Do you know anything about this vintage camera?

[Marie Hass]

Does anyone know anything about the Zeiss Ikon BOB 510/2 6X9 BII8 Nettar-Anastigmat Folding camera?

I picked one up on e-bay cheap just because I liked its looks. Can someone tell me what all of the #'s and letters mean?

Appreciate knowing a bit more. When I googled it, the only thing that I could find were sales listings.

Marie

[Jim B.]

Check This site.

[Marie Hass]

Thank you, Jim! I did not look under Nettar. I was also looking for the type of images taken with this camera. Can you point me in the right direction for that as well? Is this the one that you end up with images that are about 1.5" square? I know nothing about vintage cameras. This was strictly an impulse buy. The seller said that the mechanisms all work, but did not say if the camera worked. Do they even make that size film anymore?

Marie

[pnodrog]

The name indicates it takes 6cmx9cm images. I have a 6x6 version my father-in-law gave me a few years ago as it used the 120/220 film I had left over when I sold my mamiya 645. Not sure in which box it was packed when we shifted 12years ago. It deserves to be unpacked.

My wife has this theory that anything that has not been used in over two years should be disposed of. I live in constant fear of losing many of my most valued but neglected treasures. Luckily I have my garage haven in such a state that she refuses to enter.

[Manfred M]

Looks like it shoots 120 roll film, which should still be available through professional camera stores or online retailers.

For example: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...120_Black.html

A few words of caution; this camera has leather bellows, and even if the mechanisms work, there could be light leaks through the bellows. The only way to find out is to shoot a roll of film.

This camera was a black & white film camera, so you might find some strange colour casts if you shoot colour film. I would be tempted to try a fairly low ISO film, again, because this would be what the camera was designed to shoot.

[PhotomanJohn]

Look though the lens and make sure the aperture and shutter are working. Try a range of shutter speeds and see if it seems right. If it sticks a little, keep operating it which will probably loosen it up. Sounds like fun.

John

[rpcrowe]

My wife has this theory that anything that has not been used in over two years should be disposed of. I live in constant fear of losing many of my most valued but neglected treasures. Luckily I have my garage haven in such a state that she refuses to enter.

We are not bigamists but from the description of your wife's attitude to male treasures, we both could be married to the same woman!

[pnodrog]

We are not bigamists but from the description of your wife's attitude to male treasures, we both could be married to the same woman!

It would be a perfect arrangement if she can cook and do the washing for me and pick on you for all the behaviour modification and treasure disposal she thinks is required.

P.S. Providing jewellery would be totally your responsibility.

[Marie Hass]

Now, now, gentlemen!!!

Look at it from the flip side. I live with a HOARDER! He throws nothing away, saying/mumbling "I'll fix it - It's worth some money". I confess that I do clandestine raids - and I only dispose (re-purpose) of the oldest stuff. Honest. He still does not know the junk (treasures) are gone.

And thanks for the infomation about the camera. I hope it is completely intact. It would be fun to shoot a roll of film.

This was the description:
CAMERA IS IN OVERALL GREAT CONDITION
SHOWS SOME LIGHT SIGNS OF PRIOR USE
OPENS & CLOSES PERFECTLY
BOTTOM/BACK EDGE HAS SMALL SPOT OF PAINT LOSS
VERY LIGHT WEAR ON LEATHERETTE STRAP
NO DENTS, NO DINGS ON CAMERA
ALL SHUTTER SPEEDS SEEM TO BE ACCURATE
ADJUSTING THE SHUTTER SPEEDS & APERTURE IS SMOOTH
APERTURE AND SHUTTER BLADES IN GOOD CONDITION
LENS ELEMENTS ARE IN GOOD CONDITION
SHOWS NO CLEANING MARKS, NO SCRATCHES, NO FUNGUS, NO SEPARATION ON/IN BETWEEN ELEMENTS
FILM WINDER WORKS SMOOTHLY
FINDER OPENS NICELY
BELLOWS ARE IN VERY GOOD CONDITION

Marie

[John 2]

I have a number of similar cameras (Ross Ensigns) now all in working condition. As Manfred points out, the bellows might look to be in excellent condition but over time, pinholes can develop in the folds of the bellows. Also check out the hinges and the red film window(s) on the back. The other bit of advice I will pass on is NEVER use liquid lubricants of any kind in an attempt to service the shutter. If it needs freeing up, use fine graphite. Scrapings from a soft pencil lead are quite effective. I have successfully put Ektachrome colour transparency film through mine and sold a few to agencies in the pre-digital era but the lenses (105mm Ross Xpres) on mine are probably a little later than yours. When I use them today, I generally shoot Ilford B/W film but in the UK it's getting harder to find film laboratories to develop them - too idle to do it myself anymore. As to worth try these two sites:

http://collectiblend.com/Cameras/Zei...Bob-510-2.html

http://www.westlicht-auction.com/index.php?id=3&L=1

[Marie Hass]

Thanks, John

I bought this camera for $20.50 on a lark because I thought it was neat looking. I probably spent too much, but oh well.

Thanks for the links,

Marie

[William W]

Does anyone know anything about the Zeiss Ikon BOB 510/2 6X9 BII8 Nettar-Anastigmat Folding camera? I picked one up on e-bay cheap just because I liked its looks. Can someone tell me what all of the #'s and letters mean?

“Zeiss Ikon” – describes the Manufacturer of the Camera.

“Zeiss Icon” made many cameras (and lots of other stuff too) - this is one of their “folders”.
It is designed for compact light weight carry and hand held shooting: either at waist level or at eye level whilst providing (for a medium format camera) a good to high quality image, mainly because of the large negative and relatively long throw distance, from the (simple) Lens to the Film Plane.

Many folders made by Zeiss ended up with different lens and shutter combinations and it is not uncommon for folders to be found today with adapted shutters and lenses.

It is possible that the lenses and/or shutter could have been swapped during “repairs” – because often “repairs” were not repairs per se, but were simply “replace the broken bit with what is laying around the shop”.

I mention these facts, because when you get the camera the Shutter Speeds on the camera, may not match what you expect for a bob510/2 as per that wiki.org site, for which the link was supplied.

*

“BOB 510/2” is the Model of the Camera.

“BOB” (I think) is the designation that was used in the advertising for “sale in other countries”. Perhaps it made the camera seem “less German”?


“510/2” is the Model Number of the Camera.

The “5” hundred were medium format folders. (for example “8” in the hundreds I recall indicated a TLR)
The “1” tens indicated the lens design/type - a ‘Nettar’ Lens (i.e. indicating a lower grade camera – for example a “520” had an “Ikonta” Lens, which was superior lens).
The “0” and “2” unit indicates the release model / date –the lower number being the earlier versions

*


“6X9” indicates the specific format and size of the negative.
It is a 6cm x 9 cm negative camera. (For example as opposed to a: 6cm x 6cm or a 6cm x 4.5cm)

*

“BII8” is the suggested film type and the exposure that you will be able to make with one roll.

“BII” is the (original) designation for Kodak Dekopan Roll Film.

“8” indicates the number of exposures that you will get from the film.
Later Kodak universalised their film nomenclature and these films were groups by size – this camera takes 120 Roll Film.

Note that this camera does NOT use 220 Roll film.

There are two main reasons for this –

> there is no backing paper on 220 Roll Film – so you cannot see the frame number in the window at the back
(the red window) – so you will not know how far to advance the film to the next frame.

> as there is no backing paper on 220 film and because the film pressure plates on these cameras were often rough – the pressure plate can scratch or rip 220 Roll Film.

*

“Nettar-Anastigmat” is describing the Lens and the ‘owners’ of it.

"Nettar" is a trade mark name of "Contessa Nettel Werke" near Stuttgart in Germany. The Nettar Lens was originally a 3 element ‘Contessa-Nettel’ design. “Nettar” is like the Novar, Triotar, Radionar, all are Lenses, with 3 optics, in 3 groups.

The Contessa Nettel plant, came to Zeiss Ikon in 1925. The “Nettar” name was continued after a merger into the newer company ’Zeiss Ikon’. ‘Contessa-Nettel’ is represented by the ‘kon’ at the end of this new name.
After the merger, ‘Nettar’ cameras continued to be made as the less expensive alternative to the ‘Ikonta’ range. Nettar Lenses were then bought from a variety of manufacturers by Zeiss Ikon, to be sold on their lower-grade cameras.

Having been bought from a variety of manufacturers, one must not assume that any Nettar Lens named on a Zeiss Icon folder, is exactly the same lens design as the original triplet lens design.

‘Anastigmat’ seems to be German for the technical word “Anastigmatic”: which describes a Lens which is corrected for: Astigmatism; Coma; and Spherical Aberration.

Cameras in bygone eras included the word ‘Anastigmatic’ to advertise that their camera sported this new (and important) advance in lens design.

Note that ‘Zeiss Ikon’ was a camera manufacturer and is not to be confused with ‘Carl Zeiss’ - a lens manufacturer.

*

Other stuff:

You need not necessarily run a roll of film through the camera to check for light leaks in the bellows – simply open up the back (as to load the film) and make for a completely dark room with a torch (American translation = ‘flash light’) and shine the torch up the back side of the camera and look at the bellows critically for light leaks.

Small leaks can be fixed with all sorts of stuff including small pieces of black silk and nail polish to adhere same - or even Gaff Tape carefully applied in extremely SMALL patches can do the trick.

Getting new bellows is usually a Royal Pain in the Butt and in the wallet – but one can make them: which is more a pain in the butt to learn how to do the job properly.

*

The reason why colour film was suggested not to be used was because of the lens – it is not a coated lens and using colour film will result in very nice (or weird) colour casts. Also the reason why a slow to medium ASA/DIN film was suggested is mainly because of the SHUTTER SPEED RANGE of the camera. (we now use “ISO” to indicate the speed of the film).

You will likely have only: T (Time); B (Bulb); 1/25s; 1/50s; 1/75s and maybe, if you are lucky a slick top speed of 1/100s.

Your lens will likely have somewhere between F/5 to F7 as the maximum aperture and will stop down to around F/22 ~ F/32.

So, for front lit Portrait or Scene on a sunny day: if you only have 1/75s as a Shutter Speed to use and even if you can use F/22 . . . you cannot use any film rated faster than ISO 150 for fear of over exposing the shot.
Typically these cameras used Panchromatic or Orthochromatic Film rated at (today’s equivalent) ISO 12 to ISO 125.

*

If you take this baby for a spin, then you will have to learn do all sorts of groovy manoeuvres.
You will have to:

“Cock the Shutter”
“Set the Distance”
“Calculate the Depth of Field”
"Set the Aperture"
"Remember the 'Unders and Overs' "
“Set the Shutter Speed”
”Release the Shutter”
And . . .
“Advance the Film”

*

The "Unders and Overs" (mentioned above)

Of course you will have to remember that frames 3, 5 and 7 are “two stops under” because it was really cloudy that day, so you will have to “snip them” and “drop them into another soup to push them two stops”.

*

You have purchased a very nice piece of history, for the cost of only a few coffees. My Mother and my two Aunts (one a quite famous Photographer) all used 6x9 Folders even after they had purchased the more sophisticated TLR’s (Twin Lens Reflex). I have a few folders, myself.

I hope, Marie, that yours gives you great joy even it remains as a mantle-piece decoration – even more fun if you use it.

WW

[kintatsu]

I have a Nettar 515/2 from ~1937. It still works great! The one thing to be aware of, beyond that mentioned above, is focus. Take some tissue paper and place it where the film plane is to verify focus prior to use. The image projected on the tissue will give you some idea is it's off.

I love the old cameras, and shoot with a couple of them.

[Marie Hass]

Oh, William!!!!

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!! For your learned explanation. I cannot wait to get my camera and fiddle with it, now.

Marie

[Marie Hass]

Dear James,

What size pictures print from this film? I am getting excited to try this camera.

Marie

[RustBeltRaw]

What size pictures print from this film?

As with digital, you can print basically any size you want, but there will be quality issues at larger sizes. A 6x9cm negative is big enough for pretty darn big prints, but exactly how much quality you want (AKA, how big you're willing to go) is up to you. A contact print, which is made by sticking a negative directly to a printing medium, would be limited to the size of the negative itself.

I am getting excited to try this camera.

After Bill's exceptionally detailed explanation, I can see why. I just dug out my dad's garage-built, wooden 4x5in large-format camera, and I'm similarly giddy. And there's a metering prism for my Zenza Bronica on the way. Not sure why, but the further I get into shooting, the more interested I am in new cameras and film work.

That said, the learning curve is a bugger, and processing film is not for the impatient.

[kintatsu]

Dear James,

What size pictures print from this film? I am getting excited to try this camera.

Marie

The size is only limited by the quality of the negative. Properly exposed and developed ISO 100-125 film can be printed rather large. The aspect ratio matches the Canon digital, which will help you ease into film work. Keeping the ratio of your digital will make composition easier.

I've seen 16x24 prints from 6x7 negatives that were exceptionally nice.

[William W]

It was very common for the Photographer NOT to use an enlarger for printing negatives from a Folder, but to make only Contact Prints. I suspect cost (of an enlarger) was an issue. And I also suspect that's why the larger negative sized Folders (like this 6x9 as opposed to a 6x6) were so popular.

When I mentioned:

"It is designed for compact light weight carry and hand held shooting: either at waist level or at eye level whilst providing (for a medium format camera) a good to high quality image, mainly because of the large negative and relatively long throw distance, from the (simple) Lens to the Film Plane."

I was actually thinking of the quality of the resultant Contact Prints: but there is no reason not to use an enlarger and to expect nice prints.


My expectation is, that the edges of the frame might suffer for images made using the camera at the very large apertures - and you might notice this as you go bigger with any enlargement that you make.

But who knows really what can be done, until you test the lens to see its capacity.

WW

[pnodrog]

Bill thanks for the memory. When I wrote 120/220 film there was something in the back of my mind saying it was not that simple. It's over 20years but you jolted my memory of in the dark cutting and re-spooling 220 stock onto 120 spools with saved and much treasured backing paper. If I got it wrong the numbering was mucked up and I ended up guessing at how far to advance the film between shots. Those were'nt the days.

[William W]

I didn't ever think that you were that old. (aka 'experienced') !

This thread has been a trip down memory-lane for a few, I think!

In cameras which were designed for ONLY 120 film, one could use 220 film and guess the number of turns to advance the film - - I did that with a mostly always a good modicum of success.

If attempting to do this, then there are other considerations, than the two I have mentioned: it is important to cover ("black out") the red window where one would read the frame number; and it is also important to account for the thinner 220 roll (which in turn makes for a smaller circumference on the take up spindle)

What I did was always overestimate the advance and, for example with the 6x9 camera in question, be happy with getting 14 frames with a bigger than normal spacing in between each of frame.

WW