joe_sonneman1

I have a Bessa I with Color-Skopar and, maybe because I always leave it set at f/16, at the hyperfocal distance, I find all results VERY sharp indeed. 6x9 folders are just about the largest size you can fit in a pocket, well, OK, the Ikonta D is larger but no film available in that size now.

 

Use a Componon-S lens on your enlarger and you will be happy enough, and I speak as a former 8x10 shooter.

 

Now, as to portraits, I cannot say. Many say the Heliar gives "silkier" or better tones, don't know, haven't used it.

 

The advantage of the Bessa I with Color-Skopar is, same lens as on the II, but lower cost [probably $120 - $150], because the front standard does NOT move. Scale focusing [or not, when, as I do, you leave it at the hyperfocal distance].

 

Also, there are only 8 shots per roll on 6x9, so I typically will shoot up a roll within 20 minutes, so there are no long delays for the film to get slack, as some here have reported.

 

I use Ilford delta 100, but develop in D-76 for the old time look; of course Ilford ID-11 is made for this film and may do even better, can't say.

 

I always leave the shutter at 1/100 and then if weather is sunny, develop N, if cloudy bright, +1; if cloudy, +2, if cloudy dark, +3; and of course if sunny in snow or sandy beach, -1. I use 1 = 33% more time, which is pretty extreme, but works for me. f/16 with shutter = ISO is "Sunny Sixteen"; to do as I do, ALWAYS that way, regardless of the weather, I call "Sonneman's Sweet Sixteen" rule.

 

The other advantage of shooting this way: because the camera controls--including focus--are almost always left untouched--the ONLY thing to concentrate on is the PHOTO .. which IS, after all, the point, right? Now, on my version, the viewfinder is quite cloudy, but the lens is clear, so that's annoying, but the results as great, so I have not yet sent it off for cleaning.

 

Anyway, good fortune. The Color Skopar is MUCH better than the Novar on Ikonta, however, even a battered $40 plain vanilla Ikonta [not Super] will perform quite well; the large neg covers many sins. I prefer coated lenses for outdoors, but have used a 6x4.5 Welta PERL [Pearl] with f/2.9 uncoated lens for indoor shots with reasonable success.

 

Remember the old saying: "Most of the great photographs of history were made with lenses we would not now shake a stick at." Edward Weston used a Rapid Rectilinear that he bought for $5, that even then was made obsolete by the Anastigmats of his day. So what? Would that we were all as good photographers as EW!!

 

As they said about Michael Jordan, "It's NOT the shoes!!"

 

--Joe Sonneman, photographer

Use Mamiya Super 23/Universal stuff! I used a 65mm lens, a 6x9 lever action roll film back, both Mamiya, and with the help of friends built a WOODEN fixed-focal length body to connect them. The non-focusing wood body is MUCH lighter and smaller than the original metal monster, hangs easily around the neck, and --a bonus-- gets interest and admiring glances that few standard cameras do.

 

Of course, I really like swing-lens panoramic cameras with normal focal-length lenses, like the obscure and awkward Russian Spaceview FT-2 [50mm on 35mm, was great with Kodachrome 25], still covered 120 degrees, now down to about $100-200, but most swinglens cameras have wide angle lenses, which is overkill, IMHO: the normal lens while swinging creates more aesthetically-pleasing curves, IMHO. The only other I know of, was in 120, the short lived Cyclops, hard to find, still costly, haven't used it, don't know, or get a 5- or 6-inch Cirkut?

 

LEAST EXPENSIVE: Multiple shooting, overlap, from tripod with some modification so that you rotate about the lens's NODAL POINT, not the tripod mounting point. Buy an old Zeiss or Voigtlander or even Moskva or other 6x9 folder, probably with 105mm 'normal' and use the center part only?

 

NEXT least expensive? Find an old 'beater' 5x7 view or press camera and just use the middle part of the sheet film for 2.5 x 7!! Not small, but what quality!

 

Of course, there's a difference between "wide-field" and a swing-lens or circular [Cirkut] 'true panoramic' camera. [Please, no flame wars on what is/is not 'true']. Each has their place. You already said you were willing to go the 'wide-field' route.

 

BTW, one camera mag said "Dead Horse Point State Park" in Utah was BETTER than the Grand Canyon? If you go/went to Utah, do you agree or disagree?

 

Thanks, Joe Sonneman in Juneau AK

Traditional answer is Yashica 124G TLR. But you can't put it in your pocket. Also the Mamiya TLR has very good lenses, and you can change lenses. But I think, best value camera to start in MF is either Voightlander Bessa I with Color-skopar lens [i like the 6x9 model, about $100-150] or any of the many Zeiss Ikonta models, in different size/formal, 6x4.5, 6x6, or 6x9, but I'd say, stick to the ones with COATED lenses or the relatively cheap copy, the Russian Moskva V [about $75]. Any of these are also POCKETABLE, so you can have the camera when you see a photo to take!! As I say, I like the 6x9 size, but that's only 8 shots per roll. 6x6 = 12 shots, 6x4.5 = 16. There are many other inexpensive, good MF cameras and many many very pricey ones. If you want a modest price money making combo, IMHO, get a Kowa 6 [or 66] with150mm lens and do weddings and portraits with SLR viewing, under $500 probably!

 

 

Have fun, do good work.

 

Joe Sonneman, Juneau AK

The solution is, to build a SWING LENS 120 camera, 'cause only need to cover narrow slit 2.25 inches long, not big image circle. i recommend you stick to lens in the 80-90mm range, look for small physical SIZE [and weight] even with smaller max aperature [5.6 will be good enough]. this way, you can cover 120-140 degrees with NOT much lens expense .. but camera design may take more ingenuity!!

 

Have fun, do good work!

 

Joe Sonneman Juneau Alaska [former IAPP member, may join again]

I use a Kowa 6x6 [poor man's Hassy]. Get the 150 if you ever intend to do weddings or portraits. This is a money-making combination like few others. Even with Kowa [90% of the quality, 10% of the cost], the 150 is GREAT!

 

If you want environmental, why are you still in square format? Go rectangular, the wider [6x9, 6x12, 6x17] the better, IMHO, and even go to a swing-lens panoramic camera like Noblex, etc. instead of 'wide field' fixed lens like Art-Pan [which is however also available in 6x24 if you can imagine THAT].

 

Have fun, do good Work. Joe Sonneman Juneau , Alaska

Getting into MF? Hmm. You obviously like WA, yes? The Mamyia Universal is nice, but HEAVY. I have and used a 65mm,which on 6x9 is pretty wide. The 50mm I never used, but read reviews saying condition varied, some were very sharp, others perhaps not quite so good. ??

 

I think, get a camera really PORTABLE. For MF WA, that would be the Plaubel Makina II with Nikon. But just to get into MF, best value IMHO is a Voightlander Bessa I with Color-Skopar coated lens,about $100-150 and it fits in your pocket!! That's Bessa II quality, Bessa I price. Great combo. excellent value, pocketable, relatively light weight. Not WA, though.

 

I made a WOODEN body to take the 65mm Mamiya and S shaped film back, fixed focus. Great concept, light weight, looked great...but my version needs some work [light leaks]. Still, it's do-able. Probably even more doable with 50mm. WA lenses have great depth of field. But it's still too bulky to fit in a pocket. Trade-offs, always there are trade-offs!!

 

Have fun, do good work!

 

Joe Sonneman

 

Juneau Alaska

My method: I pre-determine the RANGE at which I will take photos. Say 7-10 feet. Then I use a DUMB flash [maybe fancy flash on manual, but you can still buy a DUMB flash that does not change, NO thyristor etc, for $15-25]. The nice thing about a dumb flash is, it is always THE SAME, i.e., no other variable!! OK, now you set your camera as the flash says you should, for 8.5 feet. Pre-focus for that distance, remembering that focusing should be slightly closer in a range. Now go take photos when things move into your range, if not in your range, then YOU need to move until they are [only in desperation change settings, 'cause then you'll have to change them again, too many settings, slows you down too much].

 

Good fortune and do good work!

 

Joe Sonneman Juneau Alaska

Buy a Voightlander Bessa I with Color-Skopar lens for about $100-150, spend $200 on Schneider Componon-S 105 printing lens, $400 on an old Omega D2, and the rest on travel, film, lodging, andpaper, or, stay at home, photograph what you know best, and put $13,500 into IRAs for your retirement, any balance on Delta 100 BW and Fuji NPS 160 film, Multigrade IV paper, and maybe Crystal Archive.

 

Buy FILM, not cameras. But if you HAVE TO spend more, OK, get the Bessa II with Heliar lens [but I mostly shoot at f/16, not much different there].

 

Multiple lenses? OK, look for an old Mamiya TLR Pro S ...the Mamiya TLR lenses were REALLY sharp! and interchangeable.

 

As one book said, and I paraphrase, most all of the great photographs of history were made with cameras and lenses we now, today, would pass up on as totally inadequate. Weston's Pepper #30 he shot with an old [even then] Rapid Rectilinear [pre-anastigmat] lens costing $5 or $10!! Who now can match that quality?

 

Euclid alone has looked on Beauty bare.

Fortunate they

Who once, and then but far away,

Have heard Her muffled sandal set on stone.

Edna St. Vincent Millay

 

--Joe Sonneman, Juneau Alaska

 

p.s. Why get only ONE system? Cameras are like scalpels, different tools for different jobs. Get one a year for 10 years. Have fun, do good work!

I agree with those who say, develop your own. 120 is easy to wind onto a metal roll, you only need true dark for 5 min or less.

 

I have my own method, which works for me--maybe for others.

 

I use the rule of "SUNNY 16" but I use it all the time, even when weather is NOT sunny. [For outdoor photography, anyway]. I call it "SONNEMAN'S SWEET 16".

 

First set camera as if for sunny 16--i.e., f/stop = f/16, shutter speed equal to film speed, that is 1/100th second for Delta 100.

 

SUNNY 16 says, this gives proper exposure on bright sunny day at standard development time [12 minutes in D-76 1:1] at standard temperature [68degreesF].

 

OK. Now for the modifications. Remember the old Kodak film boxes, or labels, that described weather as "Sunny Bright" "Cloudy Bright" "Cloudy" and, naturally the next would be "Cloudy Dark".

 

YOU can SEE these, no meter needed. OK, but do NOT change the camera settings from f/16 1/100th.

 

If the weather is ACTUALLY "Cloudy Bright" but you have exposure set for "Sunny Bright", you have underexposed 1 stop. So all you NOW must do is overdevelop 1 stop. So mark the film +1 to remind yourself to overdevelop.

 

My rough guide for D-76 1:1 is, + 1 means 33% more time, +2 = 67% more time, and +3 means DOUBLE the time [24 mintues].

 

Of course, you will take all exposures on one roll under the SAME lighting conditions, right? I use a 6x9 folder, only 8 shots per roll, so this is easy to do, to take 8 shots under same light conditions.

 

THis method approximates Zone System without complications and so is not QUITE as precise as using a spot meter, etc., but hey, you are probably using Multigrade paper, so what the heck right? Besides, REAL Zone System work is best if you expose EACH FRAME differently, i.e., with a view camera, right? And if youare using 120, you probably have a roll film camera.

 

The concept is,

a. Sunny 16 is a special case of a general rule

b. by leaving camera set for sunny 16, you AUTOMATICALLY underexpose by the right amount when weather is NOT sunny

c) all you THEN have to do, is note the weather condition and overdevelop by the right amount [+1 for Cloudy Bright, +2 for CLoudy, +3 for Cloudy Dark]

d) underexposing and overdeveloping increases CONTRAST

e) but when the light is less strong [i.e., NOT sunny bright], then usually contrast is also less strong

 

So this simple, meter-less method gets it right about 90% of the time, which is better than I was doing always metering and adjusting and perhaps guessing wrong. And it's a very quick method, too, no need toadjust camera. AND if you leave focus set at hyperfocal distance, then you have turned complicated 120 camera into simple point and shoot and can concentrate on the IMAGE, which after all is the real POINT of it all, yes?

 

Purists may not like this method, but I've used it for years now and it works MOST of the time, very high percentage of good exposures.

 

Shooting indoors with Delta 100 [or 400]? I using the widest opening [f/3.5 or 2.9 or what ever I can get] and the slowest hand-holdable speed of 1/25th, and +3 development unless spotlights, because most indoor lighting is SO dim and SO flat. +3 means DOUBLE the time, at normal temperature.

 

 

Good fortune, Joe Sonneman, Juneau, AK

Hi... I have a Vivitar 4600 with bare bulb and Olympus module.

I've read that even though the 4600 and OM-2n have TTL capability,

for some ?? reason Vivitar did NOT include TTL when using bare bulb.

True? Untrue? Recommendations for proper exposure in such instance?

 

Also, I read a thread here on the Vivitar 5600 suggesting a possible

problem with voltage on a much newer Nikon. Any such voltage

problems when using the 4600 on OM-2n?? ??

 

Finally?, what about putting a large [12" square or bigger] flat

white surface [foam core, say] behind the bare bulb, to direct

more/most of the light forward, though still in a diverse pattern??

 

Thanks for any input...I think I bought this when reading that Bill

Owen [suburbia, etc.] did most of his work with bare bulb...

 

Cheers, Joe Sonneman in Juneau, Alaska

 

Oh, yeah: I no longer have the instruction book for the 4600. I've

got the 'slave' switch figured out OK, but if barebulb does NOT

include TTL, does it make any different where I set the dedicated

module switch: red, blue, orange, TTL/M, or Yellow triangle??

 

Strangely, the red/green light on the right will NOT test fire the

flash, may be peculiar to this unit??

Actually, I don't know...I have a Vivitar 4600 with barebulb head, for Olympus. I understand from other sources that even though the 4600 has TTL capabilities with directional heads, this is strangely NOT true for the bare bulb? Too strange. Any idea on voltage problems or not with the 4600 and Olympus??

 

Puzzled in Alaska, Joe Sonneman

P.S: Yes, I meant also to ask, does anyone know of a 6x9 folder ever made with lens at DIFFERENT focal length [i.e. not 105-110mm]? Am looking for portrait/telephoto folder, i.e., 210-270mm if possible, f/9 is OK.... --Joe Sonneman, Juneau, Alaska

Yes, quite right: 6x9 folders are wrongly neglected by today's camera writers; they offer amazing quality in a pocketable camera with available film. What a deal! I first used a $40 Ikonta 'beater' [on the outside--the inside was PRISTINE] with coated Novar Anastigmat and graduated to a $150 Bessa I with Color Skopar [really a Bessa II lens?], which has MUCH better lens quality. Also have a newer [coated] non-rangerfinder Ikonta [no number known] with 3.5 Tessar, but have had inconsistent results on color transparency film so far. The Bessa I use for BW [ilford Delta 100 in D-76 1:1]. GREAT STUFF.

 

--Joe Sonneman, Juneau

 

p.s. I now [July 02] have a show of this work at the local Arts & Humanities Gallery; I print to 9x14 on Multigrade IV, then run through a Canon 2400 digital copy machine to create a photo carbon print--"The Pencil of Nature".

Didn't one of the TLRs--the Yashica 124?--have a 35mm adapter? If that could be made to work in the Mamiya TLRs, you'd also have interchangeable lenses! But really, using different cameras for different purposes is probably the better idea.

Oh, and you like the MF results better because the film is bigger, this is why the tonality looks better: there is more film there, or, said the other way, you are enlarging less and enjoying it more.

Here is a very simple way to MF/pan: buy a GOOD quality MF 6x9 folder, such as Zeiss Ikonta or Super Ikonta w/coated Tessar, or a Bessa I or II with Color Skopar or Heliar lens [the Brits like the Ensign 820 Selfix with Ross Xpres [don't know if they were coated, though]. Then you have a kind of supersize 35mm neg/transparency, good for head shots and you can use the horizontal center section and call it a panoramic format--3.25" long, or MORE than twice as long as 35mm. PLUS, you can fold it up & put it in your pocket, very light, and costs only $200-600, depending on model. [Even less expensive--often under $100--is the Moskva-5, a Russian copy of the Ikonta; the -5 has a coated lens, too]. I have really come to like the old folders, just wish some firm made them today, with modern super multicoated lens, and wish one were available in 6x7... Some 6x9s had 6x6 or 6x4.5 masks, too, in effect better for portraits, as on the smaller format the lens which was 'normal' for 6x9 would be slightly 'long' [which is usually best for portraits].

But why expect ONE camera to do MANY jobs? Does a surgeon use just one knife, or a totem pole carver ONE carving tool? So why expect to use just one camera?

Still ...

Another system camera to think of, if you still want to try using just one, is the Mamiya Super 23, which had a variety of backs and lenses for it, from 6x4.5 to 6x9, including 6x7. This, too, is available at modest prices, $300-500 ...modest, compared to Mamiya 7 lenses, that is [the prices of which are one reason some people prefer the XPAN, even though the latter does not offer full frame 6x7].

Don't think about it too much, just get something and go burn film!

Cheers,

Joe Sonneman, Juneau, Alaska

My answer to contact print or enlarge or scan was settled when a

salesman at Chicago's Standard Photo [now gone or moved] noticed me

drooling over an 8x10 Burke & James then [long ago] marked at $100.

He offered it to me for $50 and I grabbed it, later finding a 14"

Commercial Ektar. I knew I had neither space nor money for an 8x10

enlarger, not even for a 4x5 enlarger, and this was the pre-digital

age, so contact prints were the way to go.

Here was my simple set up for 8x10 contacts. I put the negative

and paper in a wooden printing frame [glass front, metal spring back].

This I set down, face up, on a shelf or bench. Overhead, I suspended

by its electrical cord an electric light, with 7 or 15w bulb, in a

large reflector. For a diffuser, I covered the reflector with double

thickness of white plastic garbage bag. To increase or decrease light

intensity, I would lower or raise the light by releasing or pulling

the electrical cord, which ran through an 'eye' or pulley screwed into

the ceiling. The cord was plugged into a Time-O-Light. That's all

you need, but for quicker operation, instead of a printing frame I now

use a hinged glass contact printer, mine is called a "Profile Custom

Proofer."

Color is another matter, however, and at present I have a few

transparencies scanned [about $10 each, here] onto a CD, and can use

very delicate controls even on an old Pentium 60 and even with

Photoshop Deluxe [i.e., the simple sample version] into an Epson 700,

which looks kind of like a new-art print when using Strathmore Velvet

[matte] paper. The cost of scans gets excessive you have a lot, and

scanners are getting better all the time, so I won't even try to write

about THAT.

Good fortune. Have fun and do good work!

--Joe Sonneman, photographer, Juneau, Alaska