Was there ever a wide-angle 120 6x6 or 6x9 folder back in the golden age?

[reddesert]

Um, Red, CZJ made a 28/8 Tessar for the Contax and a 55/8 Tessar for the VP Exakta. Both pre-WW II. I'm not sure that either qualifies as mass-market, they certainly weren't inexpensive when new.

Dan, sure, but those are interchangeable-lens "system cameras." There were wide angles for a variety of such systems well before the period of the 1970s; the ones you name are likely some of the earliest. Probably none of them were mass-market or relatively affordable until 1960s SLR and wide-angles came along. The OP asked about (roughly speaking) fixed lens 120 folders with wide angles that aren't expensive exotica, which you confirmed didn't really exist. And my feeling is that prior to the 1970s, there were hardly any fixed lens cameras with wide angles that aren't exotic (even relaxing the "120" and "folder" requests).

 

[ic-racer]

 

[Dan Fromm]

Dan, sure, but those are interchangeable-lens "system cameras." There were wide angles for a variety of such systems well before the period of the 1970s; the ones you name are likely some of the earliest. Probably none of them were mass-market or relatively affordable until 1960s SLR and wide-angles came along. The OP asked about (roughly speaking) fixed lens 120 folders with wide angles that aren't expensive exotica, which you confirmed didn't really exist. And my feeling is that prior to the 1970s, there were hardly any fixed lens cameras with wide angles that aren't exotic (even relaxing the "120" and "folder" requests).

I agree completely. The OP basically asked whether there were any cheap w/a cameras that would serve his needs. Since then the discussion has drifted away from the original question into other issues, including when w/a lenses became generally available, whatever that means.

W/A lenses have been offered almost from the beginning of photography, but until the advent of system cameras were primarily for professionals.

I'm a little surprised that so of us suggested that the OP look into post-WWII press and technical cameras. Some are relatively inexpensive, as are some w/a lenses that work well on them.

 

[Ian Grant]

Really? Berthiot's 1912 catalog lists f/16 Perigraphe Ser. VIa in focal lengths of 45, 60, 75, 90, ... These are ultrawides, claimed coverage 115 degrees. A 1907 Goerz catalog lists f/6.8 Dagors in the same focal lengths, claimed coverage only 90 degrees. All six elements in two groups, as is the Angulon. IIRC, W/A Aristostigmats are all 4/4 double Gauss types. TTH's Primplane Ser. VII, a wide angle triplet, was introduced, according to the VM, in 1907.

I did say first of the modern wide angles. I have a number of much older Wide angle lenses, Ross, Dallmeyer, TT&H, Wray etc, all too slow for use on a folding camera. And then Dagor's only have 87º coverage at f45, according to their data.

Ian

 

[Dan Fromm]

I did say first of the modern wide angles. I have a number of much older Wide angle lenses, Ross, Dallmeyer, TT&H, Wray etc, all too slow for use on a folding camera. And then Dagor's only have 87º coverage at f45, according to their data.

Ian

Ian, the Angulon's design is the same as the Berthiot ultrawides' as the Dagor's as the Wide Angle Dagor's ... Prescriptions are different, general layout the same. 6/2 double anastigmat.

The lenses you named are all between f/6.3 and f/6.8. Angulons are f/6.8.

 

[GregY]

I suppose it depends on what one considers the "golden age"..... After being duly impressed by the 80mm Nikkor on the Plaubel 67/670...... i've always had a yen to try the Plaubel Makina W67....with the 55mm/f4.5 Nikkor....