6x6 folding film camera resolution, ---- Should I get a 6x6 Folding camera?

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Recently I saw some B&W pictures taken with some classical 6x6 folding cameras.  They are so portable, and the images are not bad.  I got interested, particularly for the square format.

I actually already have a Hasselblad SWC, a 6x6 square format with 38mm Zeiss Biogon. It is fantastic. I have sold my HB 500C/M and other lenses, I particularly miss the 80mm very much, but I have no intention to rebuild a 6x6 MF film camera system. A 6x6 folding camera with a fix 75~80mm is good enough for me.

But, ignoring the fun of film,  just for image quality, can I get square format image with the digital camera on my hand?  Well,  this is a heavy loaded question, but I want to start with resolution. 

According to some old reviews, the lens resolution of a 6x6 folding camera shooting at f8, with film flatness etc. considered, is around 30 lpmm.  This is equivalent to about 16MP in digital camera (or 24Mp digital camera cropped to square format). It seems most digital cameras can be cropped to achieve the same level of IQ. 

Note, the folding camera's resolution is far less than the film's capability, which can be in the range of 200 lpmm. 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[gbealnz]

Maybe try a 1:1 crop of some of your digital gear?

I often use my SL2 that way, and also the CL. What the actual lpmm equates to I have no idea, but it gives me my SWC look, if I use a wide enough lens (20mm on the SL2 for example). And I don't have to wait to process the 12 shots.

[BernardC]

13 hours ago, Einst_Stein said:

But, ignoring the fun of film,  just for image quality, can I get square format image with the digital camera on my hand?  Well,  this is a heavy loaded question, but I want to start with resolution. 

According to some old reviews, the lens resolution of a 6x6 folding camera shooting at f8, with film flatness etc. considered, is around 30 lpmm.  This is equivalent to about 16MP in digital camera (or 24Mp digital camera cropped to square format). It seems most digital cameras can be cropped to achieve the same level of IQ. 

I have post-war (built in Germany "US Zone") 6x9 folder with a Schneider 105 Trionar. Lens sharpness is the least of your worries. A decent triplet will do just fine when used as intended: stopped-down for daylight exposure at longer distances. Camera shake is a bigger problem. The camera is very light, the tripod socket is way off-centre and doesn't clamp-down much, and the complicated release mechanism introduces movement. Scale focus is problematic at anything other than infinity.

My folder was the cheapest camera that my uncle could buy in university. I expect that something like a Zeiss Super Ikonta with a Tessar and rangefinder could provide outstanding results, probably as good as a contemporary Rolleiflex. If so, you can easily enlarge to 20"x20" or more with no worries.

[250swb]

If you want a 6x6 folding camera a Voigtlander Perkeo E is hard to beat, a sharp lens and pretty small. As with any folders just make sure it can take 120 film because many use 620 and while you can use 120 in them it’s only via a workaround.

[Ko.Fe.]

To me pixels amount has nothing to do with IQ. Tonality of 6x6 is the IQ. But I printed canvas size only couple of times.

This could be achieved closer with low ISO on dMF. Like GFX series. This will allows to print big. 

It will take color images with IQ, which old folders lenses don't have.

Except couple of folders made not so long time ago, like Plaubel Makina and Fuji GF670 / Voigtlander Bessa III.

[bags27]

Maybe not a folder technically, more a collapsible, the Mamiya 6 will likely be as sharp as any 6x6 you can get. Glass on my Mamiya 7 seems sharper than equivalent Zeiss glass on my Blad 500 c/m, though I haven't compared the Mamiya 43mm to my SWC, which would really be a battle of the supersharp superwides. The 3 Mamiya 6 lenses are said to be as sharp as those on the Mamiya 7. 

 

Edited March 4 by bags27

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have Zeiss Super Ikonta C, 6x9, and Bess II 6x9 with the Helior (?) lens version. but I never enjoy using tyhem, except the first few months after I got them. The Kodak Medalist II and Fujifilm GW690 are much better. 

This run, I am interested in folding 6x6 only.  After some comparisons, Super Fujica-6  would be my favorite choices. It is easier to find reasonable price with clean condition. Also, its tripod mou t is in the middle of the bottom. 

I don;t feel much tonal gradation advantages of folder 6x6 over the modern Leica digital. In fact, I see advantages in Leica digital, far better than the folding 6x6 I can access. May be due to the aging.

So, I am looking into Laowa 15mm F2 (Zero-D) and f5 (cookie). I plan to use it on Leica M but shooting in square format, pre-crop. Make it a "LEICA SWC".  

However, to be honest, the fun of Hasselblad SWC with fIlm is hard replicatible. 

 

 

 

[bags27]

23 hours ago, Einst_Stein said:

However, to be honest, the fun of Hasselblad SWC with fIlm is hard replicatible. 

My favorite camera ever. I haven't picked up any of my other cameras since I bought it.

[oldwino]

I've owned a lot of folders (Agfa Super isolette, Voigtlander Bessa RF, Super-Fujica 6, Fuji GS645...), and they are fun to use. All of them need to be stopped down. Using them wide-open usually leads to disappointment. They are, in essence, snapshot cameras. 

I would also say that a good 35mm camera, with a good 50mm lens and lower speed film, can pretty much equal what you will get from a folder, resolution-wise.  But you won't get the interesting spatial look that medium format allows, nor the smoother tonality that the larger format gives.

I particularly enjoy them as casual travel cameras, or for hiking.

[Einst_Stein]

In the film world, film size is the king.  An excellent conditioned MF of accurate focusing and shutter speed can easily match the IQ old 35mm film camera, even Leica.  But not so compared to digital cameras. I don’t have scientific comparison, but I think a MF folding camera can be on par with at most APS-C digital, …, no, may be MFT only. 

However, who cares IQ when comparing film with digital?  Yes and no, It is somewhat like painting vs photography. 
 

[BernardC]

13 hours ago, Einst_Stein said:

I don’t have scientific comparison, but I think a MF folding camera can be on par with at most APS-C digital, …, no, may be MFT only.

As we said before, it really depends on which MF folding camera. Some of them are excellent, and we haven't even mentioned Linhofs with roll film backs.

[Einst_Stein]

21 minutes ago, BernardC said:

As we said before, it really depends on which MF folding camera. Some of them are excellent, and we haven't even mentioned Linhofs with roll film backs.

Bu MF folding camera I assume only fixed lens that can be folded into  compact (in the relative sense) camera. 
I assume large format camera that has bellow and interchangeable lens is not MF folding camera, at least I am not talking that that. 
If you insist to include that, I have no argument.

[pgk]

I've been experimenting with old lenses over the last few years. Many are surprisingly good. Even 19thC Victorian lenses are highly capable and the well-known designs such as TT&H Cooke are really quite impressive. There are several technical issue to consider though. Older lenses can suffer from field curvature meaning that corners are less sharp. Film may not lie as flat as may be desired. Older lenses may be uncoated, single coated or show signs of wear/age with haze, etc. Precise focus may be a problem depending on mechanism. As ever its about quality. Well-known, quality cameras are probably a better bet, as are more recent copies.

And don't forget the bellows! Many can have age related damage including pinholes, fortunately Custom Bellows can usually make a new set but at a cost so this needs to be considered.

Edited March 6 by pgk

[BernardC]

35 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said:

I assume large format camera that has bellow and interchangeable lens is not MF folding camera, at least I am not talking that that.

The old Technika 23 was a folding rangefinder that used 6x9, 6x7, or 6x6 "Super Rollex" film backs, so it's a folding medium format camera. That's a very high-end example, but Fuji had a line of 645, 6x7, and 6x9 folding rangefinders with very good lenses. Plaubel made several similar cameras with great Nikkor lenses. They were collapsible, rather than folding, but the difference isn't very important. Any of these will be every bit as good as high-end medium format cameras from Hasselblad, Rolleiflex, Mamiya, etc.

[Einst_Stein]

Thanks for the interesting infos. I did not study that much.

When I did the survey, I found a summary of some folding MFs, including Zeiss Super Ikontas, Voigtlander Bessa, etc. The MTF data shows all cameras in the list are somewhere below 50-60 LPMM. The Japan made Mamiya 6, Super Fujica 6 are around 30-50 LPMM. 

I think this LPMM  can perform very well with 120 format films, the question is, how do they compare with modern digital.  I think we can say the modern digitalis are so good that even a M43 and APS-C can match the old MF foldings.

Edited March 6 by Einst_Stein

[pgk]

56 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said:

I think we can say the modern digitalis are so good that even a M43 and APS-C can match the old MF foldings.

In terms of actual information capacity of the resulting image you are probably correct. But there will be a big difference in the look from lens and medium format film which will look decidedly different from digital small format output. I used to shoot a Contax 645 and the transparencies from it still look quite different from FX digital. I'm currently shooting step and repeat digital on an Arca Swiss using old lenses ('1/4 plate' ~ 6x9cm). The results are hybrid in that they have the detailed tonality and colour of digital but also the flaws from older lenses (most are ~100 year+ old). Some are surprisingly good too.

[earleygallery]

Don't get all hung up on resolution, just buy a nice 6X6 folder and get out with it!

I have a few of them, 2 or 3 Zeiss models (one is a 6x9) and an Ensign Selfix 820 which is 6x9 with internal masks to change to 6x6. When buying, check very carefully for light tight bellows!

There's something really nice about using them, although I must admit I haven't done so for some time! This thread has made me want to get one of them loaded with film!

[Einst_Stein]

One of the photography aspect is the “characteristic”. You love it or hate it. Some says it is the result of imperfection. I kind pf agree but cannot explain it objectively. 

The difference of film from digital, in my personal view, is mainly the characteristics. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pgk]

There is a real challenge in using some old equipment to get the very best you can out of it. Its satisfying to do so.

[Einst_Stein]

3 hours ago, pgk said:

There is a real challenge in using some old equipment to get the very best you can out of it. Its satisfying to do so.

The challenge is the major part of the fun!