I am hooked on folders. How is a pre WWII folder?

[vegard_dino]

Hello all.

Having got my first folder, a nice Voigtlander Perkeo I with a Vaskar 4.5/80 lens, I am hooked. I really like these camera style.

Making me want more folders🙂

But, how is a pre WWII folder?
IF looking for one, any tip on what to look for? Guess Zeiss and Voigtlander made good cameras then to. How are they to have service/repair on?

Anyone here who use a pre WWII camera on a regular base?

 

[Steve George]

I don't use a pre WWII folder on a regular basis but do occasionally use a Kodak Autographic 1A - with simple modification it makes BIG panoramic slides on 120 film. When I say "simple" it really is - 5 minutes is all it takes and you get something like 6x11. I took one to South America and love the results.

In terms of what to look for, I've got an old Voigtlander folder with horrendous lens fungus I can't clean. Look for pinholes (or worse) in the bellows too. Sounds stupid, but check it'll suit your purposes too - one of my folders has shutter speeds of 25, 50 and 100 and apertures of just f8, f11 and f16 - fine on fast film but limited for anything else that doesn't involve a tripod.

It's a lovely way to take photographs though - everything about using a folder forces me to take time and that is more often than not a good thing.

 

[ZeissFan]

A prewar folder generally means that it has an uncoated lens and really means it as made before the end of World War II, rather than the start of World War II.

Keep in mind that when camera production restarted after the end of the war, some companies used uncoated lenses because that's what was available,

On certain Zeiss Ikon models, you will see uncoated Carl Zeiss Jena lenses, as well as coated Zeiss-Opton lenses. And there are a handful of uncoated Zeiss-Opton lenes, which are clearly post-war. And you'll also find some Schneider Xenars, because Carl Zeiss was unable to meet production demands.

I use a 6x9 530/2 Super Ikonta C from 1937 and before that a 1935 520/2 Ikonta C. Excellent cameras.

Nothing wrong an uncoated lens, as long as it's clean and isn't scratched.

 

[Calzone]

I recently traded a barnack for a Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta. It is perhaps from 1938 and likely had been serviced because the camera is very clean and fresh.

A very nice camera, especially if you want a small camera with a big negative. Not a fast shooter, but still an inspiring camera.

Cal

 

[GaryLH]

I have a couple of folders w/ uncounted lenses. The pictures tend to have a different look to them due to the lower contrast for single or multi coated lenses that came later. Just need to watch out for flare and c if u can find the lens hood for them. Some of them had push on lens hoods during that period.

The biggest issue u are going to,face w/ older folders is their condition. From issues w/ structs to bellows repair to sticky shutters to cloudy lenses... I have 9x12 and 4x5 folders dating from 1914 to 1936 around.. U can still get 9x12 sheet film for them and they are really fun to use..

Gary

 

[wallace]

The Welta Welturs are great. Coupled rangefinder and whole lens unit moving for focus instead of only front lens (like Zeiss Ikonta).
I had 3 of them in different formats with Tessar or Xenar, bellows have been trouble free, good material.
Uncoated lens of course, and red window only.

Thomas
(still using Perkeo II, the best! IMHO)

 

[tunalegs]

I have an Ansco Readyset from c. 1928

It is surprisingly sharp (if you stand the right distance from your subject 😀 )

The Readyset doesn't have any settings, so it's more just a folding box camera. It cannot conceivably be used with a film faster than 100ASA, at least without filters (indeed on a sunny day 50ASA is fast enough).

I've also used a Vest Pocket Kodak which was surprisingly sharp even on 40 year old VP.

I don't think I've used any of my older folders with color film yet.

 

[vegard_dino]

Thanks for the replys.

Yes, I know the age is one thing, service, repair, large, maybe need a tripod to hld them and so...But, still, there is something with a old folder that gets to me.
The way they look, so cool, old but stil modern....Yeah, I am odd who say so, but I think they do😎

A Zeiss is on my wish list, 6*9 format.
They look soooooo 😎.

 

[matt_mcg2]

I have a Super Ikonta, the 6x4.5 pre-war uncoated version. Works great. Amazingly compact, and the lens is very sharp in the centre. Contrast is good too if you use a hood. The downside is that the rangefinder is dim in poor light and the flip-up finder hard to keep clean.

 

[Alfasud]

Pre-war Folder

Pre-war Folder

I use a Zeiss Ikon Nettar 510/2 which has been in the family since before my birth. My mother received it as a gift in in 1940. It was second hand at the time. The lens is an f7.7 Nettar anastigmat. The major drawback of the camera is a maximum shutter speed of 1/75 second.

The camera has always worked well, and has never to my knowledge been cleaned and serviced.

Here are several pictures taken during the last year.

 

[vegard_dino]

Thanks for showing some really nice photos. Amazing what these old cameras can do.

But, one thing, I/we are talking a lot about the Zeiss cameras. But, how was the Voigtlander folders from the same time?
Never hear so much about them....Why? Not so many around? More expensive?

 

[jnoir]

IMHO, it's just the name. Kind of buying Apple devices: it's not just the item, it's the name and the "cult followers". Zeiss made some nice folders, but so did Voigtländer, Welta, Ensign, Franka, Balda... Even Rodenstock. Just to name a few.

 

[Vince Lupo]

Certo also made really nice folders (35mm) in the '30s, such as the Dollina and the SuperSport Dolly. Both excellent cameras.

 

[Ernst Dinkla]

Thanks for showing some really nice photos. Amazing what these old cameras can do.

But, one thing, I/we are talking a lot about the Zeiss cameras. But, how was the Voigtlander folders from the same time?
Never hear so much about them....Why? Not so many around? More expensive?

The all black Bessa Rangefinder of that period is not too expensive and a good camera with a Skopar or better lens and unit focusing. Small and dim rangefinder though which did not improve much after the war in most folder camera designs till the late fiftees/early sixties when better rangefinders became available.

Ernst Dinkla

 

[ZeissFan]

The maker of the camera does mean quite a bit.

Zeiss Ikon was the biggest maker of German cameras and probably had its hands in too many categories. Regardless, when you bought a Zeiss Ikon camera, you could be assured that they used top-rate materials assembled by skilled craftsmen and were provided superior customer service.

Zeiss Ikon also understood that cameras would need to be serviced, and all of their cameras (even simple box cameras) could be disassembled for service.

Some Franka cameras, for example, cannot be disassembled for service.

Edixa was known to make parts individually for each camera, making it very difficult to service at a later date should certain parts fail.

Voigtlander cameras generally are very good, but the CLR 35mm rangefinder and some of its siblings used rangefinder prisms that have separated over time.

Agfa made good cameras, but it used a very cheap chroming process for its Optima cameras, and it's very common to see the satin chrome with bubbles under it. And we all know about the problems of Agfa's plastic bellows and cement-like grease in its lens helicals.

Kodak's cameras from its Nagel factory have held up well, using top-rate materials, solid designs and excellent workmanship.

Most certainly, the name on the camera means a great deal.

 

[RichL]

If you are willing to re-roll 120 onto 620 spools, the Duo-620 is an excellent camera.

 

[Dez]

I will throw in a vote for the Zeiss Super Ikonta A (6 x 4.5cm).

While the postwar ones with sync and coated lenses tend to be quite expensive, the prewar cameras' f3.5 Tessar are more reasonably priced and can give lovely results in B&W and colour. You do need to be careful about flare though, and the nature of a folding camera tends to make the use of a shade inconvenient.

You can get the same lens in a simplified package, without the coupled RF if you are good at guessing distances. Here's a "non-Super" Ikonta A I recently sold on ebay; I think it went for about $80.

These cameras are simple and rugged, and fairly easy to find.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[Pioneer]

Agfa gets a bad rap, and rightly so, for the folders they built in the 50s. The plasticky bellows as well as the green goo used to lubricate the focus helicals was not really their best idea. However, I have found that many of the Agfa cameras built before the war were actually very good cameras. I have a couple 6x9 Billy Records built in the 30s that are still very good cameras. Nice, light tight, leather bellows. Good focus. Accurate shutters. Obviously these are not rangefinders but rangefinders that slide into accessory shoes are not that tough to find. So don't rule out these pre-war cameras just because some of the materials they used in the 1950s did not last for 50 years.

Besides, I own a couple of Agfa 6x6 folders from the 50s that produce images that easily rival anything that Zeiss Ikon or Voightlander produce. Agfa's lenses were no slouches.

 

[vegard_dino]

Thanks for the reply and information.
Nice camera you sold Dez.
Thanks for showing