Small ,light medium format camera

[chippy]

Hi,
I'd like to follow up RichC's response. My pre World War II Zeiss Super Ikonta B was one of the best cameras I ever photographed with until the cement started leaking out of the f 2.8 Tessar lens and gumming up the shutter. After two trips to the repair shop I gave up and moved on to a Rolleiflex MX and my first Leica. I hope the postwar Zeiss Super Ikonta Bs, IIIs, and IVs have a more durable cement between the elements of their Tessars! This experience leads me to think that while a three element (uncemented) lens is less well corrected than a four element one, it might be more durable over many years than a tessar type lens. The 75 mm f 4.5 Zeiss Triotar on my Rolleicord Ia was quite sharp, at least at f 8 and f 11. While the Rolleicords and f 3.5 Rolleiflexes from that era are certainly bulkier than a 120 folding camera, they provide a lot of bring home the pictures capability for their size, weight, and cost. Here's wishing you good success in your quest.
JustPlainBill

fwiw Bill, rear lens separation isnt usually a problem at all with the Tessar lenses, they are plenty durable and will outlive me and my children i am sure. even if it did separate (or other cemented lenses produced by another maker) then this is not usually the cause for gumming up the shutter, it usually just separates and you can see the crystallization. what does gum up the shutter in most cases (apart from general crud accumulating over the years and this happens with tlr or any camera) is the grease used for the front element focusing gets into the shutter. Zeiss Ikonta used front cell focusing on their folding 120 cameras (where the front cell of the lens is turned to focus) as did many other makers, this is a common problem but in most cases a good CLA will fix it. However there are a select few folding cameras such as the Welta Weltur, S/Isolette, Iskra, Bessa II, Mamiya 6 ,etc etc that that the lens is fixed (unit focusing) together and focuses as a unit (as do the TLR's).

 

[ZeissFan]

From Zeiss Ikon, I might suggest the Super Ikonta III or IV or the Mess Ikonta 524/16. Although the Novar is a decent lens, I would rather have a Tessar.

From Agfa, there is the Isolette III or the Super Isolette. There are re-badged Ansco versions. Get the camera with the Solinar (Tessar type) rather than the Apotar (triplet).

All of these are reasonably lightweight folding cameras with excellent lenses. As with any Agfa, check the bellows for holes and ensure that the lens helicals are frozen stiff from the hardened grease.

 

[kuzano]

Yep... you are reight...

Yep... you are reight...

The SUPER Baldax has a coupled finder. The MESS baldax, almost identical in all dimensions, does not.
My film counter is unreliable, making the red window the way to go. Still, the thing is shockingly small/light (about 75% of an Isrka) and the lens is very good. 40.5mm filter size is a real plus too.

I just looked and my baldax is not a super, no coupled rf. However as you say, the lens is very good. My previous baldax was a super and coupled.

JPA66. your budget should not be a constraint. I just picked up two (2) excellent condition Franka Werke, both with Rodenstock Trinar lenses. They are designed to shoot dual format (6x6 and 6x9) with an insert. One does not have the insert, and have not
gotten the second yet.

Budget... I paid $35 and $40. Have used these before with the Trinar lens and been happy with the results.

At least I have two more 6X9 shooters.

 

[David Murphy]

The 6X6 Bayonet 1 and similar TLR's are light and portable. E.g. Tessar Rolleiflex/Rolleicord and Yashica Mat 124/124G, etc, etc.

 

[FallisPhoto]

Having just returned from a trip, and having taken a couple of cameras with me, I've decided that I crave a smaller, lighter camera than the ones I currently have.

I was wondering if anyone could recommend a good, small, and relatively light medium format camera ( 6X6 only ). Something like the Mamiya 6 is too big and heavy for what I want. I just want a relatively small, light 6X6 that will take sharp, quality photos.

Any suggestions would be welcomed.

JP

Okay, small, lightweight, inexpensive medium format rangefinder... sounds like an Agfa Isolette III with a Solinar lens. However, there will be some issues to resolve. Agfa used a type of bellows material that is pretty much like the stuff they make plasticized paper shopping bags out of these days. After 50+ years, you can be pretty sure it will have light leaks and will need to be replaced. They also used a type of grease that sets up like road tar, so the focusing helical will probably be frozen and will need to be cleaned out and regreased. If you can handle that (or know someone who can), then you can probably find one for under $200.

 

[Harry Lime]

No, Schneider Xenar (4 element/3 group Tessar formula) was offered on IV and V models. The III model came in both Triotar and Xenar.

I just took a look at my III and it has a Xenar.

#13257XX

Every time I pick up the Rolleicord III I am amazed at how light it is...
I also have two Rollexflex 2.8 and in comparison they weigh a ton (about 500g more) and are noticeably bulkier. A Hasselblad 50x with the 2.8/80 is even heavier.

 

[Frank Petronio]

I like classic square format cameras too but if I were going to purchase a 120 camera these days -- light and for travel -- I'd want something reliable first and foremost -- and that would be a CLA'd nice Rolleicord with a Maxwell screen. The other good camera would be the last of the Fuji 645 AF rangefinders, those are modern high tech plastic wonders and not 6x6 but... the results rock.

I really grew to dislike the older 120 folders I tried, the front ends seemed flimsy and it seemed that sooner or later they would go out of wack and you'd have to stop down just to be sure to get focus. A TLR seems much more robust in that regard.

Of course slower film in a good 35mm might be enough since scanning 120 is a compromise unless you can afford a better scanner.

 

[uhligfd]

Rollei all the way; and leave the SLR(s) at home;, please.

 

[Way]

I love my folders and I'd say go with the Agfa Isolettes. The III has a non coupled rangefinder but, as FallisPhoto stated, will probably need a new bellows. I have the Super Isolette (coupled rangefinder) and I find it my most used folder. Very clear rangefinder patch, very easy to focus. It is a bit heavy as far as folders go, but I wouldn't hesitate to put it in a backpack. It has never let me down in the image department.

 

[Krosya]

Here are what I use for smaller, lighter 6x6:

Welta Weltur and Kowa Kalloflex

 

[JeffGreene]

Another vote for a Rolleicord. They are light, inexpensive and the lenses whether triotar, xenar or tessar are outstanding. I'm currently eagerly awaiting the return of a recently CLA MX-EVS 'flex from Krikor Maralian. I have severe rheumatoid arthritis in my hands, and as the years have passed have found Rolleis to be easiest to operate with great output. Admittedly, the triotars aren't the equal of the xenar or tessar rolleicord, but they still produce great output.

Respectfully,

Jeff

 

[dave61]

Did You Consider-

Did You Consider-

Mamiya Six folding 6 x 6 rollfilm camera? Models made after 1947 had 75mm/3.5 Zuiko lens in Seikosha-Rapid shuter; 1948 added flash-sync; later models gained auto advance/frame counter/double exposure prevention; bright, accurate combined RF/VF.
Highly precise rear film plane focusing=very rigid front standard, eliminated front-element focusing and complex/fragile RF coupling mechanism. Seikosha-Rapid is a reliable shutter. Bellows were well made (no replacement needed). Controls are well placed, ergonomics are good. A very useable old folder. Best of all, they're cheaper than Super Ikontas and Bessa !!'s. A lot of camera for the $$.
Add a Sekonic Twinmate L-208 clip-on meter, lens shade and UV filter (takes Leica size A36 slip-on) and you're good to go.

Photos show Mamiya Six model IV (C.1947) compared to Leica M-3 and Mamiya with Sekonic shoe-mount meter and A36-size Green #1 filter.

 

[Dante_Stella]

The problem with this search is that you have spec'd yourself out of the market. Think about whether you are really married to square negatives. A (modern, not antique) Mamiya 6 is going to be the only relatively small 6x6 whose lens performs to modern standards. The old-school folders are small and light, but if you are going through the time, expense and trouble of medium format, you might as well get the best camera you can. I would say the Mamiya or a Fuji 645.

Thanks for all the replies.

The problem is that I had my big digital Nikon slr with 18-200 zoom, and my wife had a little canon digital elph ( it's actually mine 🙂. I found myself tiring of carrying the Nikon, as well as using it ( although I really like it ), and actually swiping the Canon from wife from time to time. I also brought my Canon AE1, with just a 50 mm lens, and loved it when I brought it with me instead of the Nikon. I also liked the pics from the Canon better ( I would have brought my Canonnet, but I only recently got it and haven't fooled around with it enough to be completely comfortable ). I also brought a Holga, which, although fun, has made me wish that I had a quality 6X6 camera with me. But I digress...

I'd actually love to check out the new Bessa III, but I'm not willing to part with that much money at this point in time.

I did fool around a long time ago with the Bronica, and it's too big for what I want. I actually have a Mamiya 645, with the grip and a viewfinder prism, and I actually don't like it. It's too clunky and heavy, and I found that I greatly prefer a 6X6 negative size. I also have an old Yashica that I've used, but some nicer glass and a meter would be nice ( and I'd like to hold the thing like an slr ).

I've thought about the Fujii in the past, but I really would like a square negative.

I'm unfamiliar with the Perkeo, but it looks worth investigating, as does the Ikonta. I simply don't know much about them, and am still a little wary of the bellows having light leaks. Is that a common occurrence, or are they generally well-sealed off from light? And are the lenses that they have reasonably fast ( or at least not too slow )?

In the meantime, I'll see what info I can dig up.

JP

 

[trev2401]

Just noticed this thread. My choice would be the Fuji GS645s with the 65, or the 45 folder wide version.

Hiked up to half dome (yosemite) with the Fuji GS in the middle of winter, (yes, without the ropeway) and shot 5 rolls in -20deg C temperatures without any problems, vs 3 x 1ds bodies and 1 d2xs that died in the cold. (sensor freeze)

Tiny camera that can take a lot of beating.. has a cool crash bar too!

 

[jpa66]

I don't really need the sharpest lens on the block, but I would like a relatively decent-quality one that gives a nice, fairly sharp image. That said, I'm not a person who has to have every photo as sharp as can be - I actually use a Holga and thoroughly enjoy the photos from it ( at least some of them 🙄 ).

And I'm committed to the 6X6 negative. I do have a Mamiya 645, and aside from the heft, I'd much rather have a square negative than a rectangle at this point, which I can get from my much lighter slr. If the lens isn't up to modern standards, I'm OK with that. I want to have some fun taking some photos, and I want that fun to be in the shape of a square 🙂

 

[trev2401]

Mamiya 6 it is then. Though not necessarily the cheapest and easiest to find at this point, lenses and quality are outstanding. (apart from the winding mechanism)

 

[mrisney]

The Mamiya 6, no question about it. And in terms of size, its almost the same size as my M4-P with a Motor M, and Voigtlander meter, and definetly smaller than a Polaroid 600 SE/ Mamiya Universal

 

[Schlapp]

Voigtlander Perkeo. sorted

 

[Jamie Pillers]

The Yashica Mat cameras are a great choice. Lightweight, very nice lens, MUCH cheaper than most other TLRs.

 

[David Murphy]

Any Rollei with a F3.5 taking lens. Yashica Mat 124G, Minolta Autocord, and a few others of that ilk