Searching for a 120 film 6X9 classic manual camera...

In my 6x9's & 6x6 cameras, 400 or 100 asa materials work great if rated at 250 or 80. Development is currently with Pyrocat HDC and yields "average" negative density where one can read a paper (yes, that so called thing of the past !) thru the negs. I also use a hand held meter.

One item you will find helpful will be a tripod or monopod. I use a light weight tripod when afield, a Husky V when at the Grand Canyon or similar windy place. I attempt to keep shutter speeds above 1/25 sec. Any one of the 6x9 folders will fit nicely in a Lowepro Edit 110 bag, which is available for under $20 off Ebay.

Aloha, Bill

This is what you might get with a 6x9. Here is my Ercona II folder, with UFX400 material ( for all practical purposes, Ilford Kentmere material), developed in Hypercat. Taken with the light weight tripod. Frame on left is full sized, right is a crop into the radiator area. Aloha, Bill

I'd go with the HP5, at box speed or pulled if you prefer, it'll be just fine.

 

In fact, given my personal preferences and that older lenses can sometimes be a little lower in contrast, I'd go with HP5 in Rodinal, but that's just me.

 

Regardless of what you put through it, I'm sure it'll be enjoyable.

Thanks guys. I ended up shooting some Tmax. It was a bit of a trial- I wound past the 1st frame so began with frame 2, double exposed frames 5 & 6, and seemed to only get to number 7 in the end. So far I've tried to wind the film into the final roll position but the wider has gotten VERY tight.... ha ha bit of steep learning curve, I'd say. I shot mostly at greater distances, tho I did get pretty close on frame 6- I set the distance scale at 1.2 meters. If the double exposure come out OK it might look alright, tho. Most of my speeds were slower, fastest I shot was 1/100th. Mostly it was 1/50th, maybe 1/25th. Aperture at mostly f8 but did also shoot at least one frame wide open. SO maybe I overexposed the ISO 400 Tmax? I figured the lens is pretty slow, it wasn't super bright out. I dunno, we'll see I guess, eh.

 

Edit, oh and the small magnifier viewfinder mounted on teh lens works surprisingly well. Although I think I was looking and framing for the horizontal on frame 5 which I shot vertically- or vise versa. Again, we'll see what things look like when I get the film developed.

 

I'll be sending this film out, as I don't develop my own. Considering the slow shutter speeds, should I have them push it, pull it, or just develop as normal?

 

Thanks again.

Has the Kodak Medalist been overlooked? It fits the bill as being a 6x9 non folder. It has a disadvantage that it uses 620 film but if your not to fussed about respooling 120 to 620 then it can produce very good images. Its 100mm Ektar lens is one of the best.

 

Kodak Medalist II Review

Has the Kodak Medalist been overlooked? It fits the bill as being a 6x9 non folder. It has a disadvantage that it uses 620 film but if your not to fussed about respooling 120 to 620 then it can produce very good images. Its 100mm Ektar lens is one of the best.

 

Kodak Medalist II Review

 

I was waiting to see if anyone would mention the Medalist. It's an excellent 6x9 camera with a superb lens. Yes, It does take 620 film which come people like to fuss about, but it's really not that hard if you have at least 2 620 spools.

 

There's a lot of emphasis people put on getting a Medalist II over the original model, although in my eyes they are equally capable if you don't plan on using flash. This is of course a moot point if you have a synchronizer and like flash bulbs.

 

I suggest reading Mike Eckman's review as well if interested:

https://www.mikeeckman.com/2015/12/kodak-medalist-1944/

 

Here's one of my favorite shots from my Medalist:

 

OK learning curve?

Shot a roll of film thru the Voigtlander Bessa 6X9 and afterwards, the film wouldn't seem to wind all the way out, for whatever reason. SO I opend the camera late at night with no lights on and sort of hand wound it into its spool, stuck it inside an open mylar film pack and wrapped the whole thing in tin foil. Hopefully I've not totally messed this up. I seem to have gotten less than the expected number of exposures while shooting (I know I wound past the number one which looked like an I then stopped once I saw the "2" and began shooting from there). I will send the film away for processing at first opportunity to see what has come of it all.

 

Has anyone experienced this thing where the film didn't seem to want to wind up properly, though? All was well until that point or so it seemed!

Fujifilm made some pretty nice 6X7 and 6X9's and they don't appear to all that expensive on Ebay. I believe the best one to get these days is the Fuji GW690 or GS690. The last and I understand the best model is the GW690III . They were made with a 80mm or 90mm lens as well as wide angle versions. I've never used one, but they seem to get pretty good write ups. I think they were all rangefinder cameras.

I have a war-time Zeiss-Ikon Nettar that is quite nice with Anstigmat 105mm. The shutter bound a couple years back and I've not bothered with tinkering with it yet, largely because I enjoy my other 6x9 more (one of two I've had of the same) which is the Franka Rolfix II. Frankas don't seem to be as well known/remembered these days and go for less noticeably money. I'd shot with the 6x6 Franka Solida III many times before picking up the Rolfix II. Both are equipped with simple triplets, the Solida III with a Schneider Krueznach Radionar 80mm, and the Rolifix II with a Rodenstock Trinar 105. I love the rendering of the former. The latter on the Rolfix I've not quite figured out all its idiosyncrasies - sometimes it's wild, sometimes flat, sometimes sharp, but the edges and corners are usually at least somewhat soft, varying to incredibly so with lots of chroma activity. Still I like it a lot, and the Rolfix is lighter/simpler/more compact than others I've used. A most basic folder - which is also part of what I love about it.

Here's a shot from last fall from it, and two from 3 or 4 years back.

 

everything we could know better by Kevin Rosinbum (Eyewanders Foto), on Flickr

 

ages by Kevin Rosinbum (Eyewanders Foto), on Flickr

 

enter here by Kevin Rosinbum (Eyewanders Foto), on Flickr

Another voice for the Kodak Medalist. Built to military specifications with an extremely fine 100mm Ektar lens (mine is of later publication and coated). A simple task to respool 120 to 620 spool. A very interesting design. Since I don’t use flash, I prefer the original Medalist because of the fine focusing knob. While ever ready cases can be a pain, I find that the Medalist case helps when hand holding .

Some stuff on the Medalist:

 

Concerning the Medalist

I found this on line to modify 120 spools to fit into a 620 camera such a the Kodak Medalist:

 

120in620

 

Looks like a simple solution. Now you can go out and buy up Medalist cameras and use them.

I think I have about all of the cameras mentioned so far and some that haven't been. A Kodak Monitor 620, if you can find one with serviceable bellows and the Anastigmat Special lens, is quite a quality camera. My Medalist II has been converted to use 120 and its lens is the same formula and quality as those used on the first Hasselblads. I have 3 lenses for my Fuji and they are all good. The biggest problem with 6x9s is keeping the film flat. The Medalist and the Fuji do a good job of it.

Agfa Clack, $50 or less.

I just bought a very nice Brooks Veriwide 6x9 cm format on eBay with the original 120/220 roll film body. After purchasing and receiving it, I found that the adapter plate that accepts the body to the lens/shutter mount body is the same as the old Graflex XL. That means that if you can find an adapter plate, it will accept all the Graflex Graflok and Horseman et al film magazines and backs. That gives you the wide variety of Graflok compatible film backs available on Ebay for very reasonable prices. As I see it, should the original and now ancient Brooks film advance fail, there are ready replacements in the wide choice of Graflok compatible film backs allowing you to change from 6x9 cm all the way down to 645 format if desired, while retaining the excellent Scheider Angulon lens and Compur shutter.

 

I just purchased from Ebay a junker Graflex XL with a fully functional XL film back for a song. It is my intention to separate the film back and XL adapter plate from the junk camera body which I will trash. Hopefully, with the XL-Graflok adapter plate, I'll be able to extend the usefulness of my Brooks Veriwide camera with the many compatible film backs that are available for very reasonable prices.

Cool! I was looking at that Brooks Veriwide (a later model). Trying to read. up about it, a lot of folks think it's a bit of a one-trick pony, but it looked pretty neat to me!

For the. price the seller was asking, well let's say I've spent much the same a few times on cameras in the past.

Now that I've shot a test roll in my Brooks-Veriwide, there are apparently some light leaks. Looking at the light trap with the back opened, I see that there is neither felt or foam in the light trap grooves. Is this normal and relies only on the flat black surfaces of the light trap groove, or do I need to have someone fit and install foam?

Note: The dark slide slot is already taped over and shouldn't be a light leak source.

 

Can anyone help me?

I bought a Graflex XL in the mid 80s for a few hundred, but regretted it almost immediately and nver used it untiil 2010 or so. As it had no back the seller threw in two 70mm roll film backs.. so the film dilema and life stepped in. Meanwhile, I found a Graflok Adapter and finally used it, but the focus is very stiff and Compur shutter ..well needs work. It was a real beater, but the 3.5 Tessar is very nice. The three times I've used it, I have spent a day or two trying to get the shutter consistent. It needs an overhaul. I have some backs from the Century Graphic and Pacemaker 4x5. I'm well outfitted in this regard.

On the topic of affordable 6x9's, my personal goal was a clean, late model Zeiss Super Ikonta C with the coated lens and Synchro Compur shutter. But these cameras tend to be quite pricey when one can find one, so I did like many other folks have done, and went the Russian route. I bought a Moskva 5, which is sort of a modern looking update of the Super Ikonta C design. It is somewhat crude in construction, but everything works as it should. Most importantly though, it does take very nice pics. The lens in that old camera is no slouch. It's coated, labeled "H-24 f/3.5 10.5cm." Anyway, the old Moskva is a good shooter, and well worth the money spent.