If you had to choose one of the following cameras to commit to...

<p>I've managed to have had a variety of antique/vintage cameras come into my possession over the past few years and I want to pick one or two and sell the rest to support shooting the chosen model(s):<br>

I have multiple metal 620 spools and I am familiar with rewinding 120 film on to them. I am happy to see 127 film is available. My main interest is lens quality and negative size as well as effort required to use (repairs needed, film availability/modification, manual controls etc)</p>

<p><strong>Brownie Hawk-eye</strong>: lens is a mini fungal colony <br>

<strong>Kodak 2-C Junior Model A</strong>: I see some of these have glass in the front of the iris and others don't (not sure if this is a case of it missing or by design), mine does not have glass in front of the iris.<br>

<strong>Target Brownie 6-20: </strong>shutter is a bit wonky, doesn't open sometimes, seems slow at times<br>

<strong>Target 6-16</strong>: Landscape mirror is loose, otherwise seems good<br>

<strong>Kodak Jiffy 6-20 #1:</strong> Shot a roll but have yet to process, seems to be in good working order<br>

<strong>Kodak Jiffy 6-20 #2: </strong>Currently completely taken apart to lubricate shutter and re-glue mirror. I have put a roll through it, didn't seem like anything too special.<br>

<strong>Kodak Tourist (gray plastic top)</strong>: Seems OK<br>

<strong>Ventura Synchro Box</strong>: Can't figure out how to open yet, seemingly good working order<br>

<strong>Kodak Junior Six-16 Series II: </strong>lens may have slight scratch, haven't tried cleaning, seems ok otherwise<br>

<strong>Brownie Reflex: </strong>Seems OK. What a beautiful viewfinder! (other than some fungus/de-silvering of mirror)</p>

<p>I have a potential buyer that would want them just for show and not actually taking pics, so the Hawkeye might lend itself for that application unless it has a far superior lens about it etc. <br>

So, which one or two would you go with?</p>

<p>If they are to be sold to someone for display, whatever they offer for the entire lot, take the offer! These cameras frankly have very little value. There are so many quality vintage film cameras available for small money. Look for cameras that use 35mm or 120 roll film. Avoid all other film sizes. Look for twin lens cameras, rangefinder cameras, with multi speed shutters, good lenses, fixed lens or interchangeable lenses bodies. Avoid most folding cameras and ones without rangefinder or reflex viewing system. Look for shutters with Compur name, lenses with Zeiss, Skopar, Ektar, Hexanon names. Enough already, good luck enjoy the search!</p>

<p>What Paul said. Consider a Rolliecord or a Yashicamat 24G 6x6 TLR. Or go for broke and get a Rolleiflex 2.8. You will be happy. Easy to service and plenty of film available.</p>

<p>Good luck!</p>

<p>If the Kodak Tourist has an f/4.5 lens, that would be the best lens of the lot. But of course it requires 620 film. It might take 120 in the feed chamber if you nibble off the edge of the flange (I use toe-nail clippers). Be sure the bellows doesn't leak, Kodak's later bellows were made of wretched materials.<br>

The simplest meniscus lenses are just one element, normally behind the iris.<br>

The No. 1 Autographic Kodak Special with an f/6.3 or f/4.5 lens is a darned good camera, but has a lousy reflex finder. Both the original model, and model B, are both nice.<br>

In general, a Kodak folder with an f/6.3, f/4.5, or f/3.5 lens has a good lens, typically of Tessar formula. Slower lenses are likely to be fair to poor quality, suitable only for non-critical contact prints of the negative.</p>

 

<p>Thanks Paul for clarifying what I had started to feel. I really wasn't impressed with the results so far and for all the effort of re-spooling 120 film on to my 620 spools...and having to make sure I get the spools back from the lab..or re-spool again is a long way to go for not much reward. <br>

Actually, I do have my eye on a Rolleiflex 2.8 (good recommendation Anthony!) at the local antique store, beautiful portrait cameras they are. I have to put a roll through it, but the price isn't too bad. It's at a consignment store so the seller isn't there and the store owner wasn't happy that I opened it and a partially exposed 35mm roll jumped out. It has one of those adapters installed and he will have a heart attack if I go back and pull that out too, lol. The price is too tempting not to.<br>

John: Tourist is a disappointing f8.8. <br>

I am still going to try the six-16 given the neg size (might make for some interesting contact prints with alt processes) and will try some 127 in the Brownie reflex for novelty purposes. </p>

<p>Add to what Paul has said, none of those are probably worth the effort of re spooling the film, so I would look for an old Rollei, or even a Roleicord.<br>

If you want to play around with a box camera, any of the number two Brownies, particularly the Portrait Brownie No.2, take 120 film, and take quite a good "Lomo-esque" picture.</p>

Ventura Synchro Box (Press down on the back strap handle stud and pull on the top edge of the back. Some jiggling may be required depending on age.)

 

Kodak Jiffy 6-20

<p>From what I know, folding cameras can be fine. The prices are low enough, keep trying until you find one that works well enough.</p>

<p>I believe that the Brownie Hawkeye that uses 620 film will accept a 120 source spool. That saves respooling, but you do want to get your 620 take up spool back. </p>

<p>It isn't hard to find VP116 on eBay, for not so bad prices, and it usually works. If you want to put a few rolls though one of those cameras, you can do it.</p>

<p>But yes, there are enough 35mm and 120 cameras, best is to sell all the ones you have, and buy some of those.</p>

<p>The folding Zeiss Super Ikontas were some of the best medium format cameras made. Ever. They have decent rangefinders too. Agfa's Isolette Series (especially with rangefinders) are also excellent. So not all folders should be discounted.</p>

<p>No doubt one of the cheapest ways still to get into medium format is via TLRs. I own a Yashica Mat 124 (not the "G"), and because it's "just" the 124, I picked it up on eBay for a reasonable price -- about $100. It has the good Yashinon lens -- a Tessar type -- which is very sharp and contrasty.</p>

<p>Don't believe any of your collection should do more than be on view. As Michael suggests the Yashica Mat 124G is well worth the effort. Regret selling mine still, though it was years ago. A fine little camera, with film still readily available.</p>

<p>Hawkeyes are easy to clean up. Rolleis and Yashicamats can be pricey. Look for a Ciroflex or Graflex 22.</p>

 

<p>The Junior #1 and Autographic Junior #1 use 120 film, and are in the $20 to $30 price range.</p>

<p>The lenses aren't as good as Rollei and Yashica, but you can get an idea of what people did 100 years ago. </p>

<p>The Yashica might be in the $100 range, the Rollei much more.</p>

<p>As I mentioned above, regarding the Yashica TLRs, the 124 -- not the 124G -- can often be picked up in the $100 range. The main difference between the 124 and 124G is the former is made out of metal, whereas the latter contains more plastic, and supposedly has some gold contacts somewhere. There are several other options that have the better Yashinon lens. Some of them, like the LM, are often found for about this same price. They're all great shooters, rivaling Rolleiflexes in image quality. I've owned several Rollei f/3.5s and I can't really see a difference in image quality between them and the Yashicas. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have quite a few small cameras, the oldest being a 1914 Kodak Special No. 2 and the newest being a 1983 Nikon F3T. Looks like you are looking for older cameras without a meter (most of mine are pre-WW2). I suggest a Rolleiflex with f3.5 Tessar. Great camera, solid, superb lens, easy to use, and........fun! Another great camera is the late 1930s Voigtlander Bessa, a 120 based range finder with a 105mm Heliar lens. That lens is my favorite! You will absolutely love those 6x9 negs too. For a "simple" camera that is fun and loaded with history, one of the Kodak Brownie No.2 box cameras from the early 1930s in one of the colors. It's 120 (not 620) and yields 6x9 negs.</p>

<p>You were asking about the "best" lens etc. That's the Heliar. However, I shoot vintage cameras for a different reason though. I want a totally different look & feel from what I get with my Nikon D800E. I want uncoated lens with a little "character." Don't want razor sharpness across the frame or high contrast. I want a softer look from my vintage cameras. The Tessar, Dagor, and Heliar lenses have a sort of "glowing" softness about them wide open (especially Heliar,) but do sharpen up around f8. There were a lot of "funky" cameras from the late 1950s and early 1960s that are just fun to use. Examples are Mercury 2, Kodak DuaFlex, Robot, etc. </p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>