6x9 format folders

[SCOTFORTHLAD]

I have a couple of 6x6 folders which I use and enjoy form time to time.I am thinking of buying a 6x9 folder to try the different format,and was wondering if the 105mm lens and the wider negatives imply that there is in fact a wide angle element to the format.Any comments would be welcomed.
Cheers from Wales🙂
Brian.

 

[lynnb]

See here - according to this chart 105mm on 6x9 is equivalent to a 45mm lens field of view for 35mm film.

Edit: incidentally Brian, I use a Bessa II which I can recommend, although as you're probably aware there's a pretty good choice of quality 6x9 folders, esp. the Zeiss offerings. I've recently posted a few Bessa II photos in the RFF Gallery here.

 

[02Pilot]

Perfect normal focal length is the diagonal measurement of the negative. With 35mm film, this is 43mm; with 6x6, it's 85mm; and with 6x9, it's 108mm. So, 105mm is pretty close to perfect normal for 6x9.

 

[citizen99]

Considering the case of 'landscape' orientation of the 6x9 (typically f=105mm), then the *vertical* FOV on the negative will be less that that of a 6x6 folder (typical focal lengths being in the range 75-to-85 mm). With the 6x9 you're not taking quite such full advantage of the angle of coverage of the lens. Mind you, I often crop away surplus sky or foreground when using 6x6, although it can be useful to get a tall building in, for example.

 

[oftheherd]

I know that a 105mm lens normally implies a 6x9 format camera, just like a 135mm normally indicates a 9x12 format camera. I have a Zeiss Ikon 6x0 folder without RF. It takes beautiful photos. The 6x9 format is a nice pleasant surprise as well. I like it but still like 6x6 and 6x7 depending.

 

[SCOTFORTHLAD]

Many thanks everyone,I have the answer I was hoping for.Any thoughts on the Schneider Radionar 105mm F2.9,I know it is a triplet,but my results with other triplets like the Apotar and the Novar have always been grand.
Cheers,
Brian.

 

[Nokton48]

Just a thought but if you like Leica-like build quality, consider the Plaubel Makina. Twenty years ago these cameras were selling like $1500 give-or-take. I picked each of these up for a bit over $300 each. And an absolute joy to handle and use.

2016-07-15 13.41.57 by Nokton48, on Flickr

 

[Roger Hicks]

I have a couple of 6x6 folders which I use and enjoy form time to time.I am thinking of buying a 6x9 folder to try the different format,and was wondering if the 105mm lens and the wider negatives imply that there is in fact a wide angle element to the format.Any comments would be welcomed.
Cheers from Wales🙂
Brian.

Dear Brian,

There's quite a long piece on my newer site about this: http://rogerandfrances.eu/photography/focal-length-equivalents

As usual, there are at least two answers to your question: the simple, basic one about negative diagonals, and a rather more complex one that takes account of image shape and degrees of enlargement.

There's also one picture there taken with a Plaubel Makina and I have to say that my experience has not been as positive as that of Nokton48. I really don't like the roll-film backs; I find the cameras slow and frustrating to use; and to quote the caption to the picture,

Bristol, c. 1978. It wasn't just film grain and sharpness that limited early enlargements. This was taken with a pre-WW2 Plaubel Makina with a 6x9cm back and a 100/2.9 Plaubel Anticomar. I have heard of sharp Antiocomars but I have never encountered one. Enlargements are OK at 3x (168x240mm, rather bigger than whole-plate, which is six and a half by eight and a half inches, 168x216mm) but after that the quality declines noticeably. In the 1930s, remember, whole plate was the normal size to submit for newspaper reproduction.

The f/4.2 is by all accounts a very much better lens, but I've never owned one (I've had a couple of Plaubels) or even tried one (I've borrowed another).

Cheers,

R.

 

[btgc]

This thread makes me wanting to put hands on Adox Sport - 6x9 folder with 6x6 insert, sitting somewhere on "To do" shelf.

 

[SCOTFORTHLAD]

Many thanks again everyone.
Roger-- thankyou for an excellent read and great info.Cheers

Brian/
PS when I get the 6x9 I will come back and let you all know🙂

 

[Abbazz]

If you can find one, I suggest you get a Telka III camera.

The Telka is a very nice 6x9 folder that was build in the 1950s by French manufacturer Demaria-Lapierre. It uses 120 rollfilm, has a big and bright viewfinder with coupled rangefinder and a Prontor shutter with flash sync. But its nicest feature is the excellent Sagittar F/3.5 4 element lens, which is has a 95mm focal length, somewhat shorter than the usual 105mm lenses found on 6x9 folders, making it a very versatile camera. Last but not least, it's a rather stylish camera:

Credit: Süleymandemir on Camerapedia

Here are some links to pages about this unusual camera:

http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/DeMaria-Lapierre_Telka_III

http://arukucamera.net/Telka.html

http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/page_standard_eng.php?id_appareil=10794

http://herlent.daniel.free.fr/reparation/telka_iii/index.html

Cheers!

Abbazz

 

[flavio81]

I have a couple of 6x6 folders which I use and enjoy form time to time.I am thinking of buying a 6x9 folder to try the different format,and was wondering if the 105mm lens and the wider negatives imply that there is in fact a wide angle element to the format.Any comments would be welcomed.
Cheers from Wales🙂
Brian.

I'd advice against it.

I suffered a lot looking for a good folder.

I had a Zeiss Nettar 6x6 - it gave acceptable pictures but corners were not so good, so they did not justify spending more money on film (versus 35mm).

Then i got the Ensign Selfix 620 with the Ross Xpres lens, supposedly one of the best folders. The Xpres never gave me a flat image unless at f11 or f16; either the center was extremely sharp and the edges and corners unsharp, or the corners were acceptable and the center not acceptable...

Mind you, all these cameras I serviced and calibrated for infinity focus!!

Film flatness problems are always mentioned with 6x9 folders and it's possible that this was happening on the Selfix.

Moving to the Agfa Record III, mine had a problem where the "kick" of the Synchro-Compur shutter moved the focus ring, blurring the images. This because the focus ring requires a strong grease and mine had a light grease. Holding the focus ring still the problem was gone, the lens was sharp but not so sharp as to justify using the 6x9 format with only 8 exposures per roll.

(Note: My reference is the images produced by my Mamiya RB67, which at 6x7 can give an image quality that resembles large format)

Then I found a Voigtlander Bessa II with the Skopar lens but on careful inspection, the front lens standard was flimsy, which I find unacceptable. Forums indicate that this is a common problem, AND that while the lens is great, the results on film are not great due to film flatness design issues.

Another serious problem with 6x9 is that the depth of field is way too narrow for scale focusing, so you are stuck with folders that have rangefinders, or with having to stop down to f16 or even more.

So i've given up on 6x9 folders.

On the other hand, i have a 6x4.5 folder, the "Zenobia", this one gives perfect results sharp corner-to-corner, and of course has more DOF due to the smaller format. I've kept the Zenobia, it is a great little camera.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

My advise is take it easy with 6x9. Here is explanation why.
This format came from bigger formats, which were meant for contact printing and primitive, not big enlargements. While 6x6 is in opposite oriented for enlargements. Once you realize this the Agfa Billy Record with simple triplet lens is fantastic camera, especially in art deco style. 🙂
Cheers from Ontario!

 

[Pioneer]

flavio81 has some good points about the difficulty in finding a good 6x9 folding camera. I think that a good indication of the potential problems in 6x9 can be found in the fact that by the 1950s about the only folders that could be found new were 6x6 or 6x4.5. After 60 years or much more it can be a very difficult search to find a decent 6x9 camera, but not necessarily impossible.

To start, I have a wonderful Voigtlander Bessa 1 folder equipped with a very clean Color Skopar lens. It does not have a rangefinder so, as flavio81 has already said, it is difficult to focus these cameras due to their narrow depth of field. But, if you know the distance to your subject this wonderful triplet will provide magnificent portraits all day long. Though the lens is not completely sharp in the corners it really doesn't matter.

I also own a couple more that are equally nice and quite competent in their own way.

However, as flavio81 has already mentioned, if you can "live" with a smaller format on 120 roll film then there are some magnificent cameras. My Agfa Super Isolette with the 75mm f3.5 Solinar lens is a wonderful performer. I will happily compare it to 6x9 folders, with the possible exception of my Voigtlander Color Heliar (which I paid too much money for 🙂.)

 

[02Pilot]

I've got three 6x9 cameras: a Super Ikonta A, a Voigtländer Bessa II, and a Brownie Six-20 that I converted to pinhole. The last of these is maybe the best application of 6x9 these days - the large negative really works well with a pinhole, and the camera has a curved film plane, making for nice flat fields.

I've gone over the two folders carefully, squaring the standards to the pressure plate, collimating the lenses, adjusting the rangefinders, etc., so they're about as good as they can be. My initial photos were fine but not spectacular, but after some experimentation I found that both cameras, and especially the Zeiss, do really well at very small apertures. This, of course, requires a tripod - not something I usually use - but the results really show what the cameras are capable of.

Shooting hand-held I'm more inclined to 6x6 or smaller, but in the right circumstances, 6x9 can really shine.

 

[Nokton48]

Plaubel Makina III Efke 100 by Nokton48, on Flickr

I like this one; Plaubel Makina III 100mm F2.9 Anticomar wide-open, Efke 6x9cm PL100 sheet film, Microdol-X replenished

Makina Innis Woods Foma by Nokton48, on Flickr

Plaubel Makina III 100mm F2.9 Anticomar wide-open, Foma 200 6x9 roll film, Microdol-X replenished

Makina3 #2 by Nokton48, on Flickr

Plaubel Makina III, 100mm F2.9 Anticomar wide-open, Foma 200 6x9 roll film, Microdol-X replenished

 

[Ernst Dinkla]

I have a couple of 6x6 folders which I use and enjoy form time to time.I am thinking of buying a 6x9 folder to try the different format,and was wondering if the 105mm lens and the wider negatives imply that there is in fact a wide angle element to the format.Any comments would be welcomed.
Cheers from Wales🙂
Brian.

The Voightländer Bessa I that I have has a 105mm Color Skopar and the frame size is 88x56/57.4mm, diagonal 104mm so in 35mm terms the lens is about 43/44mm. The aspect ratio is 1.57 so slightly more pano than the 24x36 35mm frame size. It may be an exception, 6x9 camera frames usually are more like 84x56mm.
The Agfa Record II has a window of 85x56mm, quite close to the 1.5 aspect ratio. With the 105mm lens it should be closer to a normal 50mm lens. With the Kodak Anastigmat Special 101mm f/4.5 that is on it now the lens is an equivalent of a 43mm one.

Very nice lens and that 4.5 aperture makes focal scale estimations less flawed.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-140362.html

The Iskra 6x6 has a diagonal of near 78mm, the 75mm lens could be considered the equivalent of 41.34mm lens on 35mm film. Square formats are more forgiving than rectangle formats (of equal area) if uniform sharpness on the frame is the goal.

The cameras are now obsolete, I should put them on ebay.

There has been a range of older folders, larger film format, that have more pano like frame sizes.

Ernst Dinkla

 

[Ernst Dinkla]

Perfect normal focal length is the diagonal measurement of the negative. With 35mm film, this is 43mm; with 6x6, it's 85mm; and with 6x9, it's 108mm. So, 105mm is pretty close to perfect normal for 6x9.

Frame size of 6x6 is 56x56mm at most, in best case that delivers an 80mm diagonal.

Ernst Dinkla