Rapid Omega 100 6x7 RF camera

<p><strong>Rapid Omega 100</strong><br />1975<br>

Kadlubek Nr. KON1760<br>

<strong>Introduction</strong><br>

I keep trying to get more into medium format. <br />First, I got a Pentacon 6TL and a full set of lenses. <br />Then a Weltaflex 6x6 TLR.<br /> I even shot a bunch of 120 film 6x6 East German box cameras and folding cameras. <br />Somehow, while I had fun shooting all those cameras, and appreciated the greater clarity and detail of a larger negative, it never really 'clicked' for me somehow. <br /><br />But somewhere or other, recently, I saw what are generically known as "Koni-Omegas." Despite having exaggerated opening bids on occasion, some people did seem to be getting various versions of this line for reasonable prices. I also suspect that there is a general downturn in film camera prices, at least judging from some of the bargains I've got lately.<br /><br />So after several failures (a nice Koni-Omega with the wide-angle lens, was one), I put in a "holding" bid for one Rapid Omega 100 -- one of the last of the breed. I meant to come back with a more serious bid later, but got tied up away from computer and, too late, realized that the auction was over. I went on line to see what it had gone for, and to my astonishment found that I had actually won it, I think for less than anyone else has recently paid for one. <br /><br />One reason it may have gone unbid on, was that it came with the 220 film back, rather than the 120 back. <br /><br />There are older posts here on the Omegas such as http://www.photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00623G , http://www.photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00Qaws , and http://www.photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00QYTG?start=0 to give only the ones close to the top of a search.<br /><br />This camera evolved out of the Simmon Bros. Combat Camera PH-501/PF Signal Corps Combat Camera of 1944 - 1945, built in the United States during WWII as a combat camera ( http://www.peterlanczak.de/simmon_combatcamera1.htm ). Peter Lanczak seems to have pretty well "cornered the market" on this camera series - his detailed site shows all the variants and development, starting from http://www.peterlanczak.de/koni_overview.htm. The camera began as another of those Allied efforts to make up for the inability to acquire German cameras during WWII. <br /><br />Here are some of the stages in development. The 1954 model is a commercial model, available directly to the public.</p><div></div>

<p><strong>The camera</strong><br>

At first these were made by Simmons Omega themselves, but were later constructed by Konica. Like most of the line, the Rapid Omega 100 takes a 6x7 cm (2 1/4" × 2 3/4") negative on 120 (10 shots) or 220 (20 shots) film in appropriate film backs.<br /><br />The Rapid Omega 100, along with the 200, are the last models of this camera built. The main difference between the two models was that the 200 model had interchangeable magazines, so you could swap film in mid roll. <br />On the 100 model, the film holder can be interchanged for either a 120 back or a 220 back, but only when not loaded with film. However, if one makes allowance for shorter roll on 120, the magazine seems to work OK - that's what I shot the accompanying pictures on, not being able at short notice to get 220 film locally. <br /><br />My rationale is as follows - 1) the 200 film though thinner, does have paper backing at the start and finish. 2) the pressure plate is automatically pulled back from the film during film advance to reduce friction, I would think this would somewhat help for the problem of the thicker 120 film and its paper backing. 3) Since the 120 film is thicker, film flatness should not be a problem the way it would be if you were putting 220 through a 120 magazine. <br /><br />On the other hand, could the 120 film and backing paper damage the plate or something else? In the long run, I'm going to try to find the 120 back so as to have the choice.<br /><br />Mine came without the lens hood, but the vendor is looking to see if he can find it. The original hood gives some additional ways of accessing depth-of-field information, but otherwise everything works fine without it.<br />The lens had the adapter ring for the 90mm Hexanon which converted it from 49mm filter thread to Series 6. All it took was a rubber cork to start the ring loose (being careful to hold the front lens element so it doesn't unscrew) to remove that, and now the camera takes 49mm screw in filters. With that gone, I have ordered a collapsable rubber hood and have got a 49mm lens cap on it now. <br /><br />In the picture below, the 49mm>Series VI double-threaded adapter is shown to the left, and some 49mm screw-in filters to the right. Although the film box shown is Tri-X, I actully shot Ilford XP2 Super 400 C41 chromogenic film.</p>

<p>Umm. picture below:</p>

<div></div>

<p>I believe that the Hexanon 90mm is a double Gauss design (my beau ideal of lens designs), but whatever it is, it does credible work. I had a slight sprain in my left wrist (which hand holds the camera and fires the shutter), so found the camera a little heavy, but overall it handles nearly as nicely as so many of the nice little rangefinders we see regularly on Classic Manual Cameras forum.<br /><br />Even though the Rapid Omega 100 does not have interchangeable magazines, just film back, it does come with a metal dark slide that inserts back of the lens to allow lens changes without fogging film in the camera. There is a handy storage slot for the slide on the film back. Everything is interlocked, pretty much six ways from Sunday, so it is really impossible accidentally to shoot something or to double expose. There are ways of purposely doing so, of course.<br /><br />It's an interesting camera to shoot. I am going to order some 220 film for it, I will probably try to get one of the 120 film backs as well - it works to shoot the shorter roll in the 220 magazine, but requires considerable attention to detail to do so without waste.<br /><br />I was concerned to get it tested within the return period from the vendor, so I, still another time, went out to the campus lake. Some of you are probably getting tired of these views, and no claims to artistic virtues are made here. Try to think of it as a Zen exercise, and contemplate the differences between picture taken of them with a Perfex or Exa, and these taken with a 6x7 RF camera. :)</p><div></div>

<p>More detail of the dogwood blossoms</p><div></div>

<p>Dogwood is said to be threatened, but is hanging on here, so far.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Although these examples are all horizontal, it works just as well in vertical mode. Most were shot at up ro down from f/11 at 1/500, although the last two had a yellow filter on (-1 stop).<br>

Also among the folklore of these cameras is the advice not to use them at political events since the advance lever - click, click does indeed sound very much like a cartridge being chambered in rifle. :|<br>

Anyhow, it was interesting, and it is by far the fastest and easiest 120 film shooting I've done. In the dying days of Graflex 4x5" journalism, this camera gave the SLRs a serious competitor. Rapid is the word, and it lived up to its promise. :)</p>

<p>JDM wrote:"I believe that the Hexanon 90mm is a double Gauss design (my beau ideal of lens designs), but whatever it is, it does credible work."</p>

<p>No, tessar type. Don't guess or hope, count reflections. As we both know, there's nothing wrong with tessar types.</p>

<p>For info on the 60/5.6 and 58/5.6 (they're <em>not</em> the same), see <a href="http://www.galerie-photo.com/2-lens-6x9-dan-fromm.html">http://www.galerie-photo.com/2-lens-6x9-dan-fromm.html</a> I wanted a 58 but when a 60 came along for $50 couldn't resist. You want one of either, really you do.</p>

Well great minds think alike I was considering doing this one too... Welcome to the club! I bought mine back in the late 1980s (BC) and I too found it one of the least fussy cameras to use. I absolutely love the 90mm Hexanon and I've bid a few times on the WA to no avail. The glass is tip top! I think mine is the same as yours removable backs, with dark slide? I get some radical spacing with my 120 back and often lose the 10th exposure. (Needs work) Mine came with the 770 Strobonar which I have recently been looking to get repaired. The left-hand grip combined with the flash on the right was so balanced that even if the flash doesn't work , it's an excellent handle. Your results are very nice and I can tell by your comments that you might be embracing MF as a valid contender. I have the handbook somewhere. The only thing I remember really finding interesting was how you could plug and unplug holes in the frame mask to mark your negatives. I would like a second back ...and a WA too!

<p>They're certainly an interesting and ingenious camera, and there's no disputing that the lenses are excellent. Commercially, I could never find a slot for them in the armoury, though photographers who were more involved in action or press situations swore by them. One photographer I knew used them successfully for wedding groups, though most of us were using Hassleblads or RB67's. The one great use I found for them was in aerial photography; they were ideal cameras for hanging out the side of an aircraft, so long as one remembered to work the mechanism fully. Nice outfit, <strong>JDM</strong>, and thanks for an interesting (and nostalgic) post.</p>

<p>Thanks all, I certainly like Tessars too, so whatever, I'm just a happy little fool. Why look myself, when I was sure someone would either confirm or pounce? ;) If I had looked a little closer at the manual (available from Butkus), I would have seen how it is made (below).</p>

<p>Yes, Chuck, the 'pin' markings in the margin sounded like an interesting idea, one especially useful for journalists with the 200 interchangeable magazines, but even for the 100 changeable between rolls back.</p>

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

<p>I have always thought the Omega 100's were tidy looking cameras, all busness and no fluff. I shoot 35mm half frame a lot and find when I do pick up a 6X6 or 6X9 folder the 12 or 8 shots on a roll instead of 72 really make me more careful and that is a good thing. It's also easier to pick out that one special shot on a contact sheet. You don't even need a magnifer!</p>

<p>Nice camera to snag at a bargain price. A rugged pro tool with top notch glass. Expect a Popeye forearm to develop.</p>

<p>Those Rapid Omegas and also Koni-Omegas were quite the workhorses in their day. Maybe a bit cumbersome to use initially, but worth the effort. My dad had considered buying a Koni-Omega back in the early 70's but instead went with a Mamiya Super Press 23. <br>

Great shots. Hope the wrist heals soon.</p>

<p>Picture 2 is nice filigree against the sky. Thanks, sp.</p>

<p>This is one of my all time favourite cameras!!! And... I don't own one :( I had the pleasure of participating in a gear loan from one of the nice people on APUG a long time ago, and one of the original Koni-Omegas (silver, without interchangeable backs - with neat little shutters for changing lenses) was a resident of my camera bag for 3 months. I only had the 90mm lens, but found it to be a wonderful piece of glass - the only downside was it was a little flare prone, but not in any way out of line with what should be expected, and not really a problem at all.<br>

I think the two things that immediately struck me about the camera was the surprising ease of handling (I expected something this size to be far more unwieldy) and the very quiet operation. I also have to admit to endless (and very childish) joy I got from the film advance lever - some of the looks I got were priceless! I don't think the shutter is any quieter than anything else, but after the lever advance clanks its way with all the subtlety of a 12 gauge shotgun, the little "tssk" of the shutter was quite a contrast.<br>

Speaking of contrast, the lens is just wonderful - I simply can't find a fault with it. I know its not really something you would expect from such a large camera, but it was a great walking companion for me, and while I meant to do some more "serious" picture taking with a tripod et al, I never got a chance - I had such a great time walking about, shooting handheld, usually using the sunny 16 rule. <br>

As i write this I keep thinking - why DON'T I own one???!!! Some of the prices are ridiculous on line and seem to have reached new highs lately, and I keep thinking that this is not the most versatile system to get into compared to something like a RB67 (which has to be THE bargain of the camera world), but in retrospective, I really should ask myself "Who CARES!?" given how much fun I had during my time with the Koni-Omega...</p>

<p>The only note of caution - gentle and steady is the way to go with the advance lever - I did end up crumpling up a roll of FP4 by being a little too vigorous with it (did I mention it sounds a bit like a shotgun? Yeah... I find that way too amusing, I know....). I don't know if the interchangeable back versions are as touchy?</p>

<p>Anyhow, great camera, I miss it and I think I should go buy one now.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>....). I don't know if the interchangeable back versions are as touchy?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sure are. That's the one big weakness of the design. If I don't pull the advance slide just right, frames either overlap or gets spaced too widely apart.</p>

<p>Robert .. That with the frames ..I mentioned that too. I saw an on-line tutorial how to do a CLA on the back and just when I<br>

was resigned to do it the next time I used the camera.. the next time was OK and I got all 10 exposures.. it did get a little wacky towards the end though all 10 were there.. another reason to put off working on it!<br>

http://randamteagarden.tripod.com/id31.htm</p>

<p>Great find JDM, I've been keeping an eye out for one of those for quite a while. They are usually just a little too pricey. I keep hoping to run across one like you did and snag it for a good price. If you decide you don't like it let me know, I have some Contax gear I'd be willing to part with. :-) </p>

<p>My first use of the Koni was during my time as a photographer in the USAF. Before the Koni, we were using the Graphlex XL. A good reliable beast that you could probably drive nails with, but hardly a comfortable, or ergonomic camera. The Koni (at least to some of us) was a huge leap in comfort, and ease of use. Specialy the fact that you didn't have to remember to cock the shutter for each shot. I bought a nice older example a year or two ago fro a sweet deal, and have had great luck. The lenses (I have the 90, and the 58MM) are truly sharp, and contrasty, and I still have the 6x7 format that I love. My koni is a good choice when my old body just doesn't feel up to carrying my rb67 around in the woods.</p>

<p>I have a Rapid Omega 100 - interesting camera. My only complaint - the 58mm lens (and viewfinder) are still a bit pricey for my liking. Otherwise it would make a great MF 6x7 wide angle kit.</p>

<p>Hi JDM, The original Omega Camera was designed by my old and dear friend, Fred Simmon. Fred was like a favorite uncle to me (easily 20 years older than I) and I got to know him well when I worked for Calumet (the original) also I never worked for him, we just like each other. I'm quite sure that the lens for this original camera was a specially designed tessar type created by Wollensak according to my discussions with him. Since the US and the UK countries used 4x5,8x10, 16x20, etc., Fred created the 2 1/4 X 2 3/4, 10 exposure 120 system, not having to cut off part of the image. It was not called 6x7 for some years and a couple of later companies liked to say that they invented the format (I resent that). Fred's camera was a superb device. The one disadvantage was lack of lens interchangability. Red and Konica cooperated on the Koni Omega Rapid and it lasted for quite a number of year. My long time friend Hans Wendt use the Rapid 100 with a long lens to shoot the entire series fo photos of a passenger plane charshing into San Diego Bay.</p>

<p>The two most remarkable medium format cameras in my life time for their period were the original Omega 120 and the Vidax 2 1/4 X 3 14 with interchangable lenses and automatic RF camming. Most people in the photo industry felt that the success of polaroid harmed thoe two great camaeras. I personally doubt that, however, I believe that the lack of a good 100 speed color print film with Type C's color prints of 1957and a good quality 100 speed b/w film had as much to do with it as anything. While Verichrome Pan showed up in 1952 and Tri X in 1954, the game was prettymuch over for them by the early 50's. Also, professional use of 120 film was mostly related to Rollei's 6x6 in those days, habit can be a powerful voice in an industry. I was working in the south from 1947 until 1954 and then through 1957 in the city (NYC) before going the Santa Barbara and Brooks Inst.</p>

<p>Lynn </p>

<p>Thanks Lynn,<br>

As ever, the additional historical information is of great interest and value.<br>

The Wollensak/Tessar detail is nice to have and makes a great deal of sense, along with your discussion of the format itself.</p>

<p>I made a stab at some magazines, but the whole lot went for a lot more than the magazines alone (what I was after) were worth.</p>

<p>I have the earlier version. I have read articles saying that the 90mm is better than the normal lens used by Hasselblad. The color prints are sharp, vibrant with great contrast. Don't really know what the lens testers would say but a retired wedding photographer looked at some of my prints and said I had "nice glass". Happy snapping!!</p>

<p>I did get the original vendor to sell me a 120 film magazine he had. It seems to work fine, but the only place in town to get 120 C-41 processing has had a problem, so no pictures yet.</p>