Zeiss Ikonta vs 35mm RF

[oftheherd]

Another 6x9 photo

Another 6x9 photo

I have posted this before. It is from my Zeiss Ikon with Novar lens.

And in black and white:

I can't give you comparisons with Contax/Leica lenses but it really gives a nice rendition that doesn't show up in small jpg's.

 

[Peter_S]

Thanks all for the great advice. Excuse my late reply, I did not receive any email that there were new posts.

Its that time again that I am thinking to try MF. I am super-happy with the M6 + Sonnar C, and perhaps a MF RF would supplement it nicely. Thinking of trying a Ikonta, then perhaps move on to Fuji if I like the MF handling (would have to sell my too little-used M8 for that, so trying MF beforehand is mandatory).

Now...only concern is focusing. Any comment of how fast an Ikonta is to focus when one uses M6/M8 normally? Do I have to expect a significant drop in quickness with the camera?

Looking specifically at the Super Ikonta 533/16.

Thanks,
Peter

 

[furcafe]

As usual, the answer is "it depends." Depends on factors like your eyesight & how you get along w/the ergonomics of the camera.

Putting aside the additional time required to unfold the camera, cock the shutter, etc., personally I think you'll probably find focusing the Super Ikonta BX to be considerably slower because you have to use a focus wheel (unless you have a tightly fitted lens hood on the lens, in which case you may be able to focus by turning the hood) & the VF & RF patch are dimmer than the M Leica.

Thanks all for the great advice. Excuse my late reply, I did not receive any email that there were new posts.

Its that time again that I am thinking to try MF. I am super-happy with the M6 + Sonnar C, and perhaps a MF RF would supplement it nicely. Thinking of trying a Ikonta, then perhaps move on to Fuji if I like the MF handling (would have to sell my too little-used M8 for that, so trying MF beforehand is mandatory).

Now...only concern is focusing. Any comment of how fast an Ikonta is to focus when one uses M6/M8 normally? Do I have to expect a significant drop in quickness with the camera?

Looking specifically at the Super Ikonta 533/16.

Thanks,
Peter

 

[Peter_S]

Cheers! Just bought one. Need to try, no way around it. Does not hurt, prices are constant.
Thought about it for ages, now I am excited and cannot wait.

Thanks everybody for the advice!

 

[graywolf]

Suddenly it is a year ago.

Oh, well, no one gave a actual numeric comparison. Let's think digital for a minute. Is there any advantage in using a 42mp camera over using a 10mp camera? That is the approximate mp of a 35mm frame @ 2400ppi and a 6x9 frame at the same resolution. At 2400 you are a long way from scanning individual grain clumps, so it is a fair comparison.

 

[JPD]

Thanks Robert & Sevo!
The next step up would be a Rolleiflex w/ 3.5 Tessar. Would they be a serious improvement over my G2?

Yes it would. The bigger 6x6 negative doesn't have to be enlarged as much as a 24x36 mm one, so the perceived sharpness and tonal range will be higher.

Well, a Tessar Rolleiflex is not really that different a beast compared to a Tessar Super Ikonta...

The Tessar on the Super Ikonta/Ikonta has front element focusing, so it is of a slightly different design than the unit focusing Tessar on the Rollei. Front element focusing lenses are comprimised, some of the aberrations are over-corrected at infinity and under-corrected at closer distances. The "sweet spot" is probably at around 10 meters.

And the Rolleiflex is a sturdier camera than any folder.

I'm sure a Rolleiflex will win over a Super Ikonta if the negatives are enlarged to 30x30 cm or more.

But a folder is easier to carry around and could fit in a large pocket.

 

[JPD]

Cheers! Just bought one. Need to try, no way around it. Does not hurt, prices are constant.
Thought about it for ages, now I am excited and cannot wait.

Congratulations! Which model did you buy?

I have my east german Zeiss Ercona II 6x9 with Tessar loaded with Fuji Reala. I hope to finish the roll soon.

 

[Peter_S]

Cheers!
Got a Super Ikonta 533/16. Do not need the meter, but wanted a coupled range-/viewfinder and the coated lens. Price was good, so I went for it. First film hangs to dry....

 

[graywolf]

While I do not have a Zeiss Ikonta, I do have a couple of folders that I use.

A Happo 66E (rebranded Balda Mess Baldix) that fits easily into my pants pocket, and takes a nice photo.

And, An Iskra, that takes a fabulous photo but is a bit too large and heavy to fit in a pocket.

Both of those were the first test shots with the respective cameras

 

[nonuniform]

I kinda disagree. The advantage is easy to see when comparing 35mm to 120 scans, regardless of scanner.

The biggest difference between my Leica M4/M6 and the Super Ikonta IV that I've been using is the Leica is a lot easier to use quickly. The 120 folder takes more thought and attention to detail with the controls.

The advantage of MF negs is easy to see if you make wet prints. When scanning, the advantage is less clear - unless you have access to a good scanner.

But in any case I would buy the Rolleiflex and a Zeiss Ikonta too because they don't cost an arm and a leg and are great fun to use.

 

[barnwulf]

I shoot a lot of things with a lot of detail quite often and always like sharp images. I shoot mostly with a Leica and ZM lenses and it's a great combination. I have a Zeiss Super Ikonta III and IV with the 75/3.5 Tessar lenses which are quite sharp although if compared with modern lenses at 100% enlargement from a scan it would not be as sharp as modern lenses. However, I don't have to enlarge the image as much as the 35mm negative and the tonality from the 6X6 negative is wonderful. I love shooting with the Zeiss folders. I would not hesitate to try it but, make sure that the camera you choose is in excellent working order. I have had to get a couple of CLA done to get camera working properly. Jim