What 6x6 Folder Gives the Best Results?

[Leigh Youdale]

Depends what you want. Old cameras with some limitations or a new(er) one with most of the limitations gone? I had two Bessa I's and two Perkeo's (I&II). They were nice cameras and as I or my father had owned them from new, three of them were close to mint.
Sold them all. Why? No coupled rangefinders, tiny squinty viewfinders, manual shutter cocking, accessories, parts and service scarce - yes, they worked and took good images but they just weren't convenient and I fell out of love with them eventually.
Currently using a Rolleiflex E2 with a Maxwell grid screen. Nice images, the grid helps me stay on the level, but I'm working my way towards the Bessa III. Having had one to try for a couple of weeks, and as a 35mm Bessa user, I'm pretty much convinced. Just have to summon up the courage to sell the Rolleiflex and top up the proceeds for the Bessa III.

 

[oftheherd]

Folders on ebay stay about the same price. Buy and experiment. You won't lose much trying to find what you like. But you have set some pretty difficult standards. Most folders don't have the film advance you want. Most will give good results other than the obvious low end ones.

Good luck.

 

[Steve M.]

I agree, the Olde Folders require compromises. Those little tiny viewfinders are not fun, but w a big negative I can always crop (unless I cut their head off in the shot of course). Bit inconvenient to have to cock the shutters as well. I dearly love the German glass though, so I put up w/ the folder's faults. If it weren't for my inability to use a TLR properly I'd just stick w/ that. As for LF, I tried it and it was not my bag at all. Too slow, too big, too heavy. And from my experience a good MF lens is sharper than a LF lens. You can just blow the LF shot up bigger and see more detail that way.

Really liked the handling of my Super Ikonta IV, but the shots, while very good, weren't as good as you can get in MF. Otherwise it was one of the best cameras I've ever used. Real beauty.

Sure wish I could go w a Bessa III, but I'd have to sell all of my gear to justify the expense. That is probably the best MF camera out there right now regarding image quality. I've seen some amazing shots on flickr from them. As for the Bessa II suggestion, we're of like minds on that. Fantastic lens, but w/ B&W I am seeing the same quality w/ my Bessa RF's uncoated Heliar. Just need to keep a yellow filter and a hood on it when you shoot, which is another inconvenience as you have to take it back off to fold the camera up each time. But I will put up w/ no end of inconveniences if the negs justify it.

Looks like I'll go Keith's route w/ the Iskra as a cost effective solution and keep my fingers crossed I get one that actually works. I have a feeling I will probably just end up shooting my Bessa RF and cropping to 6x6 after it's all said and done though. Man, I really love the way that lens images. One of the dumbest things I ever did was to sell my Bessa II, but one of the smarter things I've done was to replace it w/ a Bessa RF.

 

[AgentX]

If you can't get the images you want from the gear you have, why NOT sell it all and buy gear that will??

Caveat: so long as it's truly a gear issue and not a user one--but you seem to have proven it to be so...

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Just need to keep a yellow filter and a hood on it when you shoot, which is another inconvenience as you have to take it back off to fold the camera up each time.

Yes, and I don't know why people make such a big deal about having to do this on BIII. My Voigtlander folders all had to have the filter removed - my Retina 1a had to also have the lens turned to infinity to close.
Most BIII users have overcome the main problem by fitting a filter of the correct size to the lens hood. Removing the hood also takes the filter with it. (It's a different filter size to the ones that fit the lens!)

 

[Roger Hicks]

just imagine how the (original, German) Plaubel Makina would have been if they hadn't been wedded to the awful 100/2,9 Anticomar. There was a slower option that was apparently much better (it couldn't have been much worse) but I've never tried one. I sometimes have an idle fantasy about installing a decent 100mm lens on a Plaubel.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Steve M.]

The irony on the filter issue is my Bessa RF came from the factory w/ a beautifully designed moment yellow filter, but using it w/o a hood is not a good idea, so I had to remove the stock filter and swing mount to have room to slide a filter/hood on it. It's an inconvenience, but between unfolding it, and metering and setting the shutter speeds and aperture, and dealing w/ a red window advance, speed is relative anyway. The shots make all that worthwhile. There are times when I need a faster approach though.

Maybe it's as you suggest AgentX. Could just be the photographer. But I think after 40 years of photography I know how to stop the lens down and put it at infinity

That plate camera is so darn lovely chippy! Wow.

I also keep thinking about the idea of selling everything and just using a Bessa III. Hmmmm. If only I wasn't so cheap. I'm gonna go w/ Keith's idea on the Iskra and see what happens. Hopefully it will work better than the Moskva 5 I once had.

Sure got some good ideas here! Thanks.

 

[NickTrop]

Of the three folders I've owned, I like the original Iskra the best, (which I recently sold). However, it required a trip to Oleg (I believe his name is...) in the FSU for servicing after purchasing it "serviced", and he no longer works on Iskras. The reason I like the Iskra is that (1) the lens is awesome, (2) it has rangefinder focusing (most are scale focus, not a fan), (3) the bellows usually hold up (unlike the two Agfas I had. It's a simple repair. I used the latex stuff used to repair scuba gear mixed with Lamp Black. But you never know when they're gonna spring another leak...), (4) like the Mamiya 6, the whole lens assembly moves for focusing not just the front element. (5) My sample had a working film counter (but many were modified with the "red window", which I also dislike - and common to a lot of folders, because the film counter mechanism often breaks.) Another nice feature is that the shutter speed dial can grip to the aperture ring so the two stay in sync. I all but gave up on the camera after it developed a weird light leak that was impossible to fix... until someone here posted a thread about it and other Iskra owners came out of the woodwork with the same problem, which the poster located and easily fixed! (That still amazes me...)

If you're in the market for a folder, the Iskra represents an excellent value. - BUT finding a good sample can be a challenge, and I'm unaware if anyone on the big blue marble still services them.

I'm currently "medium format camera-less" and entertaining getting another one at some point. Nothing beats that big negative. However, I'm thinking of either a TLR or one of those automated Fujis... leaning toward the Fujis. Done with folders - love the idea of them (small portable MF cameras), but they're more manual than I like, slow to operate (imo), and seem to require a lot of TLC (i.e. some sort of servicing - from DIY to send it out...)

 

[GaryLH]

+1 on Chippy's comment on Ken Ruth. He has worked on my bessa ii and has an super ikonta iv he is doing a cla on for me now. He does great work. He is around 3 to 4 weeks in terms of his work queue at the moment.

Gary

 

[AgentX]

Maybe it's as you suggest AgentX. Could just be the photographer. But I think after 40 years of photography I know how to stop the lens down and put it at infinity

Steve, I wasn't trying to be cute or coy and imply that it was a problem with the photographer...was trying to express the idea that although new gear isn't the solution to every problem, you seem to have indeed established out that this particular issue DOES originate with the gear for you.

And again, since that's the case, I don't see why you shouldn't sell off what you do own that's not doing the job for you and buy whichever camera will meet the needs you've established for yourself after 40 years of shooting...

 

[Krosya]

Bit of a loaded question. I normally use TLR's and a Hassey, but have a lot of trouble holding the things straight. On every roll at least half of the shots have buildings or people that are leaning all over the place. This doesn't happen when I use a folder, so maybe that's the best way for my problem. I use a prism finder on the 'flex and that works well, but a prism finder on the Hassey looks awful and makes the camera too big and bulky to sling over my shoulder

I've used quite a few folders in the past. The Welta Weltur w/ Tessar was great, but pretty pricey and hard to find. I just sold a Super Ikonta IV and a Super Ikonta 533/16 because even though the shots were very good, they weren't up to the Rolleiflex T or Autocord that I have. I want it to be 6x6 and have a coupled rangefinder if possible, and an auto stop on the film advance would be preferred to a red window. Any 120 folder shooters here that have any recommendations?

For now I'm using a Bessa RF w/ Heliar and cropping to 6x6, so I know there are folders out there that can compete w/ a Hassey. The shots from the Bessa are better! But 8 shots to a roll is a little inconvenient and the red window film advance is slow to use.

Having tried many - I still like Welta Weltur the best. Here are a few samples from my 6x6:

 

[citizen99]

Getting back into the older models, please bear with me ... This is my Ensign Autorange 220 from the late 1930s; very similar to my 645 Weltur of the same era except that the unit focus lens assembly & coupled rangefinder are moved by a lever instead of a thumbwheel. I like the simple geared disc displaying the frame numbers - spacings still take accurate account of varying on-spool film diameter with modern films that I have used - so there is no automatic wind-on interlock to give trouble with age. There are the usual Ensign built-in hinged masks so that the camera can be adapted to take 16-on 120. The frames number disc can be reversed; 1-12 one side, 1-16 the other.

Mechanically, the cameras are indistinguishable in build quality, but the Xenar of the Weltur of course has the advantage in performance over the Ensar triplet. However Ensign also sold some of this model fitted with the Tessar. For my amateur purposes, this camera, even at 70+ years old, is a 'bomb-proof user'.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/43334883@N03/4644048305/

 

[citizen99]

just imagine how the (original, German) Plaubel Makina would have been if they hadn't been wedded to the awful 100/2,9 Anticomar. There was a slower option that was apparently much better (it couldn't have been much worse) but I've never tried one. I sometimes have an idle fantasy about installing a decent 100mm lens on a Plaubel.

Cheers,

R.

Why not go for it !

This shows a 1930s Ensign Autorange-20 hosting a Kodak Anaston lens, a decent enough coated triplet that is nowadays rather wasted on it's original 'bog-standard' 1950s Kodak 620-film body. (I can't be bothered to be transferring 120 film to 620 spools too often ).

Experiments with other donor lenses when available are in prospect... . I like the ergonomics of the Autorange-20. Although not self-erecting, setting it up takes very little additional time. The lens assembly is unit-focus, with coupled rangefinder, and it has rising-front adjustment.

:bang: I can't seem to get the 'Insert Image' to work, so here is the link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/43334883@N03/4584826650/in/set-72157622436997353/

 

[chris00nj]

*not true, many other camera have it

Chris, some grave misconceptions are being forwarded on here. whilst i too appreciate and admire the Zeiss Ikon company history and more so some of their designers contributions to the photographic world, by no stretch of the imagination could it be said that the S/Ikonta IV was the pinnacle design, in fact it could easily be argued quite the opposite, that apart from the facelift it received (styled chrome top that others makers had already introduced-check out what the japenese had been doing to their S/Ikonta camera clones for years!) and the onboard photo-electric light meter (NOT coupled) that is of little to no use to us nowadays and a nice but small benefit back in the late 50s. As nice as it is the S/Ikonta IV was crudely speaking basically a relic from the late 1920's (it was at the forefront back then!) to being well behind the times in the late 50s!!!

to attempt to describe, if you look back in time to the 20's & 30's then you would see that mid to high end non-self erecting folders (mostly on this forum we see/talk about 'self erecting' folders`,nothing wrong with the older folders but the lenses are commonly slower although some are amazing!) were always unit focusing cameras; whereby the whole lens, as a 'unit' moves past the infinity mark to focus on something closer--same principle as the old and modern pro field or studio camera/lens set ups.

camera manufacturers in the old days wanted to sell as many cameras as possible ,including to every day snap shot family ppl, just like canon, olympus and nikon etc do today so they also sold camera with fixed front standard that made the camera significantly cheaper to produce, doing away with the sliding track and everything associated with it. to make the camera cheap but still photograph good enough for the weekend family snap shot or amateur that didnt know any better, so they produced cameras that just the front cell moves further out from the film plane to focus=much much cheaper to make but quality suffers somewhat at certain distances

Zeiss Ikon being as huge a company as they were naturally wanted in on this market and developed and sold the cheaper front cell focusing camera as well, in fact it became their mainstream for folders!! try to find a Ziess unit focusing folding camera!!! some opposing manufactures including Welta started to offer built in rangefinder as well

with everyone else offering coupled Rf, 1934-35 Zeiss had to do the same but unfortunately having already spent significant R&D on their camera body designs, their RF had to be adapted to the front cell focusing body they already had and were committed too--big disappointmemt to the photographic community no doubt but Ziess Ikon's huge marketing machine and good build quality was good enough to overshadow this, the quality of the final image was secondary to all but those photographers who knew better

after the war and by the late fifties Zeiss are still using the same basic antiquated front cell focusing 120 folder design, finaly a small upgrade to the focusing wedge which mostly makes it look like its competitors better engineered unit focusing camera designs but still isnt! i have no doubt this point alone fooled some ppl. To be sure, the S/Ikonta wasnt good enough in 1938 to serious photographers and by the late fifties is a joke that they are still offering the same basic defunk system, even though its dressed up with a light meter now is no excuse (all their R&D is going into other equipment at this stage and for some time now)

in the late 50's there are a number of other cameras that can produce better pictures on offer to the critical photographer, from a number of makers, not withstanding the Agfa S/Isolette that easily out does the S/Ikonta in the quality of the pictures, Certo 6, Balda Super baldax, the Weltur produces better pictures and it is 2 decades older!, the Mamiya 6 Automatic was more advanced, automaticaly cocking the shutter while winding on and produces better pics (Sekor lens on last models is notably better than the earlier Zuiko's used) or how about the Agfa Automatic 66 that has automatic AE mode, mechanical, air driven shutter control no less!!!

You make some really good points on the focusing. Short of a Baby Linhoff or a Miniature Speed Graphic, I didn't realize there were unit focusing folders prior to Zeiss dominating the market. Still just about all folders had the red window.

Back to the OP, based on the amount of what he is looking for, I don't think anything will qualify except the Bessa III. Perhaps the Plaubel Makina 670, but that must win the award for ugliest camera (in addition to its storied wiring problems).

By the way, is the Bessa III, front cell focusing?

 

[sevo]

Still just about all folders had the red window.

Not really. Most have it, but few of the higher end ones rely on it. I own(ed) at least eight that had a regular counter - Super Ikonta BX and III, Bessa 66, Welta Perfekta, Baldax, Hapo 66E, Super Isolette, Iskra, Makina II with counting back - and that is only a fraction of them all.

Back to the OP, based on the amount of what he is looking for, I don't think anything will qualify except the Bessa III. Perhaps the Plaubel Makina 670, but that must win the award for ugliest camera (in addition to its storied wiring problems).

Well, there always is the Makina 67, which was spared that ribbed look of its successor. And the wiring problems are fixable, affect the (somewhat expendable) light meter, and occur on worn-down cameras - the Makina 67 was/is a professional travel photography workhorse with a excellent reputation for reliability. So far we do not know whether the Bessa III will turn out to be anywhere as reliable as that.

Sevo

 

[oftheherd]

Why not go for it !

This shows a 1930s Ensign Autorange-20 hosting a Kodak Anaston lens, a decent enough coated triplet that is nowadays rather wasted on it's original 'bog-standard' 1950s Kodak 620-film body. (I can't be bothered to be transferring 120 film to 620 spools too often ).

Experiments with other donor lenses when available are in prospect... . I like the ergonomics of the Autorange-20. Although not self-erecting, setting it up takes very little additional time. The lens assembly is unit-focus, with coupled rangefinder, and it has rising-front adjustment.

:bang: I can't seem to get the 'Insert Image' to work, so here is the link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/43334883@N03/4584826650/in/set-72157622436997353/

That's darn clever!