Zeiss Ikon Nettar, how was used?

[studiocarter]

This folding 6 x 9 camera is f 6.3. What was film like in 1937? Only use in bright sunlight. Light is dim in Pittsburgh most of the time, between 80 and 160 lumins? on my Sekonic light meter. Hp5 will be used next and it will need to be at 1600 ISO. D76 can do that. 1/50 @ f 8-11 will do on the camera. I suppose people had to make pictures back then when it was bright out.

 

[summicron1]

they used tripods more, but film with asa 200 was available. That and being a titch more careful will carry you very far.

A camera with an f 6.3 lens would have been less costly, used by an amateur more, shooting snaps in daylight. Cameras with an f 4.5 or even 2.8 lens were readily available, but obviously cost more and were used more by the serious set.

 

[Steve Smith]

at 1600 ISO... 1/50 @ f 8-11 will do on the camera.

That's six or seven stops down from a bright sunny day. Does it really not get that bright where you are?


Steve.

 

[Nick Merritt]

You should be able to use the HP5 at its rated speed of 400. A sunny day, even this time of year in the northern USA, should be about 1/250 at f11. I forget what shutter speeds the camera offers, but even if it doesn't go that high, then 1/100 or 1/125 at f16 should work for you. I wouldn't go wider than f8 with that lens if you want the best results.

I agree that an overcast day this time of year can be pretty dark. But you should be able to shoot at 1/50 without a problem with camera shake.

 

[kintatsu]

I've used one here in Germany, although it goes to 4.5. I used it at about f/11 and gotten good results in our endless dark overcast days of winter. The issue with mine is the focus stop is missing/broken, so my Focus was way off.

You can find an old Zeis Ikon Nettar exposure table here- http://butkus.org/chinon/zeiss_ikon.htm It shows how proper exposure could be calculated by someone without a meter, and uses variables like DIN #, season, lighting, etc to make the calculation.

 

[Simon Howers]

Use a tripod

This folding 6 x 9 camera is f 6.3. What was film like in 1937? Only use in bright sunlight. Light is dim in Pittsburgh most of the time, between 80 and 160 lumins? on my Sekonic light meter. Hp5 will be used next and it will need to be at 1600 ISO. D76 can do that. 1/50 @ f 8-11 will do on the camera. I suppose people had to make pictures back then when it was bright out.

My Zeiss Ikon is about 10 years older than yours and uses 6x9 glass plates with an ISO of about 6. This translates to about half a second exposure in bright sunlight. I get good photos either by resting the camera on a solid object or by using a lightweight tripod. You will get noticeable flare with early lenses.

Good luck!

Simon

 

[Xmas]

This folding 6 x 9 camera is f 6.3. What was film like in 1937? Only use in bright sunlight. Light is dim in Pittsburgh most of the time, between 80 and 160 lumins? on my Sekonic light meter. Hp5 will be used next and it will need to be at 1600 ISO. D76 can do that. 1/50 @ f 8-11 will do on the camera. I suppose people had to make pictures back then when it was bright out.

Sunny summer days on beach, flash gun for Xmas tree.

Processing labs got films with two Xmas trees and swimming custom eight shots.

But every one went to talkies for news clip and two mono films...

It was the dark ages.

 

[railwayman3]

My first "serious" camera as a schoolboy, given to me second-hand by my Father, was a 12-on-120 Nettar with a f4.5 Novar lens (probably made in the the mid-1950's). It had the usual scales and speeds. but had "red-spot" settings on the focus scale and aperture scale, which gave the "best" average focus and depth-of field. You then chose a shutter speed from 1/25th to 1/250th according to how you judged the light. Using HP3 film (I think that was rated 160 or 200 ASA then?), I never went too far wrong for general picture taking, even without a meter.

 

[gone]

Well, actually, the problem is too much light. I had a similar camera (took excellent, sharp photos) and it was limited by the available shutter speeds, which on mine was a high of 1/200 that tested as an actual 1/140. This is about how the shutter ran when it was new, so the age of the made no difference.

When in low light, people used a flash back then, just like today. The film, back when the camera was made, was often ISO 25 and ISO 50, or even slower. These were the normal emulsions of the day, and not ISO 400, which is very difficult to shoot in these cameras due to the shutters. If you want to shoot it w/ 400 speed film, I suggest Tri-X in D76, which is very flexible. But, a 100 speed film is more in order.

 

[MDR]

They made contact prints and didn't enlarge the neg at least most people shooting 6x9 didn't. A light camera shake isn't really that visible on a contact print so People were able to get away with longer exposure times. Also 6x9cm contact prints of the right subject can be very beautiful. Films usually had around ISO 25/32 to max 100 (rarely) Color film was even slower around Iso 6 to 12 (early Kodachrome).

 

[Steve Smith]

But, a 100 speed film is more in order.

I agree. An ISO 100 (or 125) film is perfect for the usual range of daylight brightness. Set the shutter at 1/125 or 1/60 (or 1/100 or 1/50) and adjust the aperture to suit.


Steve.

 

[studiocarter]

The sun is out again

That's six or seven stops down from a bright sunny day. Does it really not get that bright where you are?


Steve.

With the high slide in, the full sun is 320, holding the Sekonic meter horizontally. Pointed down a little bit and it is one block lower.
When it is cloudy and dim outside, the High slide is pulled out and the reading is 80-160.
Thanks for all the really cool comments. I'd forgotten all about flash bulbs. Duh.

 

[Peltigera]

I rarely use any camera wider than f/8. My Nettar 515/2 has a f/6.3 lens and is very usable with 200 ASA film in the UK - much further north - and thus much less general light - than Pittsburg.

I have been using 200 ASA film (Agfa Vista+) today (29 Dec) and had to use f/8 or f/11 at 1/250 (in my Zorki 4).

 

[studiocarter]

This was taken Dec. 26, 2014 at about noon. It was Plus X 125 film that was outdated about a year but refrigerated. f 16 at 1/125 hand held. It goes soft towards the edges. And there are darkened corners. The camera was the Nettar with an f 6.3 anstigmat lens. It was developed in D 76 1:1 at 68 degrees F for 9 minuets agitation was every 30 sec for 5 sec.

 

[DcAnalogue]

This was taken Dec. 26, 2014 at about noon. It was Plus X 125 film that was outdated about a year but refrigerated. f 16 at 1/125 hand held. It goes soft towards the edges. And there are darkened corners. The camera was the Nettar with an f 6.3 anstigmat lens. It was developed in D 76 1:1 at 68 degrees F for 9 minuets agitation was every 30 sec for 5 sec.

Very nice shot!
Do you wanna more from a (very slow & cheap....) 77 YOld lens...? :confused:

 

[elekm]

You should have no problem shooting that camera in Pittsburgh. Film speeds in 1937 definitely were slower, and emulsions were thicker.

I think a fast film in the 1930s would be in the ASA 200 range, but likely was much slower. I'll need to take a look at my books.

For what it's worth, you'll get the best quality shooting around f/8 or f/11 from the Nettar's lens. If you ever get the money, a Tessar set in a Compur shutter should give you better performance.

 

[Steve Smith]

I think a fast film in the 1930s would be in the ASA 200 range, but likely was much slower.

I think 25 or 50 was considered fast then.


Steve.

 

[elekm]

Steve, I agree with you. I can't recall when Kodak Super XX was released but I think it was much later than I thought. I was wrong (probably about a 99.9% certainty of that).

I looked in a couple of my Zeiss Magazines from 1937, and while I see films listed, none of them included films speeds (DIN, Scheiner, Weston or ASA). Kodak had Super X available at that time, but I would guess that would be considered a slow film today.

 

[blockend]

I found a roll of Agfapan 25 in the bottom of my camera drawer and put it through the Netter. Wide open at f4.5 and 1/25 to 1/200 the shots came out fine. Remember film speeds were doubled in the early 1960s, meaning emulsions previously rated at 200 ASA were now 400 ASA. Ilford HPS was 800 ASA.

 

[elekm]

This was taken Dec. 26, 2014 at about noon. It was Plus X 125 film that was outdated about a year but refrigerated. f 16 at 1/125 hand held. It goes soft towards the edges. And there are darkened corners. The camera was the Nettar with an f 6.3 anstigmat lens. It was developed in D 76 1:1 at 68 degrees F for 9 minuets agitation was every 30 sec for 5 sec.

Is that on the South Side?

There's been an ongoing debate (in my mind, anyway) about agitation. Some say, every 30 seconds. Some say once a minute, and others profess that "stand" no-agitation development works best.

I think when I was using D-76, I was doing once a minute. I think think the results here are quite good.

This is from a Super Ikonta 69x with a Tessar lens. It's a year older than your camera - made in 1936.

This is the original scan - dust spots removed but not sharpened.

Agfapan APX 100 shot at f/8 or f/11 (don't remember which) and most likely at 1/100 second.

By the way, your photo was taken at 1/100, as the 1/125 is a "modern" speed. Leaf shutters during that time should have been marked 1 sec., 1/5, 1/10, 1/25, 1/50, 1/100, 1/250, 1/500. Some of the simpler shutters lacked the slow speeds, and some shutters topped out at 1/200, 1/250, 1/300, 1/400 and 1/500.

There were some later leaf shutters with faster speeds, although it's doubtful whether they actually reached those speeds. There's only so much you can do with a leaf shutter.

WARNING: This links to a very large 10MB JPG.

 

[studiocarter]

elekm, that is really nice and how I want to have lights and darks look. Yes, my shot is of the South Side around noon from the MacArdle Roadway newly reopened. I agitated the Kodak way, 5 sec every 30. Uh, my camera has the 125 as the highest setting. The shutter is a Telma, 125, 100, 50, 25, B, T

 

[elekm]

Oh, so you do have a 125 speed. That's interesting. I wonder why the shutter maker would bother to add a 125 with a 100.

I just re-read Ansel Adams' comments regarding agitation. He used a method of agitating every 30 seconds for the first 10 minutes and then once per minute after that. (There's always debate about Ansel Adams, his approach to photography and the Zone System.)

In any case, you probably can add some punch to your shots in post-process. Just darken the shadows and whiten your whites.

In the old days, we'd use some Polycontrast paper with the appropriate filter to boost the contrast.

With Agfapan APX films, I generally process in Rodinal. It's a high-accutance developer, but not a fine-grain developer. That's a tradeoff, but there are always compromises to make in photography. I suppose that's what makes it so much fun.

My shot is on Agfapan APX 100 processed in Rodinal. Probably at a 1:50 dilution for the recommended time.