Redseele
Established
I don't know if this is the right place to ask, but I will anyway... hopefully someone will help me.
Right now I have a Yashica Mat TLR. It is in perfect shape, the light meter works (!!!) and it's quite beautiful. That being said, whilst I love the 120 format and how I am slowed down by the TLR, I think there's something I don't like about this type of camera. I cannot quite put my finger on it to be sincere...
That being said, I still want to be able to shoot 120 (or 220), be it in 6x6 or larger format (6x7, 6x9...). So I've been researching a bit and found out that I could give a Bronica SQ a go or other 120 SLR. Obviously, I would love to have a Hasselblad but right now I'm not willing to spend that much. My budget is about $250. However, I only recently started looking into the possibility of a folder 120 camera. These cameras look seriously cool and seem to be closer to the experience i have from shooting my M3 (handheld light meter required even), but I really wonder how come there's nowhere near as many of them being popular in the last 30 years.
So, can anyone please help understand what are the pros and cons of 120 SLRs vs Folders? Do you think that the experience of shooting one of these cameras would be quite different from shooting the Yashica Mat TLR I already have (and that I would probably have to sell to get another 120 camera)?
Thank you.
Right now I have a Yashica Mat TLR. It is in perfect shape, the light meter works (!!!) and it's quite beautiful. That being said, whilst I love the 120 format and how I am slowed down by the TLR, I think there's something I don't like about this type of camera. I cannot quite put my finger on it to be sincere...
That being said, I still want to be able to shoot 120 (or 220), be it in 6x6 or larger format (6x7, 6x9...). So I've been researching a bit and found out that I could give a Bronica SQ a go or other 120 SLR. Obviously, I would love to have a Hasselblad but right now I'm not willing to spend that much. My budget is about $250. However, I only recently started looking into the possibility of a folder 120 camera. These cameras look seriously cool and seem to be closer to the experience i have from shooting my M3 (handheld light meter required even), but I really wonder how come there's nowhere near as many of them being popular in the last 30 years.
So, can anyone please help understand what are the pros and cons of 120 SLRs vs Folders? Do you think that the experience of shooting one of these cameras would be quite different from shooting the Yashica Mat TLR I already have (and that I would probably have to sell to get another 120 camera)?
Thank you.
Noll
Well-known
well I have 2 folders (both w/o rangefinder) and a TLR and find that the folders mostly get used for pictures of things, landscapes, and posed photos while the TLR gets used a lot more on people and lightly moving objects.
I have used the folder for candids and it worked out OK just don't expect to nail the focus.
I have used the folder for candids and it worked out OK just don't expect to nail the focus.
Redseele
Established
If they don't have rangefinders how do you calculate the focusing distance???
Swift1
Veteran
I'm no expert, and can't properly answer your question but, in your price range, for a folder, your looking at uncoupled rangefinder at best and mostly scale focus cameras, unless you go Russian.
Most of the coupled rangefinder models sell in the $400 range.
Also to consider, most folders date from the 50s or earlier so they are quite a bit older than say an SQ-A.
Folders can be superb though, and I think that the answer may lie in the type of photography you want to do.
Most of the coupled rangefinder models sell in the $400 range.
Also to consider, most folders date from the 50s or earlier so they are quite a bit older than say an SQ-A.
Folders can be superb though, and I think that the answer may lie in the type of photography you want to do.
Scrambler
Well-known
I think you could safely say that rangefinders have not been particularly popular in the last 30 years, at least compared to SLRs. This is true or medium format just as it is of 35mm.
Is the experience different - sure. If you want the same experience, stick with what you have
A waist-level finder on an SLR body would be fairly similar, but an eye-level finder would be different, and an RF different to either.
I have an Ensign Auto-range 2-20 rangefinder 6x6/ 645 convertible. It's fairly similar to a 35mm RF manual cam except that the ergonomics are mirrored (viewfinder on the right, shutter release and film wind on the left). The lens is not interchangable (though I have exchanged mine for a faster 75mm: f2.9 vs 4.5). The Auto-range has a reversible disc on the top that shows where you are at with the advance but it is not automatic: you have to decide yourself when to stop advancing. The viewfinder is more FSU than Leica, with a yellowish cast and lacking clarity.
More modern RF medium format cams will have better ergonomics and viewfinders. Your price point, though, will tend to be older cameras.
Is the experience different - sure. If you want the same experience, stick with what you have
A waist-level finder on an SLR body would be fairly similar, but an eye-level finder would be different, and an RF different to either.
I have an Ensign Auto-range 2-20 rangefinder 6x6/ 645 convertible. It's fairly similar to a 35mm RF manual cam except that the ergonomics are mirrored (viewfinder on the right, shutter release and film wind on the left). The lens is not interchangable (though I have exchanged mine for a faster 75mm: f2.9 vs 4.5). The Auto-range has a reversible disc on the top that shows where you are at with the advance but it is not automatic: you have to decide yourself when to stop advancing. The viewfinder is more FSU than Leica, with a yellowish cast and lacking clarity.
More modern RF medium format cams will have better ergonomics and viewfinders. Your price point, though, will tend to be older cameras.
Scrambler
Well-known
Re price: you would get an Ensign Auto-range 2-20 for the price. *
Re "How do you focus" - you either guess or use a tape measure! Under"guess" comes some reasonably sophisticated techniques, though ;-)
* EDIT: Just checked ebay. @*&%$#!!! I paid about $50 each for 3 over the years, one of which never made it to me and another that I gave away. $300 plus seem OTT
Re "How do you focus" - you either guess or use a tape measure! Under"guess" comes some reasonably sophisticated techniques, though ;-)
* EDIT: Just checked ebay. @*&%$#!!! I paid about $50 each for 3 over the years, one of which never made it to me and another that I gave away. $300 plus seem OTT
farlymac
PF McFarland
For focusing, you can always get an auxiliary rangefinder, and attach it to the camera if it has an accessory shoe (or just keep it in your pocket if not). But there are some folders out there with un-coupled rangefinders, such as the Zeiss Ikonta 524/16, that could fall within your budget. You determine the focus distance through the rangefinder, then transfer that reading to the lens.
If you're willing to hunt around a bit, sometimes you can find decent old folders at flea markets/boot sales, junktique stores, and estate sales. Best thing about folders is the wide array of formats they come in, everything from 6x4.5, to 6x17. Some folders come with masks built in to convert the format size (Agfa Jsorette, 6x4.5 to 6x6), and others you can get masks for, though unless they come with the camera, are hard to find.
PF
If you're willing to hunt around a bit, sometimes you can find decent old folders at flea markets/boot sales, junktique stores, and estate sales. Best thing about folders is the wide array of formats they come in, everything from 6x4.5, to 6x17. Some folders come with masks built in to convert the format size (Agfa Jsorette, 6x4.5 to 6x6), and others you can get masks for, though unless they come with the camera, are hard to find.
PF
jstout
Newbie
These are some very good questions. I have mulled over many of these same thoughts myself many times, and there are so many different things to consider, it's hard to simplify the choices.
One issue is waist level finder versus eye level. For scenery it doesn't really matter, but for people it depends on the situation, as to which would be better. Are they close, far, standing in front of you or sitting down, it can make a difference.
The viewfinder is different on old folders. Simple, and in some ways not so good. But, on the other hand, a waist level finder can be hard to use outside in the sun.
The lens on a folder doesn't usually get much better than a four-element tessar type. Even three elements can be good, though. Anyway, tessars have some great qualities, and are good for portraits. I'm not making this up. These are facts. Newer lenses that might be found on an SLR might have some better qualities, but they won't necessarily make better pictures. That's also a fact.
The search for the perfect SLR can be a long road. So many choices. So many great cameras to choose from.
One very important thing is to find one in good working condition. Best of luck in your search.
Jeff
One issue is waist level finder versus eye level. For scenery it doesn't really matter, but for people it depends on the situation, as to which would be better. Are they close, far, standing in front of you or sitting down, it can make a difference.
The viewfinder is different on old folders. Simple, and in some ways not so good. But, on the other hand, a waist level finder can be hard to use outside in the sun.
The lens on a folder doesn't usually get much better than a four-element tessar type. Even three elements can be good, though. Anyway, tessars have some great qualities, and are good for portraits. I'm not making this up. These are facts. Newer lenses that might be found on an SLR might have some better qualities, but they won't necessarily make better pictures. That's also a fact.
The search for the perfect SLR can be a long road. So many choices. So many great cameras to choose from.
One very important thing is to find one in good working condition. Best of luck in your search.
Jeff
ZeissFan
Veteran
I own and have used a lot of 120 folding cameras.
They aren't for everyone. For me, I like how they are compact and how they handle - generally.
Among those that I own, the downsides are that they have fixed lenses, and most of mine are front-cell focusing, which in theory is inferior to unit-cell focusing. In practice, I don't have an issue with front-cell focusing.
My favorites are Agfa Isolette III, Super Isolette, Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 532/16, Super Ikonta III, Mess Ikonta and any scale-focus Ikonta.
Also, just restored a Certo 6. I've also used a Kodak Duo 620 (6x6), which is a bit simpler and still a nice camera.
The 6x6 models tend to be easier to use, because you usually can handle them similarly to an SLR - cradle the camera in the palm of your left hand while releasing the shutter with the index finger on your right hand
They aren't for everyone. For me, I like how they are compact and how they handle - generally.
Among those that I own, the downsides are that they have fixed lenses, and most of mine are front-cell focusing, which in theory is inferior to unit-cell focusing. In practice, I don't have an issue with front-cell focusing.
My favorites are Agfa Isolette III, Super Isolette, Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 532/16, Super Ikonta III, Mess Ikonta and any scale-focus Ikonta.
Also, just restored a Certo 6. I've also used a Kodak Duo 620 (6x6), which is a bit simpler and still a nice camera.
The 6x6 models tend to be easier to use, because you usually can handle them similarly to an SLR - cradle the camera in the palm of your left hand while releasing the shutter with the index finger on your right hand
Dan Daniel
Well-known
If you can handle the smaller negative, a Bronica ETR series camera with a prism finder and the winder handle is a fast, reasonably light outfit.
I don't know how the SQ series handles in a similar configuration.
I've used a few folders and have nothing to add from what others have said.
I don't know how the SQ series handles in a similar configuration.
I've used a few folders and have nothing to add from what others have said.
Steve M.
Veteran
Folders are great. Small and light. But you're limited to infinity shots and snapshots because you can't focus close up. I had a 'blad and did not like it. Not a good camera to carry around. Speaking of which, are you aware of how big and heavy a Bronica is? If you don't like TLR's then that is that, but I would give a Rolleicord a chance, especially the older versions w/ Triotar lenses. They are small and light, which your Yashicamat is not, and the Triotar, if it's clean, is a wonderful lens. Smooth bokeh and sharp as a tack in the center. I had a Rolleiflex E w/ a Planar lens and while the Planar was sharper in the corners the Triotar blew it away in the center. Perfect for portraits, which is something a TLR excels at.
There's always a Voigtlander Brillant w/ a Heliar lens. You might find one in your budget. The Rolleicord will set you back well under $100. First shot is w/ a Brillant, second shot w/ a Triotar lensed Rolleicord. Figure on replacing the mirror and putting in a brighter focus screen on the Rolleicord, which doesn't cost much.
There's always a Voigtlander Brillant w/ a Heliar lens. You might find one in your budget. The Rolleicord will set you back well under $100. First shot is w/ a Brillant, second shot w/ a Triotar lensed Rolleicord. Figure on replacing the mirror and putting in a brighter focus screen on the Rolleicord, which doesn't cost much.
Attachments
Fixcinater
Never enough smoky peat
I have had a couple Yashicas (D and 'Mat EM), and my girlfriend has a Rolleicord which I've used for a few rolls.
I've also had a couple folders (cheapo 6x9s with minimal settings, and most recently, a 645 Zeiss, which I put an external RF on. It was tiny and lightweight, and had a nice Tessar, with the best shutter. Great example of a great camera, but it just didn't work for me.
It was fiddly in an odd way, and I just didn't get on with it similar to how you describe not getting on with the Yashica. I've never really warmed up to folders...I hold them and I don't get the sense that it is a tool to go make images with, whereas RFs and certain SLRs (Pentax 6x7 is about the best so far) make me think about being out in the field, using it.
I've also had a couple folders (cheapo 6x9s with minimal settings, and most recently, a 645 Zeiss, which I put an external RF on. It was tiny and lightweight, and had a nice Tessar, with the best shutter. Great example of a great camera, but it just didn't work for me.
It was fiddly in an odd way, and I just didn't get on with it similar to how you describe not getting on with the Yashica. I've never really warmed up to folders...I hold them and I don't get the sense that it is a tool to go make images with, whereas RFs and certain SLRs (Pentax 6x7 is about the best so far) make me think about being out in the field, using it.
thegman
Veteran
For around a $250 budget, I'd be looking at Zeiss Super Ikonta, that sort of thing.
aizan
Veteran
for $250, you could get a lomo belair "city slicker."
great camera if you're looking for kicks. if you're looking for a workhorse, that's a different discussion.
great camera if you're looking for kicks. if you're looking for a workhorse, that's a different discussion.
Scrambler
Well-known
I have been known to use a 35mm RF camera as a rangefinder for a scale-focus camera, Transfer the focal distance from one lens to the other.
The Isolette cameras by Agfa are quite variable. If you are searching for one, the correct spelling is Isolette but due to the semi-cursive first letter many people see it as a "J."
My sharpest folder is a scale-focus Zeiss Nettar 515. Only a triplet, and uncoated, but boy does that lens sing. It is so pretty it is hard to believe it's nearly 80 years old. For one thing there is very little light fall-off into the corners. Scale focus, though there is a related Super Ikonta with coupled rangefinder.
My Agfa Isolette was tinny and fragile in comparison. And it didn't sing
The 645 format folders are smaller than a 35mm camera: very convenient to carry.
Ernst Dinkla
Well-known
What is your workflow after the film is developed, I mean up to the print(size)?
Ernst Dinkla
ottluuk
the indecisive eternity
I've recently started dipping my toe into medium format. So far, I have a Kiev 6S SLR with some lenses and a pre-war Welta folder (mine is 6x6 with an aftermarket-coated 75/2.8 Xenar and coupled combined RF/VF - almost modern in some respects). The Kiev is bulky but relatively lightweight compared to some other MF SLR systems. The Welta slips into a coat pocket. I've also played around with Lubitels - not worth the trouble IMHO.
Personally, I can't see myself using either the little folder or the overgrown SLR as my primary camera system. They are good for occasional fun but I much prefer the no-nonsense operation and carrying ease of the Leica M. The Welta requires more attention to the camera than the scene in front of it and the Kiev requires a tripod and its own pack mule. Huge prints are not my goal at the moment so 35mm will do most of the time.
But if you are curious about a portable MF camera in a different form factor, I suggest you to try either
1) a folder - look for something that has a coupled rangefinder combined with the finder and a nice Tessar-style lens. See Zeiss Super Ikonta B and related models. A clean coated Tessar, Xenar, Color-Skopar or equivalent will be at least equal to what you have in the Yashica Mat. Ergonomics vary widely between models. There might be one that suits you well. Most are cheap and indestructible.
2) one of the Fuji 645 cameras - GS645 series are manual focus, GA645 series are AF cameras, basically giant advanced point&shoots. All are known for first rate optics. Might be hard to get for $250, though.
Personally, I can't see myself using either the little folder or the overgrown SLR as my primary camera system. They are good for occasional fun but I much prefer the no-nonsense operation and carrying ease of the Leica M. The Welta requires more attention to the camera than the scene in front of it and the Kiev requires a tripod and its own pack mule. Huge prints are not my goal at the moment so 35mm will do most of the time.
But if you are curious about a portable MF camera in a different form factor, I suggest you to try either
1) a folder - look for something that has a coupled rangefinder combined with the finder and a nice Tessar-style lens. See Zeiss Super Ikonta B and related models. A clean coated Tessar, Xenar, Color-Skopar or equivalent will be at least equal to what you have in the Yashica Mat. Ergonomics vary widely between models. There might be one that suits you well. Most are cheap and indestructible.
2) one of the Fuji 645 cameras - GS645 series are manual focus, GA645 series are AF cameras, basically giant advanced point&shoots. All are known for first rate optics. Might be hard to get for $250, though.
Drago
Established
i don't think that folder camera would be easier/ better experience. Not in the 250 price range. For that money you'd get something quite old, no rangefinder as most have said with a smallish finder. But for about 400 you'd be in the range of Bronica and Mamira RB series with one lens. Both cameras are way heavier than basic TLR, but as are most SLR MF cameras
farlymac
PF McFarland
I have been known to use a 35mm RF camera as a rangefinder for a scale-focus camera, Transfer the focal distance from one lens to the other.
The Isolette cameras by Agfa are quite variable. If you are searching for one, the correct spelling is Isolette but due to the semi-cursive first letter many people see it as a "J."
My sharpest folder is a scale-focus Zeiss Nettar 515. Only a triplet, and uncoated, but boy does that lens sing. It is so pretty it is hard to believe it's nearly 80 years old. For one thing there is very little light fall-off into the corners. Scale focus, though there is a related Super Ikonta with coupled rangefinder.
My Agfa Isolette was tinny and fragile in comparison. And it didn't sing
The 645 format folders are smaller than a 35mm camera: very convenient to carry.
But I like the way the font here uses the same "cursive I" as Agfa did. And I don't want to confuse people when they go looking for a particular model. The Jsorette was before the Isolette, and has different construction.
PF
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Same here. Yashica Mat 124G, was my first MF camera. With working light meter, as well.
Sold it after couple of months, within first four hours after posting it for sale.
Never liked focusing and distortion at corners.
Switched to folders. Much more compact, no difference with 135 film RFs in focusing.
I like small Bessa scale ones.
With external RF I could use it at f3.5-5.6 on close distances, no problem.
Sold it after couple of months, within first four hours after posting it for sale.
Never liked focusing and distortion at corners.
Switched to folders. Much more compact, no difference with 135 film RFs in focusing.
I like small Bessa scale ones.
With external RF I could use it at f3.5-5.6 on close distances, no problem.