Hi Jan:
Nice photographs, I specially liked the composition for that
one about the back light between the trees, despite a bit of flare. These
old lenses could have haze and it is not good for the contrast, as Richard
explained ; that one about the tomatoes looks very sharp and has good
colors.
My Bergheil was not so cheap, it costed about $250 and I have seen units
even more expensive at eBay. Perhaps I exaggerated for the comparison with
the Rollei 35, but it is only a bit bigger than the format 6,5 cm x 9 cm
and it is not so deep when it is folded.
If the lens condition is good, I'll look for a roll film back.
Carlos
2015-09-20 17:04 GMT-03:00 Jan Decher <jdecher@xxxxxxx>:
Hi Carlos,
Looks like a small version of my 9 x 12 cm Voigtlander Argus, which came
with a German Rada 6x9 rollfilm back. Mine, when folded, is considerably
bigger than a Rollei 35, but still not much more volume and actually
somewhat flatter than my RF 3.5E. Unfortunately I broke off one of
those spring-loaded "handles below the lens" you described to slide the
lens standard out, when I closed the camera incorrectly, so I currently
need to use a screwdriver on one side to move the lens standard forward.
The camera is otherwise in very nice condition, bellows, "brilliant finder"
with bubble level, Compur shutter and all.
If you learn how to use the ground glass - perhaps with a black cloth ( I
used a black t-shirt) over your head for easier focussing - you can take
advantage of the "macro capability" by cranking the lens standard all the
way forward. See this photo on Kodak Ektar with the earlier 9 x 12 Avus
with 4.5/13.5cm Tessar I had in Vermont some years ago:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mittelformat/20953137874
Here are two examples of images taken with the "new" camera with
4.5/13.5cm Anastigmat-Skopar and the 6 x 9 rollfilm back on Portra 160:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mittelformat/3869397512
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mittelformat/20953137934
The Tessar seems to be sharper and more contrasty than the Skopar. The
Skopar has not impressed me so far. The Ektar 100 film may also have been
more contrasty than the Portra 160 but there was some problem in processing
at Foto Brell in Bonn when I got this test film back. The uncut negative
strip had all kinds of creases and folds. I think, it good mangled in the
processing machine. They apologized and gave me a replacement film. Not
sure how much the problem affected color or contrast. Worth another try, IF
I could get the "lens standard handle" breakage fixed (2nd Avus for
spares...?)
Wished somebody made a compact 6 x 9 "Laufbodenkamera" with a coated
Planar of Sonnar lens (well, someone did and they are called Linhof = $$$).
Anyway, it's a lot of fun trying these cameras, especially when the camera
with groundglass holder, rollfilm back, and two 9 x 12 sheet film holders
(+ two strange 6 x 9 film adapters that look like picture frames) can be
had for under $90. Haven't tried the sheet film holders yet. If I get 12 of
them together I can finally try the Nikor 9 x 12 tank I found years ago.
There is nothing that slows you photography down for careful composition
and thinking about each step, like a Voigtlander 9 x 12 camera...
Jan
On Sep 20, 2015, at 7:10 AM, FreeLists Mailing List Manager wrote:
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 19:08:10 -0300
From: CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
I received the Voigtländer Bergheil yesterday. It came into the original
black leather case with the ground glass holder, a 6,5x9cm film holder and
a similar size pack holder. The packs are no longer manufactured from a
long time BTW, but the holder could be adapted to use the regular film
sheets, according the seller, and I think he is right.
The camera is a beauty considering it was made at least 85 years ago. It
was folded and closed and looked like a little box coated with a textured
black leather, a bit bigger than a Rollei 35. Only a plate with a DOF scale
on one of the sides suggests a photographic camera; the wonders are
revealed after
the front cover opening. This front cover becomes the base with the rails
where you slide the Compur shutter and the Heliar 4,5/105mm lens combo. You
can slide the combo along the rails putting two fingers on two handles
below the lens or turning one of the two buttons on each side of the front
cover/base. There is a distance scale beside one of the rails to calculate
the focusing distance like the Rollei 35 however the shutter-lens combo
with the bellows can be advanced or retreated a lot beyond this distance
scale limits. There also is a sort of "sports finder" with a wire frame on
the shutter-lens combo and a frame reference on the camera body. A
brilliant finder helps to compose the vertical image. and the Shutter-lens
combo have up-down movements and lateral movements too, allowing to control
the image perspective; however lens or back tilt is not possible and then
you can't increase the DOF.
The camera is light and very easy to carry, but in spite of the ground
glass back, the lack of a reflex system to focus explains why cameras like
the Rolleiflex were replacing these MF models. You need to replace the
ground glass holder with the film holder,after to focus the frame, it means
you need a tripod most of the times if you use the ground glass. Rapid
photography could be only done guessing the subject distance, like for the
Rollei 35., even if you use 120 roll film.
The Compur shutter has speeds from T, B,1,sec and the known old sequence
1/2;1/5, 1/10; 1/25,1/50; 1/100 and 1/250. Shutter speeds from 1 to 1/10
are not working, but from 1/25 they seems to work fine. You needn't to cock
the shutter for T and B and T is the way to use the ground glass. The
diaphragm scale is odd:4,5; 6,3; 9; 12; 18; 25.
An interesting camera to use sometimes:
http://itarphotos.blogspot.com.ar/2015/09/voigtlander-bergheil.html
https://www.flickr.com/photos/itarfoto/21359295710/in/dateposted-public/
Carlos