mich8261
Well-known
well I did it again, Picked up a another camera at a stoop sale. It's a beauty and I hope you can help me identify it. It's a Zeiss-Ikon 120 folder 6 x 4.5. Lens is 7.5cm Schneider-Kreuznach Radionar f/2.9 (goes to f/22). Shutter is Compur (J. Deckel - Munchen) T, B and then 1 through 250. Shutter is released from a button on the top plate (where you would "expect" it) mechanically connected to the actual shutter.
It came with the original case. It needs cleaning and the lens might have fungus (not sure what fungus looks like) or maybe it's just dirty. The bellows look good.
Thanks in advance.
It came with the original case. It needs cleaning and the lens might have fungus (not sure what fungus looks like) or maybe it's just dirty. The bellows look good.
Thanks in advance.
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Photos. I need photos. Probably a Nettar of some kind. The model number should be embossed into the leatherette on the back of the camera. The vast majority of Nettars came with Novar lenses, that had better contrast.
Last edited:
mich8261
Well-known
mich8261
Well-known
a few more pictures
a few more pictures
a few more pics...
a few more pictures
a few more pics...
mich8261
Well-known
steamer
Well-known
Just buy an inexpensive messe Ikonta or Nettar. Also I wonder if this is a Zeiss Ikon, as it has F. Deckel on the shutter and a W on the little foot.
Solinar
Analog Preferred
Is that pre-War Franka? FW is the abbreviation for Franka Werke.
mich8261
Well-known
good point. I assumed it was a Zeiss Ikon because of the case (it says Zeiss Ikon). This is my 2nd mystery camera (the other has been identified, the Balda Baldi, interestingly also with a F. Deckel shutter).
mich8261
Well-known
looks like it's a Franka Solida.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7817210@N03/846327119/in/pool-camerapedia/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7817210@N03/846327119/in/pool-camerapedia/
Solinar
Analog Preferred
Well done. It looks like a match to me.
ZeissFan
Veteran
I also was going to question if this was a Zeiss Ikon, as I can't recall Zeiss Ikon using a Radionar on any of its cameras.
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Unless it is the wrong kind of fungus, and unless it has been there for decades, it can be easily removed with a 50/50 mix of household ammonia and hydrogen peroxide. Apply it with a cotton swab and watch the stuff melt away very quickly. Clean it up with distilled water after that and you can see if you got to it in time to prevent it from etching the glass. If you try anything other than the hydrogen peroxide/ammonia mix, it might not remove the filaments of fungus and you may think it has etched the glass when it in fact has not done so. They can be very hard to get off with anything else. That doesn't look like the really bad kind though; the worst kind looks like a fuzz ball stuck to the glass. That might just be crud.
As for replacing the lens, there are a lot of Radionars out there and some of them are even made for compur shutters. You'll have to calibrate it for that camera though. Keep a piece of ground glass handy in case you do have to replace it. This is how to adjust the focus for a 3-element lens: http://www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk/focadj.html He uses an Apotar for the tutorial, but it is going to be pretty much the same with any 3-element lens (and many 4-element lenses too). Ignore the part about using waxed paper, tracing paper, tape and etcetera though -- use a piece of ground glass or you will never get the fine-tuning right.
Looks like everyone else jumped on the ID before I got to see it. Yep, you've got a rather nice Franka Solida (if you can get the fungus/crud out of it).
Last edited:
mich8261
Well-known
thanks for the detailed description FallisPhoto. I did manage to find my lens cleaning liquid this morning and that seemed to have taken care of most of the problem. I'll leave the rest to a professional; the shutter timing is way off so I'll take it to Nippon Photo Clinic here in NYC and they will do a nice CLA on it. Can't wait.
FallisPhoto
Veteran
I couldn't think of any either, but I figured if they did, it would be on a low grade Nettar. I've only seen one like that, and I wouldn't swear to it, but I believe it was not the original lens that came on the camera. Zeiss' own most closely comparable lens, the Novar, was better, so it would be hard to imagine why they would stick a Radionar on there.
ZeissFan
Veteran
The Novar wasn't a Carl Zeiss lens. It's a bit complicated, but here's how it goes:
Zeiss Ikon (not Carl Zeiss AG) held the trademark to the Novar and Pantar names. Zeiss Ikon had these produced by third-party lens makers: Rodenstock, Steinheil and others including Carl Zeiss. You will rarely see a serial number on a Novar, because lenses not produced by Carl Zeiss weren't permitted to carry a serial number. The exception to this rule is that some early postwar Zeiss Ikon cameras had Schneider-Kreunznach lenses, and those carried a serial number and were branded Schneider-Kreuznach.
I think I've seen a handful (fewer than three in the past eight years) Novars with a serial number.
The Pantar is a bit different in that you sometimes see a serial number with the lens.
And curiously enough, I have a Zeiss Ikon Continette with a Carl Zeiss-branded Lucinar that has no serial number. It's uncommon to encounter a Carl Zeiss lens without a serial number. Perhaps that lens was considered so low tier that they didn't bother maintaining a serial production count.
Serial numbers were important because Carl Zeiss (and other lens makers) produced lens elements as part of a matched set. If you ever encounter a camera in which the serial numbers on the front and rear elements don't match, then there is a chance that the lens won't focus correctly across its range. This occasionally happens with the Kodak Retina Ib/IB, IIc/IIC and IIIc/IIIC cameras, as well as Rolleiflexes (I unfortunately have one of these).
The Carl Zeiss triplet was the Triotar and almost always has a serial number, if it is branded as Carl Zeiss. The "Made by Rollei" Tessar and Triotar on the Rollei 35 cameras don't carry serial numbers, although the "Made by Rollei" Sonnar does.
Like all rules, there were always exceptions, but this in general was the way things were with Zeiss Ikon and Carl Zeiss.
Zeiss Ikon (not Carl Zeiss AG) held the trademark to the Novar and Pantar names. Zeiss Ikon had these produced by third-party lens makers: Rodenstock, Steinheil and others including Carl Zeiss. You will rarely see a serial number on a Novar, because lenses not produced by Carl Zeiss weren't permitted to carry a serial number. The exception to this rule is that some early postwar Zeiss Ikon cameras had Schneider-Kreunznach lenses, and those carried a serial number and were branded Schneider-Kreuznach.
I think I've seen a handful (fewer than three in the past eight years) Novars with a serial number.
The Pantar is a bit different in that you sometimes see a serial number with the lens.
And curiously enough, I have a Zeiss Ikon Continette with a Carl Zeiss-branded Lucinar that has no serial number. It's uncommon to encounter a Carl Zeiss lens without a serial number. Perhaps that lens was considered so low tier that they didn't bother maintaining a serial production count.
Serial numbers were important because Carl Zeiss (and other lens makers) produced lens elements as part of a matched set. If you ever encounter a camera in which the serial numbers on the front and rear elements don't match, then there is a chance that the lens won't focus correctly across its range. This occasionally happens with the Kodak Retina Ib/IB, IIc/IIC and IIIc/IIIC cameras, as well as Rolleiflexes (I unfortunately have one of these).
The Carl Zeiss triplet was the Triotar and almost always has a serial number, if it is branded as Carl Zeiss. The "Made by Rollei" Tessar and Triotar on the Rollei 35 cameras don't carry serial numbers, although the "Made by Rollei" Sonnar does.
Like all rules, there were always exceptions, but this in general was the way things were with Zeiss Ikon and Carl Zeiss.
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Any chance of calibrating one of these lenses, or is it a case for complete replacement of all elements? I have a Super Baldina (one of the old model folding cameras) that came here with no rear lens element (on a Myer Trioplan). I replaced the rear element, but now I am thinking I should have replaced all three elements (it's kind of soft).
Last edited:
ZeissFan
Veteran
With the Trioplan (a triplet, I believe), the likelihood of doing swaps between cameras should be better, although in general it's always best to stick with the same camera (Super Baldina vs. Super Baldina, rather than Super Baldina vs. Taxona, for example).
Given the chance, I would swap all three lens elements, if possible, and then recollimate.
I think much would depend on the individual manufacturer, as well as a degree of luck. I've read of some people having Retinas with mismatched elements that appeared to focus correctly.
As I mentioned, I have a Rolleiflex with mismatched Planar elements that can't be collimated to infinity and don't focus correctly at any distance. In fact, I'm not even certain that they're both Planars. It could be that the rear element is a Xenotar.
By the way, you should always make sure that all of the elements are replaced in the correct orientation. Not a problem usually with the front and rear elements. Occasionally, it can be difficult to tell which direction the middle element should face.
Last edited:
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Yes, it is a triplet. I bought it on ebay and had started on the restoration (removing the leather) when I noticed that the rear element was missing. I watched ebay for a couple of months and found a junked Super Baldina and bought that. It arrived missing one part. Can you guess which one? Well, the THIRD junked Super Baldina I bought was missing the FRONT lens element. It had the rear element though and I grabbed it. Looks like I might be looking for yet another Super Baldina.