Brince
Member
I want to purchase a 6x6 Folder with the sharpest lens edge to edge wide open. they all seem to be good stopped down. Please advice/ Thanks Brince
literiter
Well-known
Consider the Certo Six, Mamiya 6 (old version), and some of the Agfa/Ansco 6x6 folders. There will be others, but these are the ones I know.
The certo Six is a tad rare, but exellent.
The certo Six is a tad rare, but exellent.
R
Richard Black
Guest
Consider Zeiss! I had one and traded it for something, regret it now. The Agfas are ok but not as razor-sharp as the Zeiss.
sleepyhead
Well-known
I have a Zeiss Super Ikonta with 80mm f/2.8 Tessar. It's pretty darn sharp wide open, and even by f/4 sharp enough for any need.
Here's a photo taken at f/5.6. In the full-size scan, you can see the weave of his hat, and his eyelashes quite clearly - SHARP!
Here's a photo taken at f/5.6. In the full-size scan, you can see the weave of his hat, and his eyelashes quite clearly - SHARP!
Brince
Member
Thanks for the help....looks like Zeiss would be an excellent choice. Yaron, that image is incredible. Thanks Again/ Brince
literiter
Well-known
Brince said:
I take this to be your criteria. Sharp wide open.
I have three Super Ikonta Bs. One with a coated Opton Tessar and a Certo Six.
The SI with the coated Opton Tessar is a favorite. Very rugged, easy to use, nice to look at, good frame spacing (11 frames not 12. ) use it with a lens hood, at f8 and you will be impressed, wide open, still really good. I see many on the big auction site right now. Indeed this may be all you need.
This is actually my camera of choice for a 6 x 6 folder, so I am in agreement with Sleepyhead and Richard Black.
However, your criteria..."Sharpest lens, edge to edge wide open" this is easily the Certo Six, with it's coated 80mm 2.8 Zeiss Tessar. Sharp enough to scratch your eyeballs at f2.8. It actually matches my Hassleblad 501CM with its 80mm Zeiss Planar. Perhaps the Certo's contrast may be a tad better.
If this is what you want, sharp wide open, contact Jurgen Kreckel at "Certo Six" (guess what?) and be prepared to wait, and pay, but what a camera.
[SIZE=-1]www.certo6.com/cam/certo6.html[/SIZE]
Brince
Member
Literiter, so would you say any camera regardless of brand and as long as it had the Zeiss Tessar 2.8/80 mm lens should meet my criteria? Note the image posted by Yaron was thru a Tessar 2.8/80mm lens.
literiter
Well-known
That picture by Yaron is marvelous, and certainly meets my criteria for a photo any time any place. The sharpness and magic control of the depth of field is what I like so much about the 6 x 6 format. Yaron knows what he is doing, with his camera and it speaks highly as well about the capability of the Super Ikonta B.
The Ikonta Bs have front cell focusing, which means that just the front element of the lens moves in relation to a rear element. There may be a compromise in the sharpness of the lens at anything closer to infinity. This is a peculiarity with this type of lens and is designed to accomodate the type of focusing mechanism these cameras use. So, theoretically an image should be less sharp with the Tessar used in the Ikonta B.
The Tessar used in the Certo Six is fixed and the whole lens moves in relation to the film. Certo Six's Tessar is thererfore a simpler lens and is considered to be a sharper lens. As well the Certo Six automatically compensates for parallax as well where the Ikonta does not.
Having said all this I still prefer using the Ikontas for some reason. The Certo Six is really hard to find, seems a little fragile, and may need work. The crusty old Ikontas on the other hand, seem easy to find, aren't fragile are likely won't need much work to get them going.
A interesting fellow, "P C Headland" (A RFF member), has done architectural work with his Certo Six. His photos are elsewhere on this site. Take a look at his stuff.
The Ikonta Bs have front cell focusing, which means that just the front element of the lens moves in relation to a rear element. There may be a compromise in the sharpness of the lens at anything closer to infinity. This is a peculiarity with this type of lens and is designed to accomodate the type of focusing mechanism these cameras use. So, theoretically an image should be less sharp with the Tessar used in the Ikonta B.
The Tessar used in the Certo Six is fixed and the whole lens moves in relation to the film. Certo Six's Tessar is thererfore a simpler lens and is considered to be a sharper lens. As well the Certo Six automatically compensates for parallax as well where the Ikonta does not.
Having said all this I still prefer using the Ikontas for some reason. The Certo Six is really hard to find, seems a little fragile, and may need work. The crusty old Ikontas on the other hand, seem easy to find, aren't fragile are likely won't need much work to get them going.
A interesting fellow, "P C Headland" (A RFF member), has done architectural work with his Certo Six. His photos are elsewhere on this site. Take a look at his stuff.
P C Headland
Well-known
Hi
I'd agree that the Certo Six would better meet your edge-to-edge sharpness wide open criteria.
Another good option would be the Iskra / Agfa Super Isolette or one of the Mamiya Six folders. The first two have unit focusing lenses, whilst the Mamiya move the whole film plane.
The shots to which literiter refers can be found here. You can also check out the Iskra results, although none of those in that gallery are shot wide open - you'll just have to take our words for it that they are good wide open
I'd agree that the Certo Six would better meet your edge-to-edge sharpness wide open criteria.
Another good option would be the Iskra / Agfa Super Isolette or one of the Mamiya Six folders. The first two have unit focusing lenses, whilst the Mamiya move the whole film plane.
The shots to which literiter refers can be found here. You can also check out the Iskra results, although none of those in that gallery are shot wide open - you'll just have to take our words for it that they are good wide open
Krosya
Konicaze
There are many good and sharp lenses. However, it comes down to the condition that lens in question is and how well adjusted Folder camera is. Struts, back pressure plate for film flatness, rangefinder clibration, etc. Even very best lens will not give you good results if those other things are out of adjustment.
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Brince said:
Very sharp lenses can be found on several cameras, by several manufacturers. The Schneider Kreuzenachs are good, as are Solinars, Soligors, and the Rodenstocks and Tessars. Even Kodak made one good lens, the Ektar (Kodak made several lenses labelled Ektar though, and you'll probably only find one of the good ones in a Medallist or a Speed Graphic).
This is all very old technology, and there hasn't been much improvement, (beyond multicoating them) in the last 50 years.
The only really significant improvements over the last 50 years or so have been the introduction of baked lens coatings in the 70s (fused the coating to the glass and made multicoating possible), and in the areas of zoom lenses and automatic functions. With the exception of multicoating, and some of the lens barrel materials, lenses are basically pretty much made the same today as they were back then. There just hasn't been much room for improvement, because they have been around long enough that any little tweaks that could be done to improve them were thought of and done years ago.
In fact there are a few modern lenses out there that are not as good as their older ancestors.
Last edited:
joe326cn
Newbie
Ensign Selfix 820 Special Also Should Be A Good Choice.
With Ross.london Lens.....
With Ross.london Lens.....
kuzano
Veteran
There seems to be a message here.....
There seems to be a message here.....
A continuing theme here seems to be to stay clear of lenses that use front cell focusing, and tend toward cameras with either film plane movement focus (Mamiya) or front standard focusing of the whole lens. If I had to make this choice, I'd probably opt for the Mamiya, because the front standard on a good Mamiya is ROCK SOLID. On the front standard focusing, you will want to assure yourself that the front standard on the particular camera you buy has no play as a result of the moving mechanism, and is absolutely parallel to the film plane. I would also tend to think that the CERTO6 would be a solid build on the focus mechanism.
All of the cameras mentioned as good seem to have unit focus, instead of front cell focus. It that connection is correct, it absolutely rules out the majority of cameras in the medium format folder field.
Another camera that is not mentioned, but I would certainly look at would be the Bessa II with the 5 element Heliar lens. It is unit focus. However, I would have to hold and check out the camera, or buy it on "subject to approval". I would definitely want to check the integrity of the front standards and the parallel to film plane. I am not suggesting that the Bessa is lesser than the others, but, in fact that you should be wary on any camera with front moving standards. Voigtlander was a high quality builder, but all of those cameras you are looking at have been in the hands of many people for over 50 years.
There seems to be a message here.....
A continuing theme here seems to be to stay clear of lenses that use front cell focusing, and tend toward cameras with either film plane movement focus (Mamiya) or front standard focusing of the whole lens. If I had to make this choice, I'd probably opt for the Mamiya, because the front standard on a good Mamiya is ROCK SOLID. On the front standard focusing, you will want to assure yourself that the front standard on the particular camera you buy has no play as a result of the moving mechanism, and is absolutely parallel to the film plane. I would also tend to think that the CERTO6 would be a solid build on the focus mechanism.
All of the cameras mentioned as good seem to have unit focus, instead of front cell focus. It that connection is correct, it absolutely rules out the majority of cameras in the medium format folder field.
Another camera that is not mentioned, but I would certainly look at would be the Bessa II with the 5 element Heliar lens. It is unit focus. However, I would have to hold and check out the camera, or buy it on "subject to approval". I would definitely want to check the integrity of the front standards and the parallel to film plane. I am not suggesting that the Bessa is lesser than the others, but, in fact that you should be wary on any camera with front moving standards. Voigtlander was a high quality builder, but all of those cameras you are looking at have been in the hands of many people for over 50 years.
athos
Still like film
Hello...
I posted some MF folder lens comparisons on photonet. Among them are a Solinar, Certo6 and several CZ lenses. There is also one from Fuji, either a 670 III or 690 III for comparison. Most were taken at F:8 to F:16 which does not show how well they do at wide open. The worst of the bunch was a true Tessar. It was on a camera where the whole lens moved, not just the front element which should have given it some positive edge.
Each posting is a very small cut of the much larger frame/scan. They are posted pixel per pixel at 2900PPI and photos were taken at 185 meters from the bus. The size difference is due to lenses being from about 75mm to 105mm.
http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=730969
Tom
I posted some MF folder lens comparisons on photonet. Among them are a Solinar, Certo6 and several CZ lenses. There is also one from Fuji, either a 670 III or 690 III for comparison. Most were taken at F:8 to F:16 which does not show how well they do at wide open. The worst of the bunch was a true Tessar. It was on a camera where the whole lens moved, not just the front element which should have given it some positive edge.
Each posting is a very small cut of the much larger frame/scan. They are posted pixel per pixel at 2900PPI and photos were taken at 185 meters from the bus. The size difference is due to lenses being from about 75mm to 105mm.
http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=730969
Tom
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Excuse me all... shouldn't this be the modern Fuji folder?
athos
Still like film
Hello...
I posted 12 lens comparisons on photonet. Among them are a Solinar, Certo6 and several CZ lenses. There is also one from Fuji GW670 III for comparison. Most were taken at F:8 to F:16 which does not show how well they do at wide open. The worst of the bunch was a true CZ Tessar. It was on a camera where the whole lens moved, not just the front element which should have given it some positive edge.
Each posting is a very small cut of the much larger frame. They are posted pixel per pixel at 2900PPI and were taken at 185 meters from the bus. The size difference is due to lenses being from 75mm to 105mm. I've shot the same scene with about 35 cameras. Not all results are posted on photonet. One of the better results was from a 135mm CZ Tessar on a 4x5 with a roll film back.
There are 12 photos in the posted group. Stop the cursor over a photo and the shot name will appear. Tap on a photo and it will go full size. Tap on the "Detail" box for camera/lens info.
I did not find the Bessa II with the 4 element Color Skoper, one of the better results. The lens coating sure looked good. I was surprised and ran another roll of film through the Bessa. I got the same results. The Bessa II film looked like there was camera movement but there was not. It was the lens. All shots for all cameras were on a tight and very heavy tripod. There was no wind and I used a remote release. Look how much better the three element Cassar is on a 6x9.
http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=730969
Tom
I posted 12 lens comparisons on photonet. Among them are a Solinar, Certo6 and several CZ lenses. There is also one from Fuji GW670 III for comparison. Most were taken at F:8 to F:16 which does not show how well they do at wide open. The worst of the bunch was a true CZ Tessar. It was on a camera where the whole lens moved, not just the front element which should have given it some positive edge.
Each posting is a very small cut of the much larger frame. They are posted pixel per pixel at 2900PPI and were taken at 185 meters from the bus. The size difference is due to lenses being from 75mm to 105mm. I've shot the same scene with about 35 cameras. Not all results are posted on photonet. One of the better results was from a 135mm CZ Tessar on a 4x5 with a roll film back.
There are 12 photos in the posted group. Stop the cursor over a photo and the shot name will appear. Tap on a photo and it will go full size. Tap on the "Detail" box for camera/lens info.
I did not find the Bessa II with the 4 element Color Skoper, one of the better results. The lens coating sure looked good. I was surprised and ran another roll of film through the Bessa. I got the same results. The Bessa II film looked like there was camera movement but there was not. It was the lens. All shots for all cameras were on a tight and very heavy tripod. There was no wind and I used a remote release. Look how much better the three element Cassar is on a 6x9.
http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=730969
Tom
fidget
Lemon magnet
Thanks for posting the link to these Athos. Practical testing and comparison of lenses can be very revealing and sometimes confusing when a widely aclaimed lens shows poor results. I guess that it can idicate that there may be a variation between samples, possibly one which is caused by poor adjustment in the past?
The image from the three element lens is good and shows that these should not be written off as being low spec. I look forward to trying more comparison shots in my small collection of folders and will be sure to include the triplets too.
Dave
The image from the three element lens is good and shows that these should not be written off as being low spec. I look forward to trying more comparison shots in my small collection of folders and will be sure to include the triplets too.
Dave
Ernst Dinkla
Well-known
Practice
Practice
Tom,
I'm surprised about the Color Skopar. The one I have on the Bessa with the front lens focusing is quite good. The Iskra with the Industar lens much better though. The Monitor with the Anastigmat Special not a bad performer either, but I doubt one will find a good Tessar type on a folder anywhere that gives satisfying results wide open. Not only because that lens design isn't suited for wide open takes but all the flaws of folders plus MF film flatness are pronounced with wide open DOF.
http://www.pigment-print.com/tijdelijk/Iskra-and-Monitor2.jpg
Ernst Dinkla
Practice
athos said:
Tom,
I'm surprised about the Color Skopar. The one I have on the Bessa with the front lens focusing is quite good. The Iskra with the Industar lens much better though. The Monitor with the Anastigmat Special not a bad performer either, but I doubt one will find a good Tessar type on a folder anywhere that gives satisfying results wide open. Not only because that lens design isn't suited for wide open takes but all the flaws of folders plus MF film flatness are pronounced with wide open DOF.
http://www.pigment-print.com/tijdelijk/Iskra-and-Monitor2.jpg
Ernst Dinkla
trittium
Well-known
I have a Certo Dolly Super sport RF. It is very nice, but usually is very expensive. I was lucky to find a cheep on at a camera show. Another option is the mamiya 6 folder. It has a very sharp 75mm Zuiho (olympus) lens.
I would recommend the Mamiya Six. It has better features and a better vf than the Certo Dolly super sport. Here are some shots with the mamiya (I cannot remmember aperture sorry)
cropped
cropped
uncropped
I would recommend the Mamiya Six. It has better features and a better vf than the Certo Dolly super sport. Here are some shots with the mamiya (I cannot remmember aperture sorry)
cropped
cropped
uncropped
whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
Very nice photos on your site. I have a number of 6x6 cameras and just love them.