pb908
Well-known
All, do you have any idea which one is the smallest'
In the past I have one 524/16 mess ikonta, and now 523/16 ikonta which I thought is the smallest I can get for 6x6, but then came Voigtlander Perkeo III (e) to my collection, and I was surprised to see how small it is compare to ikonta.
right now I don't have my ikonta with me, so for curiousity I compare it with my other 35mm rf for you to know.
Compare to RD1, it is as tall, as thick, but around 2cm less in length.
Compare to Hexar RF (leica m6 size), it is maybe 1cm taller, but almost 1cm lesser in length.
So, as I use to take my rd1 for my everyday camera, i feel that perkeo is small enough for my daily MF need, small enough to fit in a jacket pocket.
As a bonus, i get nice color skopar coated 80mm f3.5 (i like the result as I have bessa II skopar) and a built in uncoupled RF. I'll post comparation picture later on.
how about you? Any other opinion?
In the past I have one 524/16 mess ikonta, and now 523/16 ikonta which I thought is the smallest I can get for 6x6, but then came Voigtlander Perkeo III (e) to my collection, and I was surprised to see how small it is compare to ikonta.
right now I don't have my ikonta with me, so for curiousity I compare it with my other 35mm rf for you to know.
Compare to RD1, it is as tall, as thick, but around 2cm less in length.
Compare to Hexar RF (leica m6 size), it is maybe 1cm taller, but almost 1cm lesser in length.
So, as I use to take my rd1 for my everyday camera, i feel that perkeo is small enough for my daily MF need, small enough to fit in a jacket pocket.
As a bonus, i get nice color skopar coated 80mm f3.5 (i like the result as I have bessa II skopar) and a built in uncoupled RF. I'll post comparation picture later on.
how about you? Any other opinion?
ZeissFan
Veteran
Some weigh less than others, but physically, they're all close in size, because they're tied to the 6x6 film size.
If it's down to 1 centimeter difference, it becomes inconsequential. Go for the best camera at the best price.
Some of the Voigtlanders weigh less than others, I believe because of the use of lighter-weight materials.
If it's down to 1 centimeter difference, it becomes inconsequential. Go for the best camera at the best price.
Some of the Voigtlanders weigh less than others, I believe because of the use of lighter-weight materials.
bigeye
Well-known
I can fit the Ansco Speedex (aka Agfa Isolette) in the back pocket of my jeans. Scale focus, though.
fraley
Beware of Claws
I was going to say also, the Agfa Isolette is the smallest of my three..
whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
How about the Voigtlander Perkeo IIIe?
julio1fer
Well-known
Voigtlander Perkeo, or Zeiss-Ikon Nettar old model (the one with foldable metal frame viewfinder).
bensyverson
Well-known
Gotta be Perkeo. It's not really possible for it to be much smaller.
pb908
Well-known
yes, mine is perkeo IIIe, the smallest 6x6 I ever have, and it has uncoupled RF !!!
as far as I know, the old model of ikonta with (albada?) metal frame finder, should be small enough, but no RF.
still the Perkeo IIIe is the best of the small 6x6. or is there any other else ?
rolleistef
Well-known
The Isolette is really small, however it's rather big compared to the Voigtlander Baby, by far one of the smallest 6x6 in existance...
http://voigtlander.pagesperso-orange.fr/anglais/bessa4666tousA.htm
http://voigtlander.pagesperso-orange.fr/anglais/bessa4666tousA.htm
yefeihe
Member
From what I have seen, Perkeo II is smaller than Zeiss Ikonta, Balda Baldix, Franka Solida, Dacora Royal, Adox Golf, Braun Gloria, Agfa Isolette, Fujica Six, and Mamiya Six. Perkeo IIIe is not much bigger than II. So I'd say the Perkeo is probably the smallest of them all.
Yefei
Yefei
summar
Well-known
Voigtlander Bessa 66 (Baby Bessa), the precursor of the Perkeo. Perfect MF camera for hiking.
BTMarcais
Well-known
+1
My bessa 66 is smaller (and quite a bit lighter!)
than my super ikonta 531 ( which is only 645).
-Brian
My bessa 66 is smaller (and quite a bit lighter!)
than my super ikonta 531 ( which is only 645).
-Brian
graywolf
Well-known
I have no idea what may be the smallest. My Happo 66E is about the same size as one of the smaller 4.5x6 folders. Measured with a digital caliper, I get:
5.265 inches long including the carrying strap. (5.074)
3.884 inches high including the tripod hump and accessory shoe. (3.64)
1.775 inches thick including the stand up flipper (is there a name for that) and the bump of the red window opener. (1.720)
Number in parenthesis are not including protrusions, in case someone is interested.
That is about the same size as a Canonet GIII 1.7 QL, but guite a bit thinner.
The Happo is a rebranded Baldix uncoupled rangefinder camera. It is interesting that while I have downloaded PDF of a lot of folding camera manuals, none of them have the size listed, unlike modern cameras.
5.265 inches long including the carrying strap. (5.074)
3.884 inches high including the tripod hump and accessory shoe. (3.64)
1.775 inches thick including the stand up flipper (is there a name for that) and the bump of the red window opener. (1.720)
Number in parenthesis are not including protrusions, in case someone is interested.
That is about the same size as a Canonet GIII 1.7 QL, but guite a bit thinner.
The Happo is a rebranded Baldix uncoupled rangefinder camera. It is interesting that while I have downloaded PDF of a lot of folding camera manuals, none of them have the size listed, unlike modern cameras.
Last edited:
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Agreed - and there even are Skopar and Heliar versions which are optically a step or two above the three-element competition.