BERGHEIL or AVUS

[Steven Tribe]

9x12 film is not a real problem as it is widely available in Europe.
Whilst the KW etui patent cameras are a design ikon, I not not sure they would stand up to much use after so many years - they are more sensitive than other designs. I can speak highly of the 9x12 by Glunz, Goerz and Zeiss-ikon which are very available and robust. The film holder situation is not that difficult - but be aware that sellers have no idea what they are selling. They are so cheap that an occasional wrong purchase will not set you back much. There is some info available on line about style differences. I enclose a small contribution from a 1934 catalogue which shows the main types in profile/camera producer. The weakest point is the velvet light sealing strip which has occasionally been eaten by various bugs.

[IanG]

Whilst the KW etui patent cameras are a design ikon, I not not sure they would stand up to much use after so many years - they are more sensitive than other designs.

Actually both my Patent Etui's are quite robust, despite being over 80 years old Si I think they'll last quite a few more years of use. However the fact that they are about half the weight of many other German 9x12 cameras makes them harder to hand-hold steadily. I prefer my Crown Graphic hand held the extra size & mass makes a big difference, the 9x12's are just for fun.

Steven's mentioned Glunz, Goerz 9x12 cameras, but there were about 30 manufacturers, often parts are common, some companies were very short-lived but most quite solidly made, I have an Orion Werks & a Rodenstock both very well made,

It's really the lens & shutter combination you need to pay attention to, get a lens you want to try, lesser known triplets, in Vario and other 3 speed shutters aren't really worth it, the most reliable are those with Compur shutters, the Ibsor isn't as good, but can be OK, it's self-cocking and very heavy on cable releases, it's the forerunner of the Prontor Press.

Ian

[Steven Tribe]

I agree with everything Ian says, The Vario shutter is a warning sign of a cheaper, not so well made camera, - usually on plate cameras without an extension. Apart from Compur dial, Ibso (looks like a compound) many makers had their own branded shutter.
Pre 1926, other good names were ICA and Ihagee (IHG) for plate cameras (6x9,9x12, 10x15 and 13x18cm).

There are a lot more back systems than I illustrated before. In 1925 there were as many as 9 types. The big clearout of makers came with the Zeiss-Ikon formation and the massive German Depression. The photo shows the styles and the various main makers.

[ARCHIVIST]

Thank you Ian.

[rfesk]

You guys all have good points. Here in the US I have purchased maybe 25 holders to get about 10 that work well. I also find them slow to load and prone to loading mistakes on my part.

Also, I want to use a fast film and that is in my case T-max 400 rated at 800 ISO. To obtain that it has to be cut down from 4X5.

I wanted the AVUS to use for traveling - weight, size and the speed of set up are all important.

I have traveled with my Avus tucked in a Domke 803 satchel. The Avus' lens was replaced by a late 90mm F/6.8 Angulon. On a tripod it did ok. I scale-focused everything on that trip.

I am now in the process of converting a VAG to take both the 90mm F/6.8 Angulon and a Fujinon 150 F/6.3. This has taken a lot of work on my part and the project is far from complete because I want the 90 to fold up in the VAG as it does with the AVUS.

However, there is another consideration: 5 single holders (Voigtlander) weigh about the same as one loaded 6-shot Grafmatic. The Grafmatic is faster to operate and is known to hold the film consistantly flat.

Consequently, I have considered significantly lightening a 4X5 press type camera of some type or building my own out of carbon fiber sheets and use it only when traveling.

There are always trade offs.

[IanG]

Bob, I've been thinking of a similar approach, I really like the size and flexibilty of the 9x12 cameras compared to the vast majority of 5x4 cameras.

So I've thought along similar lines, maybe using the front standard & trackbed from another camera and building my own body & back.

It's when you compare the Patent Etui to a Crown Graphic, (as in the photos I posted) and realise the film size is only marginally different,then you think how to make a 5x4 version. They originally had similar 135mm Tessars.

My original intention was to mount a modern lens on my 2nd lens-less patent Etui, but even the tiny modern 150mm f5.6 Xenar is too large for the camera to fold closed, I'm not sure how KW overcame the problem of the larger Compur 0 shutters.

I've looked at a number of options, first make a 5x4 back for one of my other 9x12's, there is (or was) a camera repair guy who made conversion backs for Recomars, this would be the easiest & cheapest option.

2nd would be go down the Razzle, Byron, Littleman route, converting a Polaroid, the Byron accepts interchangeable lenses.

The third is to build a new camera, which makes you weigh up the Pros & Cons of your existing cameras and consider what features you actually want and need.

At this point we share common ground, I need to be able to use a 150mm (possibly 135mm) and a 90mm I have a good 90mm f6.8 Angulon, I don't need double extension, focus to 3-4 ft is ample, more movements than most 9x12 cameras (of the type we are discussing). Compact for travelling, and easy to use hand-held.

The fly in the ointment would be to try and kill two birds with one stone and add be able to shoot 6x17, eliminating my carrying two different cameras.

Ian

[Bernard Kaye]

Ian's second black camera, with the Etui, looks like an ICA/Zeiss Ikon "IDEAL" which has a swing back and if you can find Ideal 9 x 12 holders that pop on-pop off and load differently, you have a robust outfit that takes up to 150mm. lenses in Compur shutters. Avoid Ideals with smaller lens board holes that will not accept the larger 150mm. lenses. The lense-shutters are interchangeable but only shutters with the male bayonet lugs or male bayonet tabs will fit the female lugs on lensboard. It is difficult to put it all together but you seem to welcome challenge and there were good reasons serious photographers used more expensive Ideals in the 20s, 30s & 40s and before and after.
Bernie

[IanG]

Wrong guess Bernie

The second 9x12 in the photo is in fact my Rodenstock with a Trinar lens in an Ibsor shutter., but many of these camera's look very similar.

Voigtländer & Ihagee also made interchangeable lens 9x12 cameras, and there were others like the rare ISE Edelweiss 9x12.

Ian

[Bernard Kaye]

Shucks!
Bernie

[Bill_1856]

These were great field/press cameras when film packs were available for them. Unfortunately, by the time you add a dozen cut film holders the weight and bulk have been increased so much that you might as well carry a Crown Graphic or Busch Pressman and a couple of Grafmatics.