Thinking of stepping back into medium format folders - advice?

[Robert_Lai]

A few years ago, I got interested in medium format. At one point, I

had a Moskva 5, a Zeiss Ikoflex I, and a Zeiss Super Ikonta B

(532/16). I spent the money to have all of them completely overhauled

by Wolf Umbach. The Ikoflex always felt a little too delicate and jam

prone in the shutter department (even after servicing), so it didn't

inspire a lot of confidence. I also had trouble working fast with the

L-R reversal on the ground glass (most of my photo life has been with

35mm SLRs).The Moskva 5 was disappointing compared to the Zeiss

products when comparing the images. It also appeared to be crudely

made in comparison to the Zeiss products.<p>Hands down, the Super

Ikonta B was the most fun of the bunch. The RF was fast to use, and

in an interesting venue such as Toronto's Chinatown, I could blast of

a whole roll of film within a few minutes. I loved the ability to

fold it flat in seconds, and then walk onwards with it in my overcoat

jacket pocket.<p>I sold all of these cameras for reasons which I don't

want to go too heavily into. Let's say that the spousal unit was not

happy about my spending upon and repairing these old cameras.<p>Well,

the itch has come back. Has anyone compared the handling of an Agfa

Isolette III to the Zeiss Super Ikonta? Does having an uncoupled

rangefinder slow you down a lot? Should I go back to the Zeiss Super

Ikonta B? I'd like to keep costs down, even though I know I'll

probably have to send the camera off for servicing when I acquire it.

OTOH, I'd like to have a camera that I'll enjoy using. The Moskva 5

was cheap enough, but I really didn't get a lot of pleasure from

it.<p>Sorry if this has been asked before, but I'd love to hear from

those of you who have a number of folding cameras which are your

favorites, and why. Thanks.

[bueh]

My Moskva-5 is fine, my Iskra 1 is even better but has <b><a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Dxmf">some quirks</a></b>, and I do not have the funds to invest in a Super Ikonta. As I often shoot wide open and at minimum focus distance, I find uncoupled rangefinders too inaccurate and don't like the slowing down. So for me only cameras with coupled RFs are worth it. But if you can live with the drawbacks of an uncoupled RF, I recommend getting an accessory rangefinder you can use with <i>any</i> camera and buy a less expensive folder with a nice Tessar-type lens (i.e., a East German Welta Weltax -- one of my favorite 6x6 folders).

[dean_matsueda]

I have the Isolette III and a Certo Six (coupled-rangefinder) and I actually find the "guess-

focusing" method to be a lot faster. Then again, the Certo didn't have the brightest

rangerfinder in the world so, perhaps the slowness was due to having a harder time seeing

the rangefinder.

 

But y'know, I've seen some really wonderful results from the Russian copies and I wouldn't

necessarily count-out some of the "lesser known" folders, too -- Baldas; Voigtlaners; etc.

 

Robert, have you checked out CE Nelson's (Craig's) forum yet? You'll find some good

threads from folks posting pix from their favorite folders.

 

nelsonfoto.com/phpBB2

[alejandrokeller]

Robert, check out the site of this jurgen guy (<a href="http://www.certo6.com" >certo6.com</a>). He seems to be doing a very good work. The only reason why I have not bought from him is that it feels a little strange to have the cameras fly all the way across the ocean when there are so many arround in Europe. Write to him and ask him all these questions... I dont really have that much experience but I can tell you that I am having a great time with <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=564447" >my Isolette III</a> (slower Apotar 85mm f/4.5 version).

</p><p>

Actually, <b>I find the uncoupled rangefinder very usefull</b>, specially if I want to be discrete. I can measure the distance with the camera closed. Only then, I open it and focus. The camera is, of course, very silence. Great for street photography or spontaneous snapshots... I do forget ocassionally about adjusting the lens to match the rangefinder, but only because I have always used Relfex Cameras.

[ivan_dzo]

I'm having great fun with a Zeiss Ikonta 6x6. Lovely camera, very sturdy and sharp lens. The coupled rf is good but not always necessary. With Tri-x in, it makes a great discreet street camera. If you buy from an Ebay dealer, you shouldn't have to spend anything on it.

[jeremy_keller]

Hi Robert,

 

My vote goes to the Ikonta. I am using a Super Ikonta III with the f3.5 Novar, purchased from Jurgen two years ago. It's a fine camera, albeit limited by 1930s technology, meaning that the lens needs to be stopped down to f11 or so for critically sharp negatives. Also, contrast is not spectacular, unless one is in bright sunshine. Still, the f3.5 Novar is a better lens IMHO than any of the f2.8 Tessars I have tried on the model B.

 

Re the distaff complaint: show her the price tags for old folders compared with those of Mamiya 7s, Hassleblads, etc.

[bruce_appel]

I have three folders, a non-rangefinder Bessa I, a Super Ikonta 532/16, and an Iskra. The Iskra is currently getting a cla. I bought the Ikonta and the Iskra at the same time, with the plan of selling the one I like/use the least. Thus far I really like the Ikonta. Built like a tank, classic tessar lens, great ergonomics.

The Iskra, may be a better user. It has a great (coated) lens, the viewfinder is bigger and brighter than the Ikonta. The build quality is not as good. I find the ergonomics not as good as the Ikonta. I find it harder to find the focus gizmo, and to cock the shutter when it is up to my eye. The Ikonta falls to my hand easier. I will reserve final judgement till it comes back from the spa treatment, but I am leaning towards keeping the Ikonta.

[kai_griffin]

I have the Welta Weltur (coupled rangefinder) and Ikonta 533/16 BX (also coupled rangefinder & light meter that's luckily still accurate), and my vote goes for the Ikonta. The Welta is nice (and smaller than the Ikonta), but the big knobs sticking out everywhere annoy me a little - they keep catching on things on the way in and out of my coat pocket! I personally could not live without at least coupled rangefinder; I feel like I'm fumbling around with apertures and shutter speeds enough as it is without having to also remember to transfer yet another setting to the lens. I've picked up a Moskva 5 more than once at various flea markets, and I really, really wanted to like it, but I just don't. Spoilt by that Ikonta, I'm afraid...

[jordan_w.]

You might try looking for a Daiichi Zenobia. They're great -- a Japanese copy of the Super Ikonta A, I think. No rangefinder, 6x4.5 format, very sharp lens.

[michael_p6]

I have a Moskva 5, a Super Ikonta C (530/2), an Agfa Super Isolette and an Iskra.

So far, the best of the lot is the Super Isolette; I was lucky enough to find one in mint condition, and it gives me fantastic results. Next favourite is the Moskva 5. I CLAed mine and I must say I'm blown away by the result. The "lefty" way of using it is something to get used to, and the double exposure system can be a bit annoying, but the image quality is really amazing.

The Super Ikonta C is also very good, altho I have an uncoated lens I had stunning results shooting Velvia for example. Problem is, it's "collectable" so is a lot more expensive than a Moskva !

 

The Iskra I'm just starting to use; it took 4 buys, and 3 returns, to find one that works reliably. And the last one I also had to give it a complete CLAed before it was usable. The first film looked at least as good as the Isolette ! Very nice and sharp, excellent large & bright rangefinder too! It's a bit heavier than the Isolette, but I'm sure it's going to earn it's space in the bag too..

[paulh]

I've got a few folders, and have tried/looked at quite a few.

 

The one that I really like using is the Iskra. Big, bright viewfinder/RF and very sharp lens. Just make sure you get one that is working properly.

 

The later Super Ikontas (III and IV) are very nice too, but can get a bit pricey. Still, they handle nice, and even the Novar lens performs very well. I much prefer the viewfinders and RFs on these compared to the Ikonta B's.

 

Paul

[furcafe]

I would just go w/a top-of-the-line folder, like your old Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta B (or BX), the later Super Ikonta III or IV, or an Agfa Super Isolette (AKA Ansco Super Speedex). As you once knew, the top end models are usually better made, have better lenses, & are faster to use in the field.

[alejandrokeller]

Christopher, I think that is part of the original question. Is it really better to go for the more sophisticated model? After all, the simplicity of this cameras (in comparison to today's electronic monsters) is part of their beauty.

 

As for the lens, after the 50's, coated was the standard. Of course there were differences but there will always be a big discussion regarding which one produces better pictures. Maybe a lot of people will disagree with me, but in my opinion, if you go for a folder it is because you have a very special approach to photography. I could not care less about details like MTF graphs and those kind of things. I just want to know what the signature of my lens is...and I can assure you that even the Apotar version of my Isolette III produces images that have a precious-like visual quality.

[rory_litonjua]

Robert,

 

I have and use several Ikonta's and Nettars. I have found them to be a pleasure to use. I find the simplicity and compactness appealing. None of mine have rangefinders but I have not found that to be too much of a hinderance; I have a separate rangefinder and I'm getting better at estimating.

 

The models with coupled rangefinders are much more attractive and much more expensive. That just seems to be the fact of the matter so it may just be a matter of what you are willing to pay for. I will say I've found using the German 6x6 and 6X9 folders to be a much more satisfying experiance. They are usually found in better shape, many are usable as-is (or with very little work).

 

I think the worst folder I've ever had the pleasure using was the Seagul 203. It was dual format and had a coupled rangefinder but the built-in 4.5x6 mask would scratch the film (I had to remove it entirely) and the lever wind was just cosmetic (you really had to look at the number window). Featurewise it's tempting but it is not as good a user if you are really trying to take pictures (and not just collect cameras)The f3.5 lens was OK but not as good as the Novar in the ikonta's or nettars.

 

Anyway, in my opinon if you want a bargain consider the Nettar or Ikonta. Some of the simpler plain Ikonta B's are equipped with f3.5 75mm Tessars. Of course a late model Super(like a IV in perfect condition)would be most welcome.

[furcafe]

Alejandro, I see what you're saying, but my point is that even the most sophisticated 1950s folder is pretty simple compared to anything made in the last 20 years or so. I mean, c'mon, a coupled RF is not exactly a whiz-bang innovation. E.g., if we're talking about a 532/16 Super Ikonta B like the 1 Robert used to have, you're really talking about a 1930s folder, only w/a 1950s coated lens. If Robert wants an uncoated lens, he can simply get a Super Ikonta B from the late 1930s (works the same as the 1950s version). What you gain w/the top-end models is better construction, design, & materials, which is a bigger deal w/folding RFs than w/other camera types.

 

---------------------

 

"Christopher, I think that is part of the original question. Is it really better to go for the more sophisticated model? After all, the simplicity of this cameras (in comparison to today's electronic monsters) is part of their beauty.

 

As for the lens, after the 50's, coated was the standard. Of course there were differences but there will always be a big discussion regarding which one produces better pictures. Maybe a lot of people will disagree with me, but in my opinion, if you go for a folder it is because you have a very special approach to photography. I could not care less about details like MTF graphs and those kind of things. I just want to know what the signature of my lens is...and I can assure you that even the Apotar version of my Isolette III produces images that have a precious-like visual quality."