resources for classic Bessa III models

<p>Hello all,</p>

<p>I'm wanting to get into 6x9, and while I'd love some of the more modern cameras I'm thinking a folding Bessa III is my best option (and one that will draw the least ire from others...). I have found resources online for the different models, but am seeking guidance on which one would be the best for me, realistically.</p>

<p>For instance - are the RF versions worthwhile? What's the change an RF is usable at this point? I don't mind zone/guess focusing - I've gotten pretty good at it over time with other classic cameras. What other features of the later models aren't worth it, essentially?</p>

<p>I don't mind getting a CLA'ed model, but I'm not sure where to start with that, either. I'm way out of touch right now with resources and where to start. It's been a while!</p>

<p>I know my questions are generic and general, and appreciate whatever responses you all have time for.</p>

<p>thanks.</p>

 

<p>You WON'T draw the ire of many here. IMO a rangefinder is worthwhile and, despite the camera's age, likely to be perfectly usable. Unless you'll be mostly photographing subjects at infinity, the 105 (or so) mm lenses on 6 X 9 cameras have relatively narrow depths of field.</p>

<p>FWIW I think a Super Ikonta C is likely to be more durable than a Bessa, but here I'm getting into quasi-religious grounds, like Fords vs. Chevys :-)</p>

<p>lookng at Jurgen's site, the Super Ikonta C is coming in at the high end of what I can afford. I have more flexibility on the Bessa. But worth it, lens/shutter/etc-wise? </p>

<p>What should I look for on an ebay sale, beyond the obvious? Bellows quality, folding, clear lens, etc?</p>

<p>thanks</p>

<p>Hello everyone, and welcome to the 6x9 folder world Allan. As the owner, and frequent user, of three 6x9 folders, here are a few of my "thoughts". All three of my cameras were CLA'd by Jurgen. The Ercona and Record were purchased from him, and my Bessa II sent to him after an Ebay purchase (from Australia).<br>

If you can work with zone focus, the top end Bessa or the Record 3 can be sub'd with the 2 models. My Bessa & Ercona are both II's with the zone focusing but all three cameras have top line lenses in them. . that is the factor which allows superb negatives. Do not even think of the "lesser" lenses found on these cameras.<br>

As to getting a great deal on Ebay or elsewhere, I think all the bargins are gone. In a flash my money would go to Jurgen for one of his offerings. I have gotten "burned" on a few folders (also have 6x6 models), but never from him.<br>

When you do select a camera, think of putting it and all the filters, light meter, etc. into a hard cased pistol carrier. . . cheap but sturdy. Filters, push-on Series 6 adapter rings and lens shades are offered on Ebay.<br>

My cameras are used on a sturdy tripod with the built-in timer shutter release for exposure. . damps any body motion, but do get a cable and use it.<br>

Hope this helps. Aloha, Bill</p><div></div>

<p>I might add that like all lenses of this era (50's) edge to edge sharpness suffers until you get into the f11-16 or smaller openings. All three of the shot's above were somewhere in the f16-f32 area. All three of my cameras have an "uncalibrated" f45 when gentle pushed to the stops. Also, I almost always have 400asa film in use, with Pyro staining developers. So far, 16x20 prints show up nicely. Aloha, Bill</p>

<p>Here is the Record III kit. Grab n Go simple. Bill</p><div></div>

<p>Bill,</p>

<p>Thanks. Which would you say are the "better" lenses? Jurgen says that the 3 element ones are pretty good and not to be underestimated, but I take it you are referring specifically to the 4 element ones?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Isn't the Bessa III actually 6x7--not 6x9? I have the original 1937 Bessa RF and really like it. It is a full 6x9. My camera has an uncoated Heliar lens. I do think the Heliar lens is the reason to buy a Bessa. Another good choice is the Kodak Medalist 6x9. It too has a Heliar design lens.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>Rereading all the posts above, I do think your best choice is going to be the Kodak Medalist II. It has a superb coated Heliar type lens. This was one of the best cameras Kodak ever made--it was a premium model. Some pro photographers of the era used them.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>My "6x9" preference is a Kodak Monitor Six-20 with the f/4.5 Anastigmat Special lens, with a Kodak Service Rangefinder in the accessory shoe. Not a coupled rangefinder, but a darned good lens. It's a Tessar with rare earth glass.<br>

Obvious downside is the need for a 620 take-up spool, and to clip the flange on the feed spool. <br>

However, you are very likely to have to replace the bellows. Came with a terrible synthetic leather bellows.</p>

<p>My apologies if I got the III mixed up with the II. </p>

<p>I've been reading Jurgen's site and I'm a bit confused on the models. Which ones have a coupled rangefinder? Any? I know the Super Ikonta's do but what about the Bessa models?</p>

<p>thanks again</p>

<p>All three Bessa--Bessa RF, Bessa II, Bessa III have coupled rangefinders. These became popular about 1935. As for the Super Ikonta, I own the "A model, which is 4.5x6. There are two things I don't like about it: (1) the Albada finder doesn't really work any more (2) the camera is very "fiddly" to use. <br>

I have a nice little collection of folding cameras, most are 6x9. They include: 1914 Kodak Special No.1, 1928 ICA Cocarette Luxus (gorgeous!), 1928 Voigtlander Bergheil, 1935 Bessa, 1937 Bessa RF, 1938 Super Ikonta C. Of these, the Bessa RF is the easiest to use and gives me the image quality I want. </p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

I used to own Bessa RF 6x9, but cannot get used to the ergnomics. The shutter trigger is in an odd place

and whenever I trip it my camera moves. Even though the Super Ikonta has front cell focus instead of unit

focus lens, I still like its ergnomics better since I can trigger the shutter while keeps camera still thus

getting sharper images. I do love the Voigtlander lenses but overcoming their body oddities sometimes

can get in the way of photography.

<p>So much confusion here!<br>

Here are the main versions:<br>

Bessa (early model) no rangefinder, flip-up viewfinder, uncoated lens. <br>

Bessa (early model) with coupled rangefinder/viewfinder, uncoated lens. helomar, voigtar, skopar<br>

Bessa I, no rangefinder, chrome top, integrated viewfinder, coated vaskar or skopar<br>

Bessa 66, no rangefinder, 6x6, flip-up viewfinder, coated vaskar. (not sure if ever a skopar)<br>

Bessa II, coupled rangefinder, coated skopar, heliar, or lanthar.<br>

Bessa III (modern), coupled rangefinder, 6x7 or 6x6, heliar<br>

Bessa III W (modern), non-folding, coupled rangefinder,6x7 or 6x6, 55mm wide-angle color-skopar.</p>

 

<p>Hello again. I goofed! My Bessa is a I, not the II model. It does have the top end (for the time) Color-Skopar lens & a Compur-Rapid shutter. The Ercona II was the East German (DDR) 6x9 made parallel with the Zeiss Ikon 6x9 from West German (not enough time for that bit). It has the Tessar lens & the DDR Tempor shutter. The Record III has the Solinar lens & a Compur-Rapid shutter.<br>

The Bessa & Ercona are zone focused by "guesstimation". The Record does have a very good range finder built in, but it's "output" must be transferred to the focus ring in the lens assembly.<br>

The "drill" routine to use either of these cameras for hand held events is insane at times. Now and then I sneak some HH work in, but a monopod is used. Even on a tripod, I must "remind" myself to get all the bits n pieces right, but when I do . . oh Yah !<br>

Aloha, Bill</p><div></div>

<p>Your best bang for the buck by far is to get a Voigtlander Bessa RF w/ a Heliar lens, which you can usually find for $300-$400. Those old uncoated Heliars image so much better than the newer lenses, and have a 3-D quality to the shots. For all intents and purposes they're the same camera as a Bessa II, which will set you back $1000 w/ a Heliar lens (coated vs uncoated) and has unit focusing, a rangefinder, etc.</p>

<p>You're right about the stealth factor. I briefly owned a Fuji 6x9 rangefinder and it was comically big and it DID attract attention. Folders usually fly under the radar.</p>

<p>All of the 6x9 cameras generally have very good lenses, and a 3 element one stopped down can be quite nice. Keep in mind that unless you're enlarging beyond 8x10, a 35mm camera w/ fine grain film and proper exposure & development is not going to look much different than a 6x9 shot unless you enlarge it a lot. Unlike Bill, all of my 6x9 folder shots were made handheld. The trick is to keep the camera open w/ the film advanced to the next frame, carry it w/ one hand, and have the shutter cocked. Having it pre focused to the distance you expect to get the shot at helps too.</p>

<p>My favorite MF rangefinder is the Rapid Omega 100 (e.g., http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00c3RP). Of course it's only 6x7. It may be too convenient to use to satisfy your folder-bent predilections !</p>

<p>So in comparing the Bessa II with the RF model:</p>

<p>-RF is older. not that that matters.<br>

-RF is 2 separate windows. Is the Bessa II a single RF/VF window?</p>