimensions for me is the Agfa Isolette III with the Solinar lens. Indistinguishable from tessar 75mm or color skopar 75 and 80mm, but lighter, smaller and sturdier.

I agree. In fact it is now my main travel film camera replacing my Rolleiflex because of the size difference.

 

[cliveh]

Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 530/16 Film Camera 120mm with Tessar 2.8/80mm

Somewhere I have a couple of pictures I took with one of these and they were so sharp you could cut yourself.

 

[Chrismat]

I have a Certo6 East German folder which is very sharp but the camera is heavy, almost defeats the purpose of portability but I still like it. It's sturdiness may be a blessing, not as easy get out of alignment.

 

[Chrismat]

I also have a Balda Super Baldax folder which is a little on the heavy side, but not as much as the Certo.

 

[rgeorge911]

Frrom my Mamiya 6 folder. Ektar.

 

[moto-uno]

^^ Those photos are a treat to the eye "Chrismat" ! Now I have to find a photo or two from my Welta Weltur ( and maybe my Iskra 1) . Peter

 

[Alex Varas]

120folder.com, it's me. yes, quality and sharpness ARE pretty subjective. and then there is the fact that these cameras are 60-70 years old, maybe more. the may have suffered or not.

concerning the sharpness: the makina 67 DID impress me a lot, no doubt, but it's pretty heavy. I recently made a comparison between an agfa record III solinar, a bessa rf heliar and a moskva 5, all very fine, but not impressing to me.

6x6: all of my 3 mamiya 6 were fine, but did not impress me at all. impressing were: super ikonta III and IV (except light meter, I tried 5 different cameras, all meters failed), a balda super baldax, a certo 6 (except rangefinder and shutter), an iskra and some of my certo super sport dollies.

also impressing were the 6x4.5 konica pearl III and IV and the fuji GA's, which are no folders, but pretty small.

there is an iskra2 with working meter in the mail, fully serviced, from russia. we will see in a few weeks.

this is just my 2 cents, and it's just my humble opinion...

Great web, love it! Thank you!

 

[cptrios]

Well, I've sold off some unused gear and made $600 in the process. Vacillated among an Isolette variant, a GS645, and a GA645zi. What did I end up getting? A Contax G1 and 28mm to go with my already-owned 45mm. I'm gonna go through life with the Autocord for a while and see how it works out!

 

[Dan Daniel]

Well, I've sold off some unused gear and made $600 in the process. Vacillated among an Isolette variant, a GS645, and a GA645zi. What did I end up getting? A Contax G1 and 28mm to go with my already-owned 45mm. I'm gonna go through life with the Autocord for a while and see how it works out!

Well, I've certainly tried to get smaller 120 film cameras than a TLR or such. The tradeoffs are unavoidable. Size, viewfinder, alignment, lens type... there's a reason there are so many different medium format camera designs as they try to balance out all the factors.

I've found the Tenba BYOB 7 bag insert holds an Autocord nicely. This then fits into a variety of bags- messenger, knapsack, camera shoulder bag, etc. If the TLR viewfinder is still disorienting, I'd suggest practicing. Sitting in front of the TV or such, just play with the camera for a few minutes day after day. With enough experience the brain and body start handling it smoothly. Also I use the magnifier almost all the time, as almost a chimney finder. This gets the camera higher up and feels a bit more like a 'regular' viewfinder system.

 

[mrosenlof]

This is taken with a Super Ikonta whatever model the last 6x6 one is. 75mm Tessar. Probably wide open, but maybe down a stop, and probably at 1/30. Definitely handheld. Asakusa, Tokyo, 2016.

 

[JPD]

In my 20's I carried a Rolleiflex 3.5F, a Tele-Rolleiflex and another Rolleiflex around my neck on a day trip in the mountains. I'm not doing that again. Now when I'm 50 I would carry a lightweight pre-war Rolleiflex and/or a simple plate camera or my Ercona II.

 

[Sirius Glass]

In my 20's I carried a Rolleiflex 3.5F, a Tele-Rolleiflex and another Rolleiflex around my neck on a day trip in the mountains. I'm not doing that again. Now when I'm 50 I would carry a lightweight pre-war Rolleiflex and/or a simple plate camera or my Ercona II.

I would like to see a photo of you working with The Rollei Bling. Do you have any?

 

[Wayne]

In my 20's I carried a Rolleiflex 3.5F, a Tele-Rolleiflex and another Rolleiflex around my neck on a day trip in the mountains. I'm not doing that again. Now when I'm 50 I would carry a lightweight pre-war Rolleiflex and/or a simple plate camera or my Ercona II.

They've stiffened them up quite a bit since then, and they are pretty hard to fold now.

 

[cptrios]

Well, I've certainly tried to get smaller 120 film cameras than a TLR or such. The tradeoffs are unavoidable. Size, viewfinder, alignment, lens type... there's a reason there are so many different medium format camera designs as they try to balance out all the factors.

I've found the Tenba BYOB 7 bag insert holds an Autocord nicely. This then fits into a variety of bags- messenger, knapsack, camera shoulder bag, etc. If the TLR viewfinder is still disorienting, I'd suggest practicing. Sitting in front of the TV or such, just play with the camera for a few minutes day after day. With enough experience the brain and body start handling it smoothly. Also I use the magnifier almost all the time, as almost a chimney finder. This gets the camera higher up and feels a bit more like a 'regular' viewfinder system.

View attachment 266363

That's kind of ridiculously perfect! A definite for the to-buy-before-travel list

 

[JPD]

I would like to see a photo of you working with The Rollei Bling. Do you have any?

I wouldn't call them "bling", but perhaps "lumbago-inducing equipment". I don't have a photo from that occasion, but I think my father does. He only carried his mostly plastic Nikon F 801 with its kit zoom lens.

 

[takilmaboxer]

Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 530/16 Film Camera 120mm with Tessar 2.8/80mm

Somewhere I have a couple of pictures I took with one of these and they were so sharp you could cut yourself.

I have one of these 530/16s that sat on the shelf for 30 years because of fungus damage to the rear element. I watched the Bay for ten years and finally found a lens and shutter assembly with a very close serial number to mine, that was clean and clear. I bought it ($40) and replaced the rear element on mine with the clear one from the Bay. Voila! The camera now works great! The lens is sharp, but not as sharp as my 1955 red T Tessar lenses. But it has a rangefinder that works!!

 

[macfred]

... I've found the Tenba BYOB 7 bag insert holds an Autocord nicely....

View attachment 266363

Dan, will this fit my Rolleiflex 3.5F ? Thank you!

 

[Dan Daniel]

Dan, will this fit my Rolleiflex 3.5F ? Thank you!

I have a 2.8C around right now and it fits fine in this case. The issue with an F will be the meter bump. The case is soft and it seems that the wall would have enough room to deal with the meter. It might not be the smoothest to zip up, though, because there will be some distortion off of a clean rectangle? Seems to be more than enough slop.

I would look up the dimensions of a F compared to a 2.8 C just to make certain that it isn't significantly larger. I don't know how they deal with the meter bump when they give dimensions. The C is a bit tighter all around than the Autocord but still has plenty of room.

 

[macfred]

I have a 2.8C around right now and it fits fine in this case. The issue with an F will be the meter bump. The case is soft and it seems that the wall would have enough room to deal with the meter. It might not be the smoothest to zip up, though, because there will be some distortion off of a clean rectangle? Seems to be more than enough slop.

I would look up the dimensions of a F compared to a 2.8 C just to make certain that it isn't significantly larger. I don't know how they deal with the meter bump when they give dimensions. The C is a bit tighter all around than the Autocord but still has plenty of room.

Dan, thanks so much for your assessment.
Yes, I'm worried about the light meter on the 3.5F - I'll just order the bag and give it a try.
Other than that, I'm going for version number 9.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Dan, will this fit my Rolleiflex 3.5F ? Thank you!

The BYOB 7 does fit my 3.5E without meter, but it is a bit snug. I need to unclip the strap. There is enough room to park my Gossen Luna Pro SBC on top of the camera. Filters fit in the zippered pocket. A Leica M is another suitable occupant.

A friend sent me this little 7. Nice little padded bag. Checking online, I was surprised how expensive they are. Really, it is not sophisticated technology or sewing.

 

[macfred]

The BYOB 7 does fit my 3.5E without meter, but it is a bit snug. I need to unclip the strap. There is enough room to park my Gossen Luna Pro SBC on top of the camera. Filters fit in the zippered pocket. A Leica M is another suitable occupant.

A friend sent me this little 7. Nice little padded bag. Checking online, I was surprised how expensive they are. Really, it is not sophisticated technology or sewing.

Thank you, Kodachromeguy !
One thought on price and sewing quality ...
I would like to use the bag as an insert for an old Domke F6. The inserts in the Domke are almost dissolved. I have looked around for new Domke inserts, but they are rather even more expensive and of dubious quality.

 

[Dan Daniel]

A friend sent me this little 7. Nice little padded bag. Checking online, I was surprised how expensive they are. Really, it is not sophisticated technology or sewing.

Yep. There is an Ebay seller, phillycamera or something like that, who has them for $30. Cheapest I have found. Not sure why the price is high. I will say, though, having bought a couple of cheaper comparable bags, the Tenbas are nicely made. It isn't sophisticated sewing, but it seems not many other companies want to do it right. And the one I have has held up well over six or seven years now.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

I have looked around for new Domke inserts, but they are rather even more expensive and of dubious quality.

Yes, you are right. Any separate part that you buy for a Domke bag is outrageous in price. You can buy the inserts, but they're $35 or $40, while an entirely new f2 bag is $120 (in USA).