Sharpest 120 Folder?

[xya]

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.

 

[John Wiegerink]

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.

I will second the Ensign Autorange 220. I had one several years ago, and it was a really great camera. Never a problem with it and it was easy to use. I wanted one with the Tessar lens, but ended up with the slower Ensnar lens. After a couple of rolls I no longer desired to Tessar since the Ensnar was as sharp as a tack with very nice rendering of the background in a scene.

 

[blee1996]

Ensign Autorange 820 seems to be really nice, but current price (on ebay) seems to make it into the league of Plaubel Makina 67 and newer Fuji/Voigtlander GF670 territory. And it makes harder case to buy one as a user.

 

[Donald Qualls]

And the Ensign Commando is much harder to find -- last I looked, there were two on eBay, both visibly damaged.

 

[FeS2]

Had a Plaubel 670 with 80mm Nikkor . Awesome.
Wish I still had it (or could afford it) –

 

[flavio81]

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?

They are great. At least the one in my Selfix 820 was. But very fragile if you knock them.

 

[blee1996]

In my futile quest for an affordable 6x9 folder, I discovered that Tessar or Triplet lenses did not matter all that much. More importantly is to have a folder that does not have a frozen front lens cell, has a light tight bellows, calibrated focus, rigid and parallel front standard, properly working shutter, film flatness, and working shutter connection. f/11 f/16 f/22, tripod, landscape and be happy.

 

[Covellite]

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

 

[lecarp]

I once cut my finger on a Seagull 120 folder, the edge of the door was very sharp!

 

[pbromaghin]

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

Lovely photos. Welcome to APUG.

 

[flavio81]

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.

I never got good results with the Selfix 820. Either the lens (ross xpres) has enormous field curvature, or the film plane is curved.

I could calibrate it for a sharp center but then the edges would be unsharp.

Only way to have the whole field sharp was to use it at f11 or 16.

 

[henryvk]

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.

 

[Neil Grant]

these were taken on an AR3 camera, Solinar 105mm lens@f/16. Film, FP4 in D76 1+2. I think i've got the camera working reasonably well now after re-calibrating the focus with a 'screen-in-the-film plane' method.

 

[moggi1964]

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.

 

[henryvk]

Love those colours and the subject. A great image.

I personally find the leaf distracting but it doesn't spoil it for me.

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.

 

[BMbikerider]

The smaller the film area the more DoF you’d have. So I wouldn’t write off 4.5x6 folders.

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.

 

[moggi1964]

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.

It's the same with my Agfa Isolette II viewfinder especially as I wear glasses. Often hit and miss on framing.

Honestly, I think you did a great job with framing the carriage, I'm easily distracted, just ask my wife

 

[Axelwik]

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.

 

[retina_restoration]

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.

 

[Axelwik]

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.

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.

 

[Neil Grant]

I never got good results with the Selfix 820. Either the lens (ross xpres) has enormous field curvature, or the film plane is curved..."

...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.

 

[retina_restoration]

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.

So, your perspective is that "there is no such thing as a poor lens"??

 

[MTGseattle]

I only read the first 4 pages. Is anyone using a Voightlander Perkeo? I had ordered one about 6 years ago, but porch pirates got it. I've been wondering if I was missing out ever since.

 

[xya]

I have a Perkeo II and it's marvellous https://www.120folder.com/voigtlaender_perkeo_II.htm and I don't agree with the Skopar being a bad lens...

 

[Besk]

...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 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.

As to the slightly curved film plane of the camera- I haven't noticed but will check.