What size is 6x9 - really?

This may sound silly, but I am having some trouble figuring out what

6x9 really is. Sat. at a camera show I picked up a negative carrier

for my Beseler 23C, and a roll film back for my century crown graphic.

The negative carrier has an opening 5.5 cm x 9.15 cm, and the opening

on the RH 8 lever-type roll film back is 5.5 cm x 7.8 cm. I measured

the

carrier for my Omega D2 and the opening is 5.5 cm x 8.1 cm. 6x6 and

6x7 backs and carriers seem to be pretty consistent, but it looks like

6x9 is pretty variable - and the RH8 is obviously not a real 6x9 - are

any of the other roll film holders any different? Thanks

 

Stephen

A Horseman 6X9 back measures 82X56mm. I also have a Beseler 6X9 holder

that measures 82X56mm.(p#2434RNC) The Fuji GW690 makes 82X56mm.

I have an old Bessa 6X9 folder that does 87X56mm. 6X9 does seem to

be getting cropped a bit, but I still find it a nice size to work with

for roll film.

I have a Horseman back that measures 80x56.

6x9 in Europe refers to sheet film that is 2.5" x 3.5". Over the years it has been associade with 2.25" x 3.25" sheet film available in the USA & UK. Format 2.25" x 3.25" is refered to 6x9 in a general manner only. It's not exact.

 

The 120 film specs call for 8 exp of 2.25" x 3.25" (no metric mesurement). 120 film is wider than 2.25" x 3.25" sheet film thus requires different negative carriers.

 

Beseler made a number of "6x9" carriers for the 23C:

 

8061 2¼ x 3¼ film pack

 

8062 2¼ x 3¼ roll negs

 

8063 2¼ x 3¼ sheet film neg carrier

 

Yours seems to be a bit wider. What is the number on the carrier? Could it be a cystome modified unit?

I've seen the JIS standard quoted as 56x84.

Good answers above. 6x9 (cm) and 6x7 are generally misnomers, modernizations of 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 inches and 2-1/4 x 2-3/4 inches respectively.

Thanks - and the 23C carrier is a No. 8951, which I don't find any listing for. If you look closely it looks like it might be modified, but if so a very neat job. I guess the Graflex and Singer RH 8 backs are a little less than most other nominal 6x9 backs. Oh well, still works nicely with my 65mm Angulon on the little Century Crown Graphic, and gives me a lot of information in a negative that is really huge compared to 35mm. I appreciate the input on this one.

 

SP

My Mamiya Press 6 x 9 is 56 x 84 (which is the same 2:3 ratio as the mythical 60 x 90). The RH-8's 78mm sounds more like 6 x 8 to me.

Having 6x7 and 6x9 carriers for my 23CII, the other day, I picked up an old Beseler 6x8 carrier for $10. Now, all I have to do is scrape together $10,000 to buy a Fuji 680 system with the shift capability

Linhof Super Rolex = 56.38 x 82.55.

Wista = 57.25 x 84.57

 

When I was Product Manager for Beseler in the early 70's we

discovered that we had 7 different carriers per enlarger for 6x7.

One each for Linhof, Koni Omega, Pentax, Graphlex, and what

ever the other 3 were back then. They were all a different size.

We changed that to one for all as we were always in stock on

something and out of stock on what the customer needed.

 

but then measure 6x6.

 

Most are not square and none are 6x6.

For that matter, what size is 2 1/4 X 3 1/4? I use an old Kodak

Precision enlarger for MF. I have 2 nominal 2 1/4 X 3 1/4 carriers

for it--the plain (roll film ?) one is 54 X 80 mm. The 2 1/4 X 3 1/4

S.F. (sheet film?) carrier is 50 X 76 mm. My Kodak Medalist II, of

the same vintage and brand, produces 57 X 83 mm.

negatives-Go figure!

 

Bob Marvin

Stephen,

 

I can't find a listing for 8951 either. I've listed all the Beseler 23C items I cound find on my web site at:

 

http://www.mindspring.com/~aoresteen/bes23c.html

 

 

Eric, I'm not aware of a 6x8 carrier for the 23C. Does it have a number?

 

I use the glass negative carrier for my 6x9 sheet film & 120 6x9. It's just a pain keeping it clean.

56 x 84 mm; 2.2047 x 3.3071 inches; 2 & 3/16 x 3 & 5/16

I checked out my more than 50 years old RADA rollfilm back, which I bought in Germany and used with an 6 x 9 CERTO SPORT. It measures 5,65 x 8,3 cm.

I always thought that there is only one of a kind, but as we can see, that´s not true.

 

Another Stephan

 

Stephan Funke FRPS

I measured many cameras in my collection and the sizes are all over the place, as you guys already found. A Kodak Medallion predecessor is 58x84, a Kodak Medalist appears to be 57x83, an old Voigtlander is only 54x82, etc. etc. I have an unlabeled 6x9 roll back for a 4x5 camera, and it is by far the largest at 57x87. Problem is, it doesn't matter how big the neg is if your carrier or printer is 54x82, like many are. The smallest ones are not that much bigger than a big-frame 6x7, like a Pentax 6x7 which wastes very littel space, and yields 2 more pics per 120 roll.

A lot depends on why you want the 6x9 negative. Is it the 2:3 ratio, or is it simply a quest for the BIG negative. If the former, most cameras maintain this, or are so close it makes little difference in terms of the ratio. If the latter, the small difference in gate sizes DO MATTER, if you sit down and start calculating. Some 2x3 sheet holders are very small, as noted above (some are really closer to 6x7, since they measure 55x78, or even 54x70!). But, if you remember that a 35mm neg is 24x36mm (864 total mm), it is possible to have two different 6x9 cameras in which the actual negative sizes differ by a measurable portion of the size of the 35 format. The small "mm" difference might seem irrelevant, but the difference between some older folders 55x80 (4400 total mm) and my old Ikonta 56x84 (4760), which, and I am estimating here, around 8% larger, and the difference isn't that far off from that of a half-frame camera (a neg big enough to regularly make decent 5x7 pics). As for the closeness of a good 6x7 and good 6x9, I think it is deceptive. For instance, the camera Miles refers to, the Pentax 6x7, if I remember correctly has a gate of 55x68 (3740 total), whereas the most popular, recent 6x9, the Fuji 690 has a gate of 56x82 (4592 total). The difference between these two is 852, almost the size of the film neg most people work from since as noted above 35mm totals 864. True, 6x7 yields more pics, but if you prefer the 2:3 ratio, a 6x9 camera can be ideal - if you LIKE to enlarge. The numbers can be deceptive between the two format sizes, but it can have a payoff in the darkroom, and not just in terms of perspective. The limiting factor, as the question here noted at the beginning, is in the darkroom. The film gate doesn't matter if your enlarger has a 54x78 gate! However, any decent machinist can make a carrier part to size, or enlarg your current one. Many people got their 6x9 carrier from an "adaption" to an old 6x7 carrier; this is especially true of people using less expensive or portable equipment, like the lightweight 690's from Japan in the 1970's.