Quite Solidly Franka

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>The Franka Solida I is an early model from a long line of Solida folding rollfilm cameras produced by the Franka-Kamerawerk in Bayreuth, Germany, in the years circa 1951-66. So far as I can tell, this example dates from 1954.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>I rather like Franka cameras. They were no-nonsense, mid-range cameras from a company with a long tradition of camera manufacture, beginning in 1910. Most of them seem to be quite well-designed and soundly constructed, without any pretence at upper-market status. I've covered the history of the company in a couple of other posts, but the brand survived until the early 1970's, Franka-Kamerawerk having been acquired by the Wirgin company in 1962, and disappeared when that company foundered . At it's peak in 1958 Franka-Kamerawerk was a large concern with a workforce of around 150 and an annual production of 650,000 units. I'm a fan of their sturdy little 35mm rangefinders of the 1960's, the Super-Frankarettes and their kin. Many Franka products were re-branded for sale by distributors such as Oga, Porst, Burke & James and Sears. </p>

<p>This Solida is nicely finished, with a cute little button at the end of the top deck that releases the lensboard catch, allowing the camera to unfold with quite some ferocity.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>There is an inaccurate peep-hole of a viewfinder, and the Vero shutter has to be cocked by the usual lever behind the lens, the limited range of speeds running through B, 1/25, 1/50/ 1/200. Apertures run from f/6.3 to f/22. There is a basic and slightly unpredictable interlock between the film wind and the shutter release to prevent double exposures, or any exposure at all, as sometimes happens with this example. The interior is well-finished with swing-out spool carriers and chromed rollers; overall, one would have to describe the construction as lightweight, but tidy.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>The Solidas went through a seemingly endless progression of models with various lens options, and this example has one of the simplest, a 75mm Frankar Anastigmat f/6.3 lens, a fairly lowly lens for a 1950's camera. It appears to be a simple uncoated triplet, with the front cell revolving for focus. While the lens looks bright and clean, the results I achieved with a test film were really pretty awful, and in retrospect I'm wondering if the lens is in dire need of collimating; I shot everything at infinity so there's no yardstick to see what the lens might do at closer settings. I'll put it on my list of things to do; in the meantime, here are a few dreamy images from a roll of Rollei RPX-100. If I find the lens can do better than this I'll post a few more, with my apologies to Franka-Kamerawerk.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.2</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.3</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.5</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.6</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.7</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.8</p><div></div>

[Mike Gammill]

Interesting camera. With a minimum of markings it would be easy to sell under different brands I would guess. Thanks for

posting.

[Gus Lazzari]

<p>Rich, another nice sample from you, thanks for that.<br>

These "Perkeo like" medium format compact cameras, are fun to use and give a great "Old School" look to their images... </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Very interesting. It does have a "dreamy" look to it -- maybe that is "Franka glow", sort of?</p>

[tom_cheshire]

<p>One of these days, if I can find the time. I will share the story of one of my collectables: the Ray Liotta's father's camera (it is a Retina Automatic III).</p>

[john_robison3]

<p>Two and a quarter square in a jacket pocket, under 18oz. with film! That is what I love about these simple, minimum spec. folders. Hope you can sort out the focusing glitch Rick. Maybe someone had it apart in the past and did not reset infinity. Usually front element focusing is fairly straight forward and not too hard to reset. Just last year I picked up a Zeiss Nettar with the simple 75mm f6.3 Novar coated lens. For $25, the same price as a new Holga 120N it has produced sharp negs with reasonable contrast. Yeah, it don't have the 'dreamy Holga charm' but I think can live without that. If I want charm I'll stick a series IV plus 5 diopter close up lens on my 4X5. All the fuzzy wuzzy pictures you would ever want.</p>

[john_robison3]

<p>Editorial correction: previous post should have read "...series VI plus 5 diopter...."</p>

<p>I really have to proof read more accurately.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>Hey, those results reflect pretty accurately what I generally get with folders. I think this whole "folders are great for pocket medium format shooting" is a conspiracy of some sort. (chill folder fans-just kidding). Nice looking camera, Rick, so not all bad. The horizontal struts remind me of the Kodak Duo Six-20 camera I'm fussing with now. Does it fold up by pressing a button release on the inside of the door under the lens? I wonder who stole what design from whom. </p>

[bernard_lazareff]

<p>Nice pictures, Rick (as usual). But I suspect that technically they do not do justice to the lens. See (shameless plug) my test:<br>

http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00TxrW<br>

Admittedly a different lens (Radionar), but by F/8 it is quite decent. Fully open at F/2.9 it is <em>very</em> dreamy!. </p>

[bill_delehanty1]

<p>Thanks for this fine post about the Franka company and their Solida line of cameras. Maybe a personal reminiscence wouldn't be out of place here. Because I turned 16 in 1954, I was able to work at a factory in a seasonal job and spent some of the money I earned (@.94¢/hour) to replace my Spartus Full Vue, a 120 twin lens box camera, with a Solida ( I think it must have been a Solida II) from Montgomery Wards which had a large photo mail order catalog at the time. It had an f/3.5 lens from Ennawerk, a full range of speeds (1 to 1/300 as I recall), full focussing down to c. 3.5 feet, and like the one in this post took 12 exposures on 120 film. I used it a lot till I got a deal on an Aires III in 1958 which let me take 35mm slides. I still have many prints and negatives from the Solida and they were sharp and contrasty though most of the time I had to be satisfied with "Jumbo" prints (3.5 x 3.5 inches) with Deckle edges; but, I could occasionally use a relative's darkroom and made what I remember as "good" enlargements that my classmates paid a modest price for. An older brother, who was a very good photographer, even with the Baby Brownie that he used for many years, was impressed with my Solida and also bought one. He wasn't so pleased with his sample, because the viewfinder was badly out of whack. His widow gave it to me, but I have never taken a picture with it, always meaning to find a way to correct the viewfinder and never doing so. I suppose that my Solida cost about $30 with case in 1954; flash was extra. A focussing anastigmat lens that was fast enough to make good exposures even in poor light; a shutter with a wide range of speeds; enough resolution that would hold up in the occasional 5x7 or 8x10 enlargement: those were very desirable features for a high school student in 1954 and for many adults as well. In my case, it helped greatly to establish a hobby that I still enjoy.</p>

[marc_bergman1]

<p>Rick,</p>

<p>Montgomery Wards was the main importer of these cameras to the states. In 1955 they marketed the Solida II and the Solida Jr. The Junior model looks closest to your Solida I but there is a difference around the flash shoe.</p>

<p>Bill,</p>

<p>You have a good memory concerning prices. Here is a scan of Ward's 1955 catalog.</p><div></div>

[marc_bergman1]

<p>Several directories that I have list Montgomery Wards as the USA distributor. Imagine my surprise when looking at a 1956 Sears catalog and seeing this listing.</p>

<p>Sorry to confuse matters.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Thank you all for your responses. <strong>Louis</strong>, there's many a true word spoken in jest...That button/bar for closure seems to be a fairly common device in folders of this era, or so I've observed. Goodness knows who first thought of it. <strong>John</strong>, I'm not that impressed by the "dreamy" look one little bit, and I'd bet that the Nettar is a far-superior camera. As several of you hinted, the pics should really be far sharper. Thanks for your link, <strong>Bernard</strong>, and I'm all for the "shameless plugs"; I consider this Forum both a clearing-house of information and a data base, and the more cross-references the better. Well, that's my justification for my habitual shameless plugs!</p>

<p>Thanks <strong>Marc</strong>, as usual; I mentioned in the text that I'd found a connection to Sears, but I hadn't realised that they sold them with the Franka badge. Great reminiscence, <strong>Bill</strong>; details like that really bring a post to life. Thanks, <strong>Tom,</strong> and I look forward to the retina post. <strong>JDM</strong>, a "Franka Glow" would be most flattering, and thank you <strong>Mike</strong> and <strong>Gus</strong> for your input.</p>

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>Frankly, it's really quite pretty...sorry! A lot of these old folders did suffer from inaccurate focusing, whether that is lens collimation or just the bellows not in the right place. I must admit to having a few, the worst being a Bessa11, which is a shame as a good Bessa will produce amazing pictures.<br>

I agree that the Frankas seem well made, I got a Solida 111 a few months ago and haven't shot with it yet. It has a 2.9 Radionar lens which will test the focusing accuracy!</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p><strong>Tony</strong>, I resisted making that pun all the way through, and now you've blown it. I expect some pics from the Solida III, after that; the f/2.9 Radionar could be an interesting lens.</p>