Ikoflex Ia 856/14 TLR and Some Sample Photos

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Yep, it's ugly. I have been so impressed w/ the Novar on my Super Ikonta III, that when I saw this one on eBait for cheap ($60) I decided to go for it. It arrived yesterday, and looks....old.</p>

<p>According to my research, it was made in 1956, and is possibly a Ia 856/14 model. Zeiss seems to have really bungled the serial number progressions on the Ikoflex models, but I'm pretty sure that's what it is. The lens is another Novar 75 3.5, but unlike my folder this one is unit focus, and is also labeled Anastigmat. Coatings are, well, hardly there anymore. Lots of cleaning marks, a little haze internally. The viewing lens is a 75 3.5 Teronar Anastigmat, and the top is bent from what I suspect was a header off the bar at some time in it's probably colorful past. The top hood needs some adjusting but works good enough, as does the double exposure prevention and frame counter. My negs were nicely spaced.The shutter runs from B to 1/300.</p>

<p>I like the shutter release on the top left of the camera, which cannot be actuated unless you pop the hood open. It's a sports finder hood too, meaning you can shoot it like a 35mm camera once you get it focused. The ground glass is surprisingly bright (old fresnel screen), considering the lousy mirror inside, but is really stiff. This seems to be a hallmark of these, stiff focus. I had heard that the camera moves the mirror inside for parallax adjustment, but don't quote me on that. That seems to contribute to the stiff focus problems on these, but I just slipped a small screwdriver into my pocket when I went out w/ it and kept cinching the focus knob down now and then.There is a lot of rust on the camera. It's pretty heavy, and the ergonomics take some getting used to, but I had a lot of fun shooting it today. Before heading out I checked the shutter speeds (about 1 stop slow), verified infinity focus, and cleaned some of the dirt out of it. That's it.</p>

<p>So, how does it perform? Well, let's put it this way. It rivals my Voigtlander Brillant w/ Heliar! In some ways, it's even better! I mean, this lens rocks. I did very little post processing on the negs (Tri-X, yellow filter, D76 developer at 1:1 dilution, 9 1/2 minutes at 70 degrees). Many of the shots were off because I forgot to set my meter correctly, AND I overdeveloped the film a bit. So, all things considered, I am very, very happy w/ this thing.</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Much Bigger Unfolded</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Side View. Looks a Lot Different Than My Rolleicord</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>The Back. Quite Rusty</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>With Hood, Ready To Hit the Streets</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Nice Craftsmanship</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>The Bottom View</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>There Is Actually Some Old Felt On the Edges For Light Seals. And More Rust, Of Course</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Shot 1</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Shot Two. That's A Ceiling Fan Blade On The Top</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Shot Three</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Shot Four</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Shot Five</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Shot Six</p>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Shot Six W/ An Actual Photo :)</p><div></div>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>90 Degrees Outside the Coffeteria</p><div></div>

[JDMvW]

<p>Awful shape, but still going. Yay, Zeiss!</p>

[jerry_lehrer1]

<p>Steve,</p>

<p>I had one of those, (actually an Ikoflex 1) when I was in high school. My Novar lens was identical to yours, but your results appear sharper than mine. Those shots of your double-wide home are excellent. <br>

</p>

[User_4525289]

<p>I have Icoflex I. Recently fixed. It has Tessar however. Needs a lens hood. otherwise it is very intolerable to sun-flare<br>

PS. May be someone knows the specifications for a lens hood for this cameras?</p>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Kozma, your lens probably has a different diameter than my Novar. Simply take a ruler and measure the diameter of yours (you want the outside diameter) and look for a series adapter that is roughly the same size, either in MM or inches.</p>

<p>Thanks Jerry and JDM. It's not nearly as convenient to shoot as my Rolleicord. The focus knob on the Ikoflex is on the "wrong" side for us right handed people, and the top hood is more fiddly to fold and unfold. It weighs more than the 'cord too. The shots are largely duplicates of others I've made w/ different cameras, but that's my simplistic way of seeing how they compare to each other in IQ. They looked much better and had a lot more detail before I downsized them.</p>

<p>That's the neighbor's place across the street Jerry, which is probably the oldest in the park and looks a little shabby. It and many other homes here are deserted right now because all the snowbirds went back up North. Our place is a single wide, but w/ a Florida room, and the screened in carport for the cat, it still has more room than we know what to do with. It's amazing what $10,000 or so can buy you down here. One of the homes recently sold for $4,000, and it was really nice. Central air, new carpet, carport and Florida room, etc.</p>

[starshooter]

<p>I would not say the camera is ugly. Plain -- yes. Takes nice photos, doesn't it?</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>It's an old 'un but a good 'un. A tribute to German optics and precision engineering</p>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>I'll have to amend my glowing statement about the lens. I shot a more tightly controlled test roll, and while it's certainly good, it isn't as good as the Novar on my later Super Ikonta III (although being a TLR, it's sharper wide open and close up). It's not as good as my Heliar on the Brillant, but does occasionally offer a bit of a 3-D look on some images. It's still a neat TLR, quite quirky, and solidly built. It ain't no Seagull.</p>

[david_m]

<p>I love Ikoflexes. I certainly would not call them ugly. To me they are much more stylish than a Rolleicord or Rolleiflex. They just exude quality. Lovely photos. I must get mine out again.</p>