v._b. Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 I recently bought old (1936/1937) Zeiss Ikon folding camera. This is a 520/2 model, 6X9. I loaded B&W film, shot one roll, developed but did not print yet. My question is how different is optical quality of these pre war camera lenses compared to modern ones. My camera has Tessar 105mm 4.5 uncoated lens. Thanks for commenting, Valdas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelging Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Valdas,,,The quality is excellent.I have a Super Ikonta with the same lens . I would advise using a lens hood ,being uncoated the lens is subject to flare .I think you will be very happy with this camera. Mine is down right now with shutter problems and I miss using it. Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 The classics forum here a P.N might get you better responses. Assuming that everything is properly adjusted on your folder (actually a rare event!) and that you learn how to really use it to its capability (also not necessarily simple), you can expect nice sharpness stopped down with lower contrast and poor flare resistance compared to a modern, coated lens. How do the negs look? People tend to use a camera like this to get a different look than a modern lens can provide. I eluded to this earlier, but don't be surprised to find shutter problems, bellows light leaks, lens haze, improper focus, poor front standard alignment etc with a folder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v._b. Posted November 25, 2004 Author Share Posted November 25, 2004 I do realize that this should be different type of photography (compared to modern medium format cameras), but I hope I still can use it for landscape shots and architecture to get pretty good details. I'm an amateur shooting with 35mm format Contax, so I have no intentions to go for high end MF stuff, but sometimes it's nice to use advantages of 6X9. Negs looks OK although it's hard to judge about real quality w/o making prints. Unfortunately my enlarger does not support 6X9 and in my country it's difficult to find labs to print from this size negative. Valdas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_m Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 It always amuses me when someone says 'I just bought such and such a camera and wondered how it performs'.... The answer is simple, put some film in it and shoot pictures. There is no guarantee that anyone elses results even with the same camera will give comparable results to your camera. Quality control still leaves variations in quality between lenses, shuters and general construction tolerances. And in an old camera these differences are magnified many times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_richert Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Quality is very good if the lens has been cleaned and the focus set correctly. The cameras in the best shape seem to be the ones with out a focus lens set wrong at some other time. Along with good techniques 1) Open camera slowly, snapping it open will cause a vacuum that will pull the film into the bellows. 2) Stop the lens down f/11 or greater for best results. 3) Watch for flare shoot with the sun to your back. Along with all the other things you know. You state your enlarger won't print 6x9 do some contact prints you should be able to see the quality. Check out my web site with pics from my Zeiss's http://davidrichert.com/pictures_taken_with.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tito sobrinho Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 My 6x9 Super Ikonta from 1934 with the same lens as yours, takes excellent B&W pictures. A professional lab, enlarged 2 "slides" to 11x14 with excellent results. My advice to you, is to test the shutter speeds before you take a picture, mine, were close to the actual speeds. Now, for B&W, you needn't worry much. I love the 6x9 format. Don't forget a lens hood, and for slower shutter speeds, I might add... a tripod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_elek Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 The lens should perform quite well. The most important thing with the folding cameras is physical condition and even more than that is that the lens is parallel to the film plane. It's probably impossible to tell if someone in the past has dropped the camera, which could knock the lens out of alignment. That usually would show up when you open the lens door. It should open cleanly and not hesitate at all. By the way, when you open the camera, use one hand to slow the door. Don't allow it to snap open. As Mike suggested, check it for light leaks, etc. My own thoughts are that the early Tessar had some very nice qualities to it. It's extremely sharp. I've shot my own camera without a lens hood and not really had any problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_elek Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Valdas, here's <a href=http://pages.prodigy.net/mm-elek/cameras/jinshanling800.jpg target=_new>an example from my Ikonta 520/2</a>. Warning: large photo (about 320k). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpj Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Mike Elek's example enlargement is one way of saying "seeing is believing," but I can attest that this camera/lens combination has long been known for this type of capability. As someone else stated, providing it hasn't been dropped or abused, many great photographs from WWII by military officers who had an interest in photography were made with the Zeiss Ikon. Back then you had to know a lot more about the medium than the point-and- shoot people of today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_elek Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 This is one area where the current state of digital could never hope to resolve this amount of detail. Down the road -- possibly? Though it would have to make a huge leap in the ability to resolve fine detail. This is a negative that could easily be blown up to ridiculous proportions and still retain quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tito sobrinho Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 Mike, I'm impressed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 Lets be fair about the question. Not everyone owns a top quality MF camera to compare their classic against. If you have a loupe, you might want to compare it against some of your sharpest 35mm. Center sharpness of the Tessar will not disappoint. Mike Elek's photo confirms my personal experience: the Tessar is an amazing lens that is completely under-rated. I've yet to use a bad one where the lens was at fault. As usual, folks here are pushing me over the edge so I've been sniping on ebay for the last month, hoping to get a Rolleiflex Standard or Automat with an uncoated Tessar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now