Pictures from a found Agfa Isolette III

[andrew_andrews1]

<p>I found my dad's old Agfa Isolette III about a year ago, after a bit of research on the web and on these forums, I finally got round to taking it out for a spin.<br />Despite the fact that it's been sitting unused for possibly over 30 years it works well. There are no holes in the bellows, the shutter seems to be accurate, the focus ring is super tight but does turn, and the shutter sticks on any speed slower that 1/30 sec. I can live with all that.<br />I can see the two images in the uncoupled rangefinder, but they are out of alignment horizontally as well as vertically, so I have been guessing focus.<br />So, here are a couple of images I printed last night. I made some 10inx10in prints, which were too big to fit on my scanner which is max A4, so the images appear as rectangles as the scan has cropped an inch or so from the left and right.<br />It was also my first foray into split filter printing, and it's the only way I'll print from now on.<br />Both taken at f11, using the sunny 16 rule for exposure.<br />This camera has the Apotar lens, which is supposedly better than the Agnar, but inferior to the Solinar.<br />The prints are really sharp, so it seems that at f11 this lens is a strong performer. This is my first venture into medium format, and I now fear I'm hooked, just by the print quality, of a low end, small, portable MF camera. Highly recommended.<br /><a title="Engulfed by 36exp.co.uk, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/36exp/6232347186/"><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6056/6232347186_03b5197152_z.jpg" alt="Engulfed" width="525" height="640" /></a><br /><a title="Sunshine by 36exp.co.uk, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/36exp/6231829763/"><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6215/6231829763_3c7aeb52a4_z.jpg" alt="Sunshine" width="542" height="640" /></a></p>

[h._p.]

<p>I had an Isolette III for a while. The only slight gotcha I found was that the front door springs could be a bit fearsome. I always slowed the opening with my fingers after I found that the suction effect had pulled some frames out of the field of focus.</p>

<p>Apart from that, they're very nice cameras indeed, as your samples show.</p>

[mtk]

<p>I have an Isolette folder as well. Have never ran any film thru it. It is ridiculous how sharp your photos are! To think these lenses were designed without a computer....</p>

[jim_jones3]

<p>"To think these lenses were designed without a computer...."<br>

Most of the great accomplishments of mankind were accomplished without a computer. The Petzval lens (the first fairly complex photographic lens) was designed using mathematical calculations performed without calculators. Lenses of this basic design are treasured by some photographers even today. Rembrandt did well without Photoshop. Leonardo da Vinci might have done even better with a computer, but never had one. If today's youngsters understood how their ancesters lived, they might be amazed at the many things human ingenuity and experience accomplished before their time.</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Great, <strong>Andrew</strong>. The Isolettes are fine sturdy little cameras, in my experience, though I'd echo <strong>H.P</strong>.'s caution about the projectile opening action! I seem to have quite a collection of Agfa cameras with the Apotar lens, and I'd agree that, between f/5.6 and f/16, they are capable of producing very crisp images, as your post illustrates. The Solinar is a more advanced design, with better performance at wider apertures, but with little difference discernible in the middle range. Fine images; thanks for a post extolling the virtues of these old Agfas.</p>

[jason]

<p>Good composure, great tonality! Good to see images well done with an Oldie! I've never used a "folder"! Seems I've missed much. !</p>

[h._p.]

<p>"To think these lenses were designed without a computer"</p>

<p>Actually, that probably isn't true. The term "Computer" used to mean someone who carried out calculations in a more or less automatic way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_computer</p>

<p>I remember reading that Zeiss used this approach for doing the calculations for lens design and surmise that other lens designers did so as well. Not only is there nothing new under the sun but human ingenuity is quite amazing.</p>

[gnashings]

<p>split filtering can be quite a revelation, although I don't always find it necessary, it certainly allows for some amazing range and details in extremes of shadow and highlight. Great work, I bet the actual prints are quite something!</p>

[andrew_andrews1]

<p>Thanks. Yes the prints are really nice, can't be fully represented on the screen.</p>