6x4,5, 6x6 or 6x7 RF with a F2.8 lens?

mfogiel

mfogiel

Veteran
Local time
12:07 AM
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
4,671
Is there a 120 rf camera with a coupled rangefinder, equipped with a F2.8 lens, apart from Plaubel Makina?
 
You mean the Plaubel Makina 67, I assume? The most modern and probably the best lens and rangefinder in still somewhat portable combination of that speed and size. There also was the original Plaubel Makina, made from the early thirties to late fifties, which most often has a f/2.9 lens and rangefinder (though both the RF and lens strictly speaking were options). And then there was the Super Ikonta with f/2.8 lens, plus a couple more rangefinder folders of that vintage with approximately f/2.8 lenses. Given their age (essentially pre war designs, even though the peak in sales was in the decade after the year) these all had Tessar or Triplet type lenses which did not have much edge performance at that speed.

As far as later designs and better lenses are concerned, there is the Mamiya Universal with a (Zeiss licensed Planar design) Sekor 2.8/100, and the Graflex XL with two 2.8/80, and one each 2.8/95 and 100 lenses (the duplication due to difficult partnerships with Rodenstock and Zeiss), from the sixties. That seem to have been all 120 film cameras with dedicated barrel mount or fixed f/2.8 lens.

The Rodenstock Heligons may have been exclusive to the XL (I've never seen them on another camera except in butchered XL mount), but the Planars also were sold in Linhof versions (which makes for some more cameras all across their portfolio) as well as individually, so that they do sometimes show up on other lens board type press/field camera with rangefinder, like Graphics, Toyo/Horsemans etc.
 
I was hoping, there would be something more modern, particularly in the 645 or 6x6 format. It is a real disappointment, that Mamiya never made any F2.8 lenses for their RF cameras. The same for Bronica and Fuji. It is a real pity, that Bessa III is only F 3.5. I am scanning right now negatives in 645 format from Planar 80/2, 110/2, and several f2.8 lenses from Pentax and Hasselblad, and I am really pleased with the results, but I have no really portable camera that can deliver something comparable. The best choices weight wise seem to be the Pentax 645N or the Rolleiflex, but they are both quite bulky.
 
But what actually speaks against Makina? It is not THAT old and if you get a serviced one you will have a camera for a long time. You can still have it serviced directly by Plaubel (in Frankfurt) - although at a price of around 450 € The lens is really lovely too. It may be worth a try.

But I absolutely agree - it is a shame that bessa was not made with f/2.8 lens, but that might have brought the price by another $1000 (lens, RF, mount ... ).

And once we are at it - where is some nice TLR with 80/2.0 lens :)
 
Personally don't find the difference between 2.8 and 3.5 enough to,worry about for my type of photography. I can c it being. Issue shooting in dark places. Most of my shots are between f5.6 to f11 anyway.

Wht u gain at f2.8, u may loose at slowest hand holdable shutter speed when u look at leaf shutter vs focal/copal plane styles.

Unless u absolutely need a meter built in, why discount the old folders, they take great pictures.

Gary
 
I'm using a Bessa ii with color Heliar 105 /3.5.
The difference between f2.8 and f3.5 is so minimal I can't imagine wanting faster for this folder. maybe if it was 645 with it's typically short normal FL.
This Heliar lens gives quite modern results.
7417245218_36e597c1f3_c.jpg


I also use the early Bessa Heliar with an un-coated version of that lens. It's not nearly as modern (lower contrast and softer in general) but still.. has great subject isolation ability.
6149321480_1b04653eed_z.jpg


Here with a bit better spacing of OOF area for less disturbed "bokeh".
6300549964_57e4e4336f_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have the Bessa II w/ both the color version. One a Skopar and the other a Heliar.

Your un-coated looks great. Nice tonal quality.

Gary
 
GaryLH said:
Personally don't find the difference between 2.8 and 3.5 enough to,worry about for my type of photography. I can c it being. Issue shooting in dark places. Most of my shots are between f5.6 to f11 anyway.

Wht u gain at f2.8, u may loose at slowest hand holdable shutter speed when u look at leaf shutter vs focal/copal plane styles.

Unless u absolutely need a meter built in, why discount the old folders, they take great pictures.

Gary
Click to expand...
+1 for my type of photography as well. I once had an Ensign Autorange 220 with a f2.8 75mm Tessar in Compur-Rapid, but this was a rarely found top-of-the-range variant. In fact, I sold it in favour of keeping a late model with a coated f4.5 75mm Ensar triplet. The 220 can shoot 6x4.5 or 6x6, and the film wind-on mechanism doesn't 'force' you to overlap frames with modern film, you control how far it winds manually.
 
The Plaubel looks good, although I dislike foldable cameras in general, because of mechanical problems that can arise, plus difficulties in keeping the focus precise. But I was hoping to find something smaller, perhaps I should simply stick to what I have. Pentax 645N with the 55/2.8 is simply brilliant, so is Pentax 67II with the 75/2.8, but much bigger to lug around. Tomorrow is going to be a Rolleiflex day... BTW, brilliant the photos with Bessa II - I have to take a look at one if I have a chance.
 
A solid, non-folding, compact, 120 RF with an f2.8 would be sweet...if only....

What about the Linhof 6x9 cameras? Maybe on the bulky side but i believe there are 100mm f2.8 Planars. I have no experience with these cameras, however.

I've come to the realization that there doesn't exist a 120 RF that would make me happy although a Bessa II/III or a Makina 67 might suffice.
 
Folders can be quite good.
I have to admit it took a few tries to get excellent functioning Bessa and Bessa ii cameras.
Once you have one that is great they are not really all that fragile.
Most that have damage are from folks who don't know how to close them and bend the lens/focus armature. Once bent it's toast!
The Bessa ii is easily the better camera aside from it's lens.
Syncro compur shutter and a much better finder!
Still… i love that un-coated look sometimes so keep the older model as well.
 
Not necessarily toast once they get bent. As w/ everything it depends. My first Bessa II had that Skopar I mentioned. I bought it from a dealer who claimed it was in excellent condition. He was selling it less then the norm at the time. Anyway long story short, nothing focused right. Sent it to Ken Ruth. He figured out what happened and fixed it good as new. The front standard post was out of alignment.. And something else was slight bent. He found a total of three things wrong. I decided to foot the bill fixing it because the camera body and lens were in such great condition.

Gary
 
I thought he was looking for something compact...

Which the folders would be... But of the cameras that have been listed already, the one missing is graphlex xl..

Linhof non-folder would be a that monster that I think was either called a press 70 or tech 70.

Gary
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom