Super Isolette or Certo Six sharp wide open?

[Antares]

Hello...I'm considering buying a Certo Six or an Agfa Super Isolette. I expect to primarily use the camera for environmental portraits, waist-up, and I'd like to get some subject isolation. In some reviews I have read that theses two cameras are indeed sharp in the center shot wide open. Is this the really the case? I wouldn't need sharp corners or edges, just sharp central area. When I say sharp, I'm talking adequate for portraits. I don't want a dreamy mess of an image, if you know what I mean. Thanks in advance!

 

[charjohncarter]

AristaEDUultra400 HC-110h by John Carter, on Flickr

Kodak Portra by John Carter, on Flickr

Both wide open Isolette, but under low light conditions and hand held.

This is one shot at probably f5.6 with flash and focused with a add-on rangefinder.

Kodak Portra 160 by John Carter, on Flickr

 

[wpb]

When operating as designed they are sharp wide open. Finding a known good example is the challenge. Keeping the lens and film perfectly parallel and a properly adjusted rangefinder is essential to getting the most from the lens. We won’t even go into the bellows...

I love folding cameras, don’t get me wrong. But I’m a glutton for punishment; I own 2 Iskra folding cameras from the USSR.

When all is said and done there is a lot to be said for the Rollieflex. Has the same 1950s style of Tessar lens but is easier to find a good one because they have less to go wrong and they made an awful lot of them.

 

[julio1fer]

I can vouch for the Super-Isolette, it is really sharp in the center zone.

You probably do not need to open to full aperture with a 75 or 80 mm lens if you are shooting close to the subject. Most of the time you can get by with f/5.6 or so. At that aperture the Solinar in the Super-Isolette is a killer lens, at least as good as the Xenar or Tessar in a Rollei TLR.

My late father used to run proper tests side by side, tripod-mounted, of a Super-Isolette and a Rolleiflex with Tessar - we could never point which was which, using a good loupe.

 

[charjohncarter]

The lens that I posted is an Apotar. Not their best but still great for what I call a tourist camera. The Isolette is very beefy, very solid. I've had mine for 10 years and like it. I also have three other folders but no Certo 6. They all have their place so get one put it in your pocket and enjoy it.

 

[Solinar]

The Super Isolette got my vote

The Super Isolette got my vote

I want to reiterate the Rolleiflex comparison - but in this case it was by viewing large prints taken with the unit focusing, f/3.5 75mm Solinar fitted to the Agfa Super Isolette. Let me just say, that after comparing the two many years ago, I sold both of my Rolleiflex TLR cameras.

 

[ACullen]

I recently bought a Super Isolette and can confirm that the lens is very fine .

I might yet try a comparison with my Isolette II which also sports a Solinar 75mm. I think I’m correct in thinking that the lens design will be very similar between the two cameras albeit that the Super has unit focusing vs cell on it’s cheaper brethren . The Isolette II is nearly 200g lighter than the Super .

 

[johannielscom]

I love it when people make 200 grammes sound like a gallon of milk... Beef up and get the Super Ikonta B, 532/16 model. Yes it's heavier and no that don't matter much. https://www.johanniels.com/en/medium-format/103-zi-super-ikonta-overview

That 80mm 2.8 Tessar lens is excellent and they cost a fraction of the similarly drawing Planar or Xenotar on a Rolleiflex. Rangefinder built-in.

 

[Solinar]

The photo below was taken with a Super Isolette - but not at a wide open aperture.

SuperIso_TioLionel

 

[Antares]

Thanks everyone. I do appreciate the helpful comments.

 

[Pedro_fiz]

Super Isolette.

Enviado desde mi ANE-LX1 mediante Tapatalk

 

[Antares]

Thanks, very nice photo, but little can be learned from a 1000x1000 pixel image.

Super Isolette.

Enviado desde mi ANE-LX1 mediante Tapatalk

 

[jgrainger]

My own oppinion.. the Certo has half a stop advantage in low light or shallow dof. I also think it's a superb design on the body but poor (or cost-conscious) in the top part - with a rangefinder well known for needing mirrors.


Despite that, I'm inclined to suggest that condition and an ergonomic preference should probably be the main things.