Beginning 6x9 Folder?
Erynn/Lorax
Having spent a year with my Rolleicord, I find myself wanting to try a 6x9
folder. Could I have a few recommendations for one that won't cost a fortune
but still deliver good results? I'd prefer one I can mount filters on, if
that's possible.
Best of light,
Gordon Cooper
Seattle, WA
Hemi4268
Hi
Just about any folder with a 4.5 lens will work. Most of the US type cameras
such as Kodak take 620 film. Getting this film is hard and expensive. Most
German cameras are 120, so film is not a problem.
The biggest problem with folders is that the shutters usually have given out.
Make sure all the shutter speeds are working. Repair is expensive. Your best
bet is camera shows. You should be able to buy a good camera for $50 to $100.
Larry
GLewis4457
In article <199805212124...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, hemi...@aol.com
(Hemi4268) writes:
>
>Just about any folder with a 4.5 lens will work. Most of the US type cameras
>such as Kodak take 620 film. Getting this film is hard and expensive. Most
>German cameras are 120, so film is not a problem.
Actually 6x9's have closer to 10,5cm lenses. The 4,5's are usually 35mm
folders. Both my Agfa Billy Record (6x9) and my Zeiss-Icon Nettar use 120 film.
Jerry in Houston'
Jerry Lewis
League City, TX., USA
Radimus
I bought a Franka Rolfix off an eBay auction a few months back. Paid about
$55 for it. My particular model has a 105mm f4.5 lens and shutter speeds
from B to 250. Mine doesn't have the waiste-level finder on it, only the
pop-up finder on the body. I imagine it would have cost me about $20 more
is it did.
From what I've found out. This camera was probably made in the 50's. There
were a lot of the 6X9 folders made back then. The Ansco Viking/Agfa Billy
Record are another common model that can be had for around $50, give or take
$15.
When looking into one of these cameras, always be sure you know how fast the
lens is and what type of shutter is on it. These type of cameras were sold
with varying max aperatures (4.5 to 8.8) and shutter speed selections (3 to
9 speeds). Most any folder from the 50's had a tripod socket, flash sync,
and cable release socket. The Franka Rolfixs, Agfa Records, and Ansco
Vikings all used 120 film. Most of the Kodak folders of the time used 620
film. The Ikonta folders are also good cameras, but their popularity among
collectors makes them a bit pricey for the beginner photographer.
The most common Kodak folder then was the Vigilant. While a well built
camera, pay attention to the aperature and shutter of whatever model you're
considering. In case you don't know, 620 film is merely 120 film on a
slimmer spool. If you end up with a 620 camera, you can respool 120 film or
order film from Film for Classics or B&H Photo. Both sell film on 620
spools. Just remember to hoard all the spools you can.
As far as filters are concerned, none of the models above were designed to
accomodate them. Maybe someone knows a better mothod of using a filter with
them other than holding it in front of the lens.
Hope this helps.
Rad
Erynn/Lorax wrote in message <6k1l4j$3...@q.seanet.com>...
steven T koontz
Erynn/Lorax wrote:
>
> Having spent a year with my Rolleicord, I find myself wanting to try a 6x9
> folder. Could I have a few recommendations for one that won't cost a fortune
> but still deliver good results? I'd prefer one I can mount filters on, if
> that's possible.
>
well made. One way to determine how good the camera is by seeing how
many speeds the shutter has. the good ones go down to 1/2 sec or 1
sec. Also I would make sure it has a coated lens as this means it is a
fairly late camera (post WWII) and will be better for shooting color
and in funky lighting.. Also will have more contrast. The radionar and
enar lenses work well and ussually can be bought cheap compaired to
the zeis tessar ect lensed camera's. I have a rollei with a xenar and
can't really see much diff in it and these folders until you start
getting real big enlargements.. And then the 6X9 negs size makes up
for the unsharpness of the cheaper lens..
--
steve's photography & Z car stuff @ http://www.mindspring.com/~skoontz
sko...@mindspring.com
Stefan Kahlert
In article <199805212142...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
glewi...@aol.com (GLewis4457) writes:
>In article <199805212124...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, hemi...@aol.com
>(Hemi4268) writes:
>
>>
>>Just about any folder with a 4.5 lens will work. Most of the US type cameras
>>such as Kodak take 620 film. Getting this film is hard and expensive. Most
>>German cameras are 120, so film is not a problem.
>
>Actually 6x9's have closer to 10,5cm lenses. The 4,5's are usually 35mm
>folders. Both my Agfa Billy Record (6x9) and my Zeiss-Icon Nettar use 120 film.
to the maximum aperture. Have a look at your Billy Record
it probably has a Radionar f4.5/10,5cm.
best
Stefan
John Stewart
A lot depends on whether you need rangefinder focusing.
Folders tend to be made in 3 qualities: cheapo lens and shutter, mediocre
lens and shutter and great lens, shutter and rangefinder. The last is the
hardest to find. The mid range is plentiful, but full of 3 element lenses.
John
Erynn/Lorax wrote in message <6k1l4j$3...@q.seanet.com>...
>Having spent a year with my Rolleicord, I find myself wanting to try a 6x9
>folder. Could I have a few recommendations for one that won't cost a
fortune
>but still deliver good results? I'd prefer one I can mount filters on, if
>that's possible.
>
Joshua_Putnam
>As far as filters are concerned, none of the models above were designed to
>accomodate them. Maybe someone knows a better mothod of using a filter with
>them other than holding it in front of the lens.
I haven't gotten around to taking a picture of it yet for my web
page, but I recently modified a Cokin Universal mount to work on
my Moscow 5 6x9 folder. The Cokin Universal uses three thumb
screws with plastic tips to clamp onto the outside of just about
any lens barrel, whether it's threaded, smooth, knurled, etc.
My modifications were mostly done with a hot knife, removing
plastic on the adaptor that got in the way of the folding and
rangefinder mechanisms on my camera -- the designers of the
adaptor must have expected more clearance around the lens than
you get on a folder.
I was torn between using the Cokin adaptor and getting a proper
slip-on to threaded filter adaptor, but decided in favor of the
Cokin since it works with all the Cokin P filters I already own
for my other cameras.
--
Jo...@WolfeNet.com is Joshua Putnam / P.O. Box 13220 / Burton, WA 98013
"My other bike is a car."
http://www.wolfenet.com/~josh/
GLewis4457
In article <17F5EB1C3...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>,
UZS...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de (Stefan Kahlert) writes:
Sorry for the misunderstanding, and yes it does have the Schneider-Krueznach
4.5/10,5 cm Radionar.
Jerry
LMG50
><rad...@paonline.com> writes:
>
>>As far as filters are concerned, none of the models above were designed to
>>accomodate them. Maybe someone knows a better mothod of using a filter with
>>them other than holding it in front of the lens.
I use a Super Ikonta B 6x6 folder with a Zeiss Tessar lens. The camera
belonged to my grandfather, and in with his camera gear were a vaiety of sizes
of filter holders that slid over the front of the lens and were held in place
by a kind of spring action. The adapters come in series (V, VI, VII, etc.) and
you can still get filters that fit. I have neve seen these in a store, but you
may want to
look in a used equipment bin for these adapters.
Joe Berenbaum
"John Stewart" <radi...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>A lot depends on whether you need rangefinder focusing.
>Folders tend to be made in 3 qualities: cheapo lens and shutter, mediocre
>lens and shutter and great lens, shutter and rangefinder. The last is the
>hardest to find. The mid range is plentiful, but full of 3 element lenses.
>John
This applies to the 6 x 6 format and to some extent- possibly a large
extent- to the 6 x 9 format 120 folders also. There is a subset of the
mid range that also have quality lenses- call them the upper mid-range
if you like. For example, you can find Zeiss Ikontas with Tessar
lenses, without rangefinders and sometimes with uncoupled
rangefinders, but much cheaper than Super Ikontas. Also Agfa Isolette
III with Solinar lens (that is a Tessar clone) and uncoupled
rangefinder (6x6 format) and here in the UK there are the Ensign
Selfix cameras with the Ross Xpres lens (another excellent lens).
There are many other cameras in this category also. It may be helpful
to have a look at McKeowns to see what cameras were made of this type,
and Ivor Matanle's book "Collecting and using classic cameras" is full
of useul information on the subject, particularly with reference to
which old folders are still likely to be in usable condition today.
Joe B. (Please remove the ".com" from my address for email)
wcm...@ibm.net
Joseph Albert wrote:
>
> "John Stewart" <radi...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> >A lot depends on whether you need rangefinder focusing.
> >Folders tend to be made in 3 qualities: cheapo lens and shutter, mediocre
> >lens and shutter and great lens, shutter and rangefinder. The last is the
> >hardest to find. The mid range is plentiful, but full of 3 element lenses.
> >John
>
> two versions, 1 with coupled rangefinder, 1 with just scale focus,
> but the same shutters and optics in both models. For instance:
>
> Zeiss Ikonta, Super Ikonta (645, 6x6, or 6x9)
> Agfa Isolette, Super Isolette (6x6 only)
> Ansco Speedex, Super Speedex (6x6 only)
>
> The Ansco and Agfa cameras were in fact the same camera, respectively, sold
> under both brand names. I think Agfa made the lenses and Ansco made the
> bodies, and they manufactured them and marketed them under a cooperative
> agreement. All of these cameras have shutters of reasonable quality,
> f3.5 Tessar lenses, and the models marked with "Super" also have coupled
> rangefinders.
>
> You will pay a big premium for one of the above cameras if it has the Z-word
> on its case somewhere, particularly for the Super Ikontas, and the cleaner
> the camera, the bigger the gap in price. That's typical of highly collectible
> cameras, and also means that if you do choose to use it, every little ding
> and scratch will cost you significantly more in depreciation. It is doubtful
> there will be any noticeable difference in image quality, though, particularly
> given the limitations of the folding bed design in regard to rigidity.
>
> These cameras are nice for street shooting or travel snapshots, although
> my personal preference would be for a TLR.
>
> j. albert
Haven't seen any mention of one of the best: The Mamiya 6 folder. It
came with a variety of lenses, the Zuiko Olympus 75mm f3.5 being a
really good one. I can't speak for the others. The Olympus is apparently
a Tessar knock-off, and mine's in a seikosha 1 - 500 shutter. I bought
mine at an auction for $18, but that was a steal. I doubt you'd normally
get a good one for less than $100, but compare it with the Super Ikonta
and you'll see it's an excellent one to consider. I think the sharpness
is attained largely by virtue of the fact that the film is held very
flat via a slide-in pressure plate. That arrangement was necessary
because focusing is done by moving the film plane rather than the lens
elements. I believe this also makes for a more rigid front standard --
the old Mamiyas seem to be very rigid. Try it, you'll love it.
e...@shell.clark.net
This is interesting...
I have a Franka Rollfix Jr in front of me right now which sort of violates
Steve's quality code. It has a Vario 3-speed shutter (25,75,200) with
unknown (I would assume M) synch. So far it sounds cheap, but it has a
105mm f:4.5 Schneider Radionar coated lens! Cheaper shutter with good
glass!
Personally, I prefer the cheaper shutters as the greatest single cause of
shutter problems is in gummed lubricant in the slow speed gears. As a
result, I actually prefer these simpler and more reliable shutters. I
have a Kodak Tourist with a similar shutter and a coated f:8.8 Anaston
lens (also a Cooke triplet type) which I'd love to death if only I didn't
have to deal with the 620 film mess. The lens is an absolute joy for
sharpness.
I've got a few really nice "top of line" cameras here whose 7 and 9
speed Compurs need expensive work that I feel is beyond my resources
and competence to repair. The cost of repair is several times the
value of the cameras that they're on! Conclusion? To me at least,
avoid the deluxe shutters but look for good glass!
My $.02
Ed Lukacs
Washington, DC
steven T koontz <sko...@mindspring.com> wrote:
: Erynn/Lorax wrote:
:>
:> Having spent a year with my Rolleicord, I find myself wanting to try a 6x9
:> folder. Could I have a few recommendations for one that won't cost a fortune
:> but still deliver good results? I'd prefer one I can mount filters on, if
:> that's possible.
:>
: I've had very good results with the "franka" camera's. They seem very
: well made. One way to determine how good the camera is by seeing how
Joe Berenbaum
<e...@shell.clark.net> wrote:
>This is interesting...
>I have a Franka Rollfix Jr in front of me right now which sort of violates
>Steve's quality code. It has a Vario 3-speed shutter (25,75,200) with
>unknown (I would assume M) synch. So far it sounds cheap, but it has a
>105mm f:4.5 Schneider Radionar coated lens! Cheaper shutter with good
>glass!
This IS interesting. I thought the Radionar was a three element design
that is not quite in the league of Tessar type lenses, which are what
is usually meant by "quality lenses" in this context. But I would be
curious to know what you can do with it- sometimes what people say
about "good" lenses is what they read somewhere, not what they
actually know. Commonly heard advice is to stick to the Tessar types
if quality is what you're after. If that is wrong, I want to know
about it...
for...@gmail.com
A Voightlander Avus 6x9.5 plate camera with a leaky bellows
A Franka Rolfix II with a good bellows
An Agfa Billy Record II with a bad bellows, (being repaired with new bellows and CLA)
A box camera, Traveler 120, with a single speed shutter and two element lens.
I had a Moscow 5, that also had a bad bellows, and that locked up when I tried to set the self timer, I sold it as junk.
the point is that most of the old folders will have a bad bellows. Especially the Ansco/Agfa models.
The Compur shutters seem to be famous for the factory grease turning to concrete like glue and locking the shutter. My Billy, Rolfix and Avus all had this condition. I removed the shutters, and soaked them thoroughly in naptha, then took them apart enough to brush and blow out as much of the green gunk as possible, then dried them and relubed with graphite. The shutters are fairly easy to fix, but the bellows are expensive! www.certo6.com is a good place for repair options.
I am about ready to order a Cokin style yellow plastic filter for the Rolfix, I intend to cut that into a circle that will just fit inside the lens ring. As I use the Rolfix exclusively for B/W film, having that filter semi-permanently installed makes sense to me. The slip on filters will not fit for storage when camera is closed. If the filter is fitted inside the lens ring the cover can be closed.
Patiently waiting for my Billy to come back with new bellows, my FAVORITE folder, wish I had the Billy III with the integrated rangefinder though.