I'm thinking about a super ikonta 531/2 ...

[cicala]

Hi to everybody , is some week that I'm reading about folder 6x9, I like very much the Zeiss super Ikonta 531/2 with coated tessar 3,5 105 mm , I will use a lot with slide for landscape .
Have you some suggestion for the right price ( I'm looking for something good conditions) or maybe for somethig different that I don't know .

Thanks to everybody .....matteo

 

[jnoir]

My favorite 6x9 folders are the Super Pontura with Xenar and the Bessa IIE with Heliar, together with the Plaubel Makina IIIR which is a press camera with interchangeable lenses and not a folder per se.

I have a 532/16 for 6x6 and a 531 for 6x4.5

I reckon some people will recommend you certo6, personally I'd step clear of his cameras, but others have had good experiences.

 

[RichL]

The 531/2s run a good solid $350 plus. If you have a bit of time to spare you can find them in the $250 to $275 range.

I'll probably be shot for saying this but I've used the Moskva 5 without problems. The one drawback to it for some is the max 250 shutter speed. Most of my shooting was cityscapes with the camera tripod mounted and shutter speeds in the 1/50 to 1/100 range so that was a non issue for me. A good Moskva 5 will run you right around $100 to $150.

Rich L

 

[citizen99]

I like the original (starting late 1930s) Bessa Rangefinder, and find the uncoated lenses not to be a problem if you avoid stray light getting in when shooting, as with any of the era. They crop up on ebay quite often, often with the Helomar, which is an excellent triplet and didn't disappoint me when I shot with one, sometimes with the (Tessar-class) Skopar, and sometimes with the Heliar, although those go for higher prices. Although sellers sometimes seem to expect 'Heliar' prices for the 'Helomar' equipped models. Like with any of that age, it's worth making sure that you get one in good condition, unless you don't mind fettling and CLA-ing yourself .

 

[jnoir]

I like triplets a lot, and in fact use them regularly for BW. Radionar, Apotar, Vaskar...

But, since OP will use it mostly for slides, in my opinion he should go for, at least, 4-element lenses. Supposing both are sharp and well adjusted, most Tessar-type designs should have less light fall-off at the corners. What do you think?

In addition, I prefer Schneider-Kreuznach to Carl Zeiss lenses.

 

[citizen99]

But, since OP will use it mostly for slides, in my opinion he should go for, at least, 4-element lenses. Supposing both are sharp and well adjusted, most Tessar-type designs should have less light fall-off at the corners. What do you think?

Good point, I suppose I tended lazily not to think about that much as, where that is important to me, I'm taking e.g. landscapes in well stopped-down conditions, with 'finger-in-the-air' exposure levels on tolerant negative emulsions . Certainly I would go for the greater range of the Tessar type if I can get one. .

In addition, I prefer Schneider-Kreuznach to Carl Zeiss lenses.

I don't have much comparative experience with those, had good results from both in 35mm, haven't used a Schneider-Kreuznach yet in MF. But I recently got hold of an Angulon, and am planning to improvise a 6x9 around it ... .

 

[Vickko]

I have a Bessa II and 531/2. For 6x9cm, the Bessa II is my "go to" camera. But no shutter interlock with the film advance, so you do really have to pay attention to using the camera, to avoid double exposure. It can be like using a LF camera - pay strict attention to procedure.

The 531/2, well, looks neat. But more fiddly with the swing up RF window. And the viewfinder plastic is yellowed, so I removed it. I haven't done anything for framelines so, takes a bit of guesswork for the edge framing.

$350 is a good price. I bought one from certo66 for more, but he said he CLA'ed it. There used to be collector pressure on the pricing, but I think that has long disappeared. To bad, because I feel I paid too much.

...vick

 

[citizen99]

About 40 years ago, I had one of the pre-1940 Super Ikontas (don't remember the type number). I was a bit put off by the swing-up rangefinder window, but it took excellent photographs.

I hadn't come across the Super Pontura before it was mentioned by jnoir above; having looked it up, I must say I do like the look of it. And the 'lever on the bed' focussing method is reminscent of the Ensign Autorange 220, of which I am very fond, although that only covers 6x6 and 6x4.5 formats.

 

[jnoir]

[...] I hadn't come across the Super Pontura before it was mentioned by jnoir above; having looked it up, I must say I do like the look of it. And the 'lever on the bed' focussing method is reminscent of the Ensign Autorange 220, of which I am very fond, although that only covers 6x6 and 6x4.5 formats.

It's quite similar. The AutoRange 220 and the Weltur, for example, have the lever in the inside part of the bed / door. The Super Pontura has the lever outside, and I find it more convenient.

You've got a PM re: Super Pontura

 

[cicala]

Tanks to everybody for the suggestion , I'm still looking for somehing ........what you think about Frank Rolfix .....is better the Rodenstock o the Schneider Kreuznach Radionar ?? What are the main differences of these two lenses ?? Thanks to everybody but I don't know anything of this old folder ......

 

[jnoir]

The Rolfix is not a bad camera, I have one with Radionar in its original box. It was also sold as Hapo 5 by Hans Porst, so you can look for that also

​

I like Franka cameras a lot and in fact use the Franka Solida with Radionar lens regularly for Black and White work. As said, for slides, you would be better off going for, at least, 4-element lenses such as Tessar, Solinar, Skopar, Xenar...

If the Rodenstock is a Trinar, then it is a 3-element lens. If it is an Ysar, then it is a 4-element lens. The Ysaron is the name for a later evolution for the Ysar. I have an Ysar on an old Perle, and is not bad. For Radionar vs Trinar, I like the Radionar a lot, so my vote goes for the Radionar.

 

[Borghesia]

Hi to everybody , is some week that I'm reading about folder 6x9, I like very much the Zeiss super Ikonta 531/2 with coated tessar 3,5 105 mm , I will use a lot with slide for landscape .
Have you some suggestion for the right price ( I'm looking for something good conditions) or maybe for somethig different that I don't know .

Thanks to everybody .....matteo

I bought a 531/2 for 125,- euro's in a perfect state.
The RF is spot on, the shutter and glass perfect, a CLA wasn't necessary.
The only minus is the albada finder, which turn yellow over the years.

 

[cicala]

The Rolfix is not a bad camera, I have one with Radionar in its original box. It was also sold as Hapo 5 by Hans Porst, so you can look for that also

I like Franka cameras a lot and in fact use the Franka Solida with Radionar lens regularly for Black and White work. As said, for slides, you would be better off going for, at least, 4-element lenses such as Tessar, Solinar, Skopar, Xenar...

If the Rodenstock is a Trinar, then it is a 3-element lens. If it is an Ysar, then it is a 4-element lens. The Ysaron is the name for a later evolution for the Ysar. I have an Ysar on an old Perle, and is not bad. For Radionar vs Trinar, I like the Radionar a lot, so my vote goes for the Radionar.

Thankyou very much jnoir , as we say in italian you are a deep hole full of science about folder .........can you tel me somewhere to look for learn something ??? Thank matteo

 

[Pete B]

About 40 years ago, I had one of the pre-1940 Super Ikontas (don't remember the type number). I was a bit put off by the swing-up rangefinder window, but it took excellent photographs.

I hadn't come across the Super Pontura before it was mentioned by jnoir above; having looked it up, I must say I do like the look of it. And the 'lever on the bed' focussing method is reminscent of the Ensign Autorange 220, of which I am very fond, although that only covers 6x6 and 6x4.5 formats.

I was watching an Ensign and a Zeiss on the bay but they both went for a little more than I was expecting:
Zeiss
Ensign

:bang::bang:
Pete

 

[jnoir]

Wow, an AutoRange 820, recurrent wet dream of mine... :bang:

 

[jnoir]

Thankyou very much jnoir , as we say in italian you are a deep hole full of science about folder .........can you tel me somewhere to look for learn something ??? Thank matteo

I have my own webpage, but unless you can read Spanish, the English version is still far from being complete.

I can tell you that there were three main Rolfix models over the years. The original Rolfix comprises 7 different variations that were manufactured for about 20 years. Older models have a reflex finder similar to those on the plate cameras from the 1920s. Later, it was replaced by an Albada finder, and the latest model from 1953 or so has a full top housing for the finder, adding a flash shoe.

The Rolfix I was introduced in the 1950s, comes with the integral top housing and adds features such as a double exposure prevention mechanism.

The Rolfix II and IIE ("E" stands for Entfernungmesser, German for Rangefinder) is basically the same camera with some cosmetic modifications, as well as the inclusion of an uncoupled and uncombined rangefinder on the Rolfix IIE.

The Rolfix was produced until the end of 1950s.

 

[cicala]

jnoir very nice webpage , I've allready read all, please finish as soon as possible !!!

 

[citizen99]

Wow, an AutoRange 820, recurrent wet dream of mine... :bang:

Not wishing to shatter anybody's dream, but hoping to mitigate possible disappointment ...

When I sold my Super Ikonta, about 40 years ago, it was because I got hold of an Autorange 820. I was an impecunious youngster then, but they had not become a cult amongst 'pay-any-price' collectors. The theory of the neat mechanism, unit focussing, special version Ross Xpres, etc appealed to me.
However, it turned out to be disappointing to use, mainly because, after having carefully set the range, one's natural grip on the camera promptly set the rack back to the 'home' (Infinity) position :bang: ! I see from the photo forums of recent years that I am not the only one to have noted this.

For the following years my photography was limited to family/holiday type 35mm snapshots. After I retired, I got interested in photography again, and soon sold the Autorange 820 - prices had begun to rise (but I still got nothing like the prices that they fetch now ). But I don't regret that too much, because as it turned out, selling that camera was the key to reviving my preference for MF photography .

 

[jnoir]

I think there were a couple of designers over there at Ensign that had too much fun at the expense of photographers... Those needles in your thumb if you forgot to advance the film, the detail you mention about the AutoRange 820, preparing very few of them, if any, for export with distances in meters (not that big an issue, just divide by 3 and you have the approximated metric scale), making them left handled (which suits me best, but still)...

But, on those occasions when they took it seriously, they did very clever things such as the dual format counter on the AutoRange 220...

Nevertheless, one of my favorite camera makers. The AutoRange 820, even if I'd not pay current prices, would be a nice addition to the "cameras I've handled and tested" list.

 

[literiter]

This was taken with my Super Ikonta C (531-2 uncoated, no hood, handheld. )
I wouldn't worry so much if the lens is coated as much as the condition.

The 531-2