Voigtlander Bessa 6x9

[skinnyvoice]

I just picked up one of these, I think it is quite old with the Voigter 10.5cms f/6.3 lens. It looks to be in great condition, no fungus, light leaks and the shuuter sounds good at all of the few speeds it has (125 is the fastest!!). It even has the 6x4.5 insert

I have a pretty dumb question though... there are two film counter windows at the back, both on the same horizontal plane. I'll be using mostly 6x9, so in which window do I line up the numbers, the first or the second? Or will it be obvious when I put a roll through it?

I can't find a manual for this particual Bessa...

 

[Jesper]

If you take a look at the paper from the back of a roll of 120 film you will see that you have numbers in three rows (some may be repeated but three different sets). One will range from 1-16, one from 1-12 and finally 1-8. If you want 6x9 it is the last one you want. It should be the lower window.
Compare the 1-8 number series with the placement of your windows and you will know which window to use.
(If you want to use 4,5x6 it is the 1-16 series you want, and finally 1-12 for 6x6).

Good luck

 

[skinnyvoice]

If you want 6x9 it is the last one you want. It should be the lower window.

Hi Jesper, this is the reason I asked. I'm familiar with the different numberings but the two windows are on the same horizontal plane, not above and below each other like say on a Holga, so the film counter will appear in both windows one after the other as you wind the film on.

This is an illustarion from a later model http://www.ukcamera.com/classic_cameras/cameras/Eb23h.jpg

 

[Jesper]

Sorry, I read your question a bit hastily.
If they are on the same plane, I don't think it really matters as long as you only use one and the same when advancing the film. There is usually some extra film in the beginning and end of the film.

 

[skinnyvoice]

I think I just worked it out! If using the 6x4.5 mask it makes sense to wind to the first window, then wind the same number to the second window. Without the mask, I guess I should use the first window for each exposure. That makes sense to me, can anybody confirm it?

I'll be taking it out later for a whirl and see if it really works though I don't plan to use the mask anyway, I want those huge negatives The uncoated lens should suit what I want it for as well. Can't wait to see the results

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Yes, this is how it should work for 645. When I had a Bessa II, mine didn't have that feature, but I thought it would have been useful, because the lens is a good focal length for portraits in 645.

 

[skinnyvoice]

Thanks for the clarification.

I've now got the negs drying. Obviously the counter works as above judging by the strip thats hanging up. Looks to be somewhat lacking in contrast though that is not unexpected. It will be a bonus if I get anything the way I was faffing around with the unfamiliar control layout.

 

[Mark Antony]

I have the same camera:
Bessa
I don't have the insert, but like the camera it was my introduction to folders a bug I've been bitten by recently.
this is taken with my other Bessa (I) on Ektar film.

Storm at sea, Bessa I with Vaskar triplet at F11
Have fun
Mark

 

[skinnyvoice]

Mark, it does look identical to yours, right down to that blisteringly fast top speed heh. I'll only be using mine for B&W though. The 6x9 negs look surreally huge in comparison with what I'm used to (35mm & recently 6x6).

It is a pleasure to use and I can see why it has lasted so long, tis a sturdy beast. I could probably stand on it (closed...) without damaging it. Oh well, only a couple of hours to go for the negs to dry and see how the film has turned out

 

[Film Guerilla]

hows your negative?

i have this old bessa as well a year ago but haven't tested it. got it off from ebay for 15$-20$ with shipping. these are the cheap ones i think. with T B 75 and 25 speeds and 7.7 10.5cm voigtar, no shutter lever or double exposure prevention.. it looks like there are a lot of these bessa versions. can anyone confirm that? is there a way i could point when was the year of production of my bessa?

i'll test it out this weekend.. thanks!

 

[Film Guerilla]

hi charles,

tested my bessa. you can open the first window from left. it looks ok with my bessa. checked it co's i can't open the second red window. lol

it has 8 frames so i think thats good. i'll try this one tomorrow.

 

[skinnyvoice]

hows your negative?

Well, technically they are OK but I was optimistic about handholding at the slower speeds. I think the clunky shutter release causes shake, it is to say the least, 'mechanical'. This photo is the best of a shaky bunch. HP5+ EI 200, HC-110 1+63 8.5 minutes

I'll try next with the cable release and/or tripod, probably the cable release since the portability appeals to me. It is after all 6x9 pocketability.

I'll have to remember about focussing in landscape mode - the focus indicator is oriented for portrait shots, so looking down in landscape I thought I had the correct distance set but of course, it was really 90 degrees to the right... the little nub is not obvious

Oh yes, I had to clean up this negative, seems to have had some cruft in the camera.

Whatever, I think it has potential and I have a project in mind.

Does anybody have any idea on how to date these cameras? I suspect this one is pre WW2

 

[Chazzy]

I think I just worked it out! If using the 6x4.5 mask it makes sense to wind to the first window, then wind the same number to the second window. Without the mask, I guess I should use the first window for each exposure. That makes sense to me, can anybody confirm it?

I'll be taking it out later for a whirl and see if it really works though I don't plan to use the mask anyway, I want those huge negatives The uncoated lens should suit what I want it for as well. Can't wait to see the results

I've always wondered about this. My theory is that, in those days, the backing paper didn't have the numbering for 6x4.5, and so cameras didn't have a red window for that row of numbers. Can anyone confirm that this was the case?

 

[tessar]

Hello Charles,
Mike Butkus has several manuals for the old folding Bessas on the following link:
http://www.butkus.org/chinon/voigtlander_pdf/voigtlander_pdf_manuals.htm
He asks for a $3 donation, which I think is very reasonable.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've always wondered about this. My theory is that, in those days, the backing paper didn't have the numbering for 6x4.5, and so cameras didn't have a red window for that row of numbers. Can anyone confirm that this was the case?

Yes, I'm fairly sure that this was the case. 120 film at one time had numbers for 6x6 and 6x9 only.

 

[Chazzy]

Yes, I'm fairly sure that this was the case. 120 film at one time had numbers for 6x6 and 6x9 only.

That being the case, the two window system would work perfectly as a substitute for a separate row of numbers. I have seen some Bessa IIs with the double windows, which would indicate that they were originally sold with the 6x4.5 mask. I believe that they also had a mask which rotated over the viewfinder. A very desirable camera, in my opinion, but the dual format versions of the Bessa II don't come up on eBay very often.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Mine with the Color-Heliar didn't have it, but the Apo-Lanthar versions usually seem to have the 645 mask.

 

[Ross Chambers]

Ah but what is the silver coloured circular doover between the 2 red windows? In my similar Bessa 1 it moves a light seal with a cross on it in front of the right hand side window (looking from the back) I always figured from the similar layout on the Perkeo that it was to exclude any possibilty of light leakage after advancing the film, but now I'm confused.

If the doover is functioning, and they do seem to become stiff in operation, you will see--when the camera is open--that a mask moves into position blocking the second window.

Regards - Ross

 

[sanking]

Mine with the Color-Heliar didn't have it, but the Apo-Lanthar versions usually seem to have the 645 mask.

David,

Did you ever do any resolution testing of the Bessa II, or perhaps compare it directly to the Zeiss Super-Ilonta C? Typically these cameras don't tend to do very well with chart resolution testing because of the inadequacies of the rangefinder systems to provide accurate focus at close distances, even though they do quite well in most real life situations. I have a Super Ikonta C and several of the Moskva cameras based on it and none of them test at more than 50 lines per mm in the center. Just wondering if the Bessa II doe much better?


Sandy King

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

David,

Did you ever do any resolution testing of the Bessa II, or perhaps compare it directly to the Zeiss Super-Ilonta C? Typically these cameras don't tend to do very well with chart resolution testing because of the inadequacies of the rangefinder systems to provide accurate focus at close distances, even though they do quite well in most real life situations. I have a Super Ikonta C and several of the Moskva cameras based on it and none of them test at more than 50 lines per mm in the center. Just wondering if the Bessa II doe much better?


Sandy King

I never did a precise test with a test target, but just experimenting with it and using it for a few years, I thought the rangefinder was good, because I could reliably get accurate focus at the nearest distance at wide apertures, which I often used, but film flatness was sometimes questionable, and the ergonomics didn't work for me. I experimented with various ways of holding the camera, but even shooting at or near the top shutter speed, I could never get horizontal shots as sharp as verticals. I think the main culprit was the shutter release on the door. It was beautiful the way the release lever would erect itself when the door was opened, but I think this made it difficult to trigger the shutter without moving the camera slightly. For vertical shots I held the camera with the release lever on the bottom and the camera was much more solidly braced in my right hand, so verticals were always sharper. I could have, and did occasionally use this camera with a tripod, but the whole point of a folder for me is handheld shooting, so I eventually sold it.

 

[skinnyvoice]

I took the Bessa out today and ran two rolls of FP4+ through it assiduously winding on til the numbers showed in the first window. But guess what... I'd left the ******* 6x4.5 mask in place. Aaaaaggghhh. How dumb was that? I'll try & relax now

 

[sanking]

I took the Bessa out today and ran two rolls of FP4+ through it assiduously winding on til the numbers showed in the first window. But guess what... I'd left the ******* 6x4.5 mask in place. Aaaaaggghhh. How dumb was that? I'll try & relax now

Best thing would be to just pack the mask up and shoot with the camera in 6X9 format. Why not take advantage of that nice big format? Put the camera on a tripod and close the lens down to f/16 or so and you should be able to make some really nice sharp negatives that will enlarge nicely.

In contrast to David, I always use my 6X9 folders on a tripod and stopped down to f/16 or even f/22 for maximum depth of field. With lenses of 105-110mm I don't consider these good cameras to hand hold.

Sandy

 

[Ian Grant]

Sandy's quite wrong, the camera needs special film to work properly, otherwise it's impossible to get decent images.

I have the right film Voightländer & Sohn, Bessachrom and for a couple of ponds will take the beast off your hands

Sandy, how do I cut these glass plates to fit ?

More seriously if you can use a tripod use it as Sandy suggests, but when it's not possible you have to work differently.

I have big problems using a tripod here in Turkey (I'm shooting at Archaeological sites) so have two alternative ways of working, no tripod shutter speed governs my exposure considerations and I use 400 ISO film, with a tripod aperture comes first, I love long shutter speeds and slow films.

I'd also stick to 6x9 it's a wonderful format.

Ian

 

[skinnyvoice]

Best thing would be to just pack the mask up and shoot with the camera in 6X9 format. Why not take advantage of that nice big format?

That was what I intended to do!!! Just forgot to pack the mask up

I have to admit I want to use this Bessa handheld if I can, I think I said a few posts up that I wanted it for its 6x9 portability. Having now developed the mistakenly 6x4.5 masked negs I am encouraged to carry on. I used a cable release (gently) at 1/60 f/11 or f/16 and the images look acceptably sharp.

Once I got the hang of it it is a joy to use and not that obtrusive. Quiet too!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

As I see it, if I'm going to be using a tripod, I'm going to be carrying a bigger camera anyway. Folders for me are cameras to keep in my briefcase or coat pocket in case I need a camera when I'm not on a specifically photographic mission.

Sometimes I bring a folder, though, as a second camera, and then I'm more likely to use it with a tripod. For instance, a very compact travel setup that I've used was a folder with a 4x5" Gowland PocketView. I've since sold the 4x5" Gowland. The Perkeo II also makes a nice companion to my Noblex 150.