Fuji 690 vs. Old Folder

mbisc · Mar 20, 2007

Quick question -- has anyone done any lens testing of the Fuji690's regular lens (100ish mm) vs. the lenses of their favorite(?) old 6x9 folder camera? I have an old Voigtlander Bessa II, and love it a lot, but since it always has B&W film in it, I need another camera for color slide film

.
Should I get another Bessa, or get a Fuji 690? Are there any other 6x9 portable cameras (I have a Crown Graphic 23, but I consider that a tripod-only camera

)?

Meleica · Mar 20, 2007

Having used the full line of Fuji's, I would say that Fuji would win this horse race, if for only the retention of proper lens to film alignment. Most old folders need/should be calibrated for proper focus. see my homepage for info on 6x4.5 and 6x7 and 6x9 Fuji's.

Dan

FrankS · Mar 20, 2007

The Fuji 6x7 and 6x9 cameras are huge compared to the Bessa folder.

Abbazz · Mar 20, 2007

mbisc said:
Quick question -- has anyone done any lens testing of the Fuji690's regular lens (100ish mm) vs. the lenses of their favorite(?) old 6x9 folder camera? I have an old Voigtlander Bessa II, and love it a lot, but since it always has B&W film in it, I need another camera for color slide film .
Should I get another Bessa, or get a Fuji 690? Are there any other 6x9 portable cameras (I have a Crown Graphic 23, but I consider that a tripod-only camera )?

From an optical quality point of view, folders are often a bit disappointing. As Dan just said, many have bad optical alignment. But they are so much fun to use and I love them. I carry one with me most of the time (and an Olympus XA when I don't). My favorite is a Bessa E (Bessa RF) with a 3.5/105 Heliar lens which has been recently CLAed. It delivers very nice pictures, better than my Super Ikontas' Tessars, and better than any other folder lens that I have tested to this day.

But the Heliar is no match for my Fuji's 100mm Fujinon lens. It may not show at f/11, but when used wide open, there's a lot of difference. You will object that the 100mm Fujinon is a 4-element Tessar formula, so in theory the 5-element Heliar should be better. Yes, but the rigid body of the Fuji provides optimum lens alignment and proper registration distance, while the folding bed of the Bessa is just not rigid enough to provide the required accuracy.

Buy a Fuji for those slides. As Frank said, it is huge. It won't fit in your pocket, but it delivers when you need optimum sharpness. Keep the folder as a carry-along everyday camera. Different cameras, differents uses.

Cheers,

Abbazz

Solinar · Mar 20, 2007

I like them both. The Bessa II is philosophically pre-war and the Fuji post 1950's.

The big Fuji will be sharper wide open and close in - more often than not - compared the Bessa II. Truly, the best benefit with the Fuji will be framing and composition. The frame lines in the viewfinder are compensated for parallax and shrink the field for close in subjects.

The Bessa II is unique amongst the old school 6x9 folders - but like other folders of the era it was more for the advanced amateur than the professional photographer.

anselwannab · Mar 20, 2007

If I could piggy-back the thread, what folder has the best wide angle type lens? I won't mind a little sofness since I'll shoot B&W and would consider it to be "Character"/non-digitial.

I travel a lot and I love my CL, but I'm intrested in something bit more portable and having a bit more negative to work with. To me the main draw of medium format is the ability to have a wider angle view, yet still have a large enough negative to coax fine details out of the pic. 35mm and my 20D do OK, but fine details get lost.

Mark

Solinar · Mar 20, 2007

In lieu of folders, there are the Fuji GA645 series - (45mm focal length / 28mm equivalent in 35mm) - and - the pricey, but excellent - Mamiya 7 with a 50mm focal length lens.

Monz · Mar 20, 2007

ChrisPlatt · Mar 20, 2007

Plaubel Makina 67W

Chris

Abbazz · Mar 20, 2007

anselwannab said:
If I could piggy-back the thread, what folder has the best wide angle type lens? I won't mind a little sofness since I'll shoot B&W and would consider it to be "Character"/non-digitial.

I travel a lot and I love my CL, but I'm intrested in something bit more portable and having a bit more negative to work with. To me the main draw of medium format is the ability to have a wider angle view, yet still have a large enough negative to coax fine details out of the pic. 35mm and my 20D do OK, but fine details get lost.

Mark

If you mean a classic folder, you won't have much choice. In 6x9, the widest angle camera that I am aware of is the Demaria-Lapierre Telka III with its 1:3,5/95mm Sagittar (great lens). Not much of a wide angle!

As mentioned by Solinar and Chris, there are the more modern Fuji and Plaubel cameras. But no folding wide angle in 6x9!

Cheers,

Abbazz

mbisc · Mar 21, 2007

Great discussion everyone, and thanks for the insights!

The nice aspect of my Bessa is its small size -- easy fit as an add-on in my 35mm photo bag and it (almost) fits into my back pocket -- and the good (for the time) optics. The film flatness issue is definitely there (like all folders), but about 6x7 or 6x8 are unaffected by that. The rest of the camera works perfectly, since I got it freshly CLA'ed when I bought it...

Things to ponder, before I get a G.A.S. attack

rbrooks · Mar 21, 2007

Perkeo II. I have two of them. Smallest and lightest folder around. Nice.

jan normandale · Mar 21, 2007

rbrooks said:
Perkeo II. I have two of them. Smallest and lightest folder around. Nice.

Same here , it's a 6x6 tho so if you want the bigger 6x9 your folder is probably a good solution. I have several folders and the Fuji. The Fuji is very tasty. I like the folders for that "old school" look I can get. Depends on what you want the camera for also.

Then you could go to a Holga as an option ;- )

Solinar · Mar 21, 2007

Another vote for the Perkeo II - In my case - it led to acquiring a Bessa II, which is really old school.

I usually have a 35mm with a collapsible lens and a medium format folder with me in a smallish satchel, called a Gravis Sidearm.

Abbazz · Mar 23, 2007

Monz Ahmed said:
I have a Fujica G960 BL with an uncoated 100mm Fujinon f3.5 lens and a Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta folder (533/16) with a 80mm coated f2.8 tessar. The folder is easier to use hand-held (of course) but I can't see that much difference optically between the two cameras. Here are some examples...

Monz,

Great pictures you have here.

There is obviously not much difference between a Fuji G690 and a properly adjusted folder, especially if you stop down the lens to f/8 or more.

Though, looking carefully at your pictures, even at small size on the web, I find the Fujinon sharper. It shows mostly on the areas with lots of fine details (hair, fabric) and might be related to the better local contrast of the lens.

A folder is a great carry-along camera delivering superb pictures. But if you are into pixel peeping, you will find out that the pictures are not quite as sharp as a professional MF camera like a Fuji, a Rollei TLR or a Hasselblad. Of course, folders were never intended to be professional cameras, and they cost much less too

Cheers,

Abbazz

NickTrop · Mar 23, 2007

Why is "sharpness" beyond a certain point the "be all and end all" measure of a lens. I think it's overrated. The signature of a lens is a mix of many subtle visual elements, "sharpness" being but one.

I love the look of a cookie triplet or earlier, simpler lens designs - the Tessar, sometimes. The Solinar on my Agfa folder may not be the "sharpest" of the several medium format lenses I own, but it's plenty sharp stopped down a bit and simply gives pictures taken with it an evocative and unique quality that can't be defined by subjective measures of "sharpness".

I recently went through the same gyrations - and thought about one of the Fujis, and decided to go with another folder - an Iskra, CLA'd + minor repair, and on its way from Oleq in Russia as we "speak". Can't wait to take some pics with that Industar 75mm.

jan normandale · Mar 23, 2007

Nick, I don't think sharpness in a camera/lens combo is viewed as the “ne plus ultra’ Like you say it’s a matter of personal taste. I’ve folders and as I mentioned above I use them for specific reasons, I have a 690 and I use it like any other man made piece of equipment in order to do a specific job a little better. Sometimes I’ll take the same photograph with more than one camera to see which produces the effect I like best.

I don’t think the discussion was a criticism of folders though. I didn’t get that impression. So I’m looking forward to your shots with your new Iskra from Oleg. I have to send him my Kiev 4am shortly.. because I like the glass.

Abbazz · Mar 23, 2007

NickTrop said:
Why is "sharpness" beyond a certain point the "be all and end all" measure of a lens. I think it's overrated. The signature of a lens is a mix of many subtle visual elements, "sharpness" being but one.

I love the look of a cookie triplet or earlier, simpler lens designs - the Tessar, sometimes. The Solinar on my Agfa folder may not be the "sharpest" of the several medium format lenses I own, but it's plenty sharp stopped down a bit and simply gives pictures taken with it an evocative and unique quality that can't be defined by subjective measures of "sharpness".

I couldn't agree more, Nick. I am not a pixel peeper. I love triplets. Among my favorite lenses are some triplets: the 3.5/105 Novar Anastigmat on a Zeiss Super-Ikonta, the 4.5/105 Meyer Görlitz Trioplan on a Welta Garant and best of all, the 165mm f/3.5 Jos. Schneider Xenar "Typ D" that I use on a 5x7 Linhof Technika.

I am also very fond of Heliar lenses, which are no more than triplets with two cemented elements at the front and back of the lens. The Emperor Shōwa Tennō of Japan liked so much the results provided by the Heliar lens that he wouldn't allow his picture to be taken with any other type of lens. And that was way before Cosina bought the rights on the name

Cheers,

Abbazz

NickTrop · Mar 23, 2007

Abbazz said:
I couldn't agree more, Nick. I am not a pixel peeper. I love triplets. Among my favorite lenses are some triplets: the 3.5/105 Novar Anastigmat on a Zeiss Super-Ikonta, the 4.5/105 Meyer Görlitz Trioplan on a Welta Garant and best of all, the 165mm f/3.5 Jos. Schneider Xenar "Typ D" that I use on a 5x7 Linhof Technika.

I am also very fond of Heliar lenses, which are no more than triplets with two cemented elements at the front and back of the lens. The Emperor Shōwa Tennō of Japan liked so much the results provided by the Heliar lens that he wouldn't allow his picture to be taken with any other type of lens. And that was way before Cosina bought the rights on the name

Cheers,

Abbazz

Geez, Abbazz, now you got me "Googling"... Heliar. Thanks for the history lesson. But "no thanks" for the GAS attack I'm about to have ; )

jan normandale · Mar 23, 2007

Nick , as the Scots say.. "Och! Look away .... look away!"

Fuji 690 vs. Old Folder

Silver Halide User

Well-known

Registered User

6x9 and be there!

Analog Preferred

Well-known

Analog Preferred

Monz

Thread Killer

6x9 and be there!

Silver Halide User

Established

Film is the other way

Analog Preferred

6x9 and be there!

Veteran

Film is the other way

6x9 and be there!

Veteran

Film is the other way