Franka Rolfix 6x9cm Folder Camera
Photo thanks to Walter Hurtowy
[email protected]
The Franka-Werk of Beyreuth, Germany produced many camera models which found their
way into American hands via Montgomery Ward Corp. catalogs and store sales. This
Rolfix folder may well be from 1955 (as photo notes poster suggests), making it
a contemporary with the Rolfix II (~1951-57) and Rolfix Jr. models (~1951-55).
The good news is these cameras take regular 120 rollfilm. Some models could take
8 or 12 exposures per roll, others 8 or 16 exposures, depending on the use of
mask inserts. While some Rolfix cameras were made in Germany before and during WWII,
others were made in U.S. occupied zone of Germany using both pre- and post-WWII made
parts (source: McKeown's Price Guide to Antique and Classic Cameras (1992-3) p.147).
Personally, I worry a lot about what kinds of parts were substituted, or materials
compromised, during WWII war time production of consumer goods. I worry even more about
production out of available post-war parts, many of which might have been scavenged
from returned or previously rejected and reworked parts. These concerns may also
help explain why such mass produced cameras can often be bought for $25-50+?
The Rolfix II models had nicer lenses (105mm f/3.5 Trinar (3 element)) and shutters
(some had well regarded compur-rapid shutters featuring a full range from 1 second
to 1/400th second, or the later synchro-compur (which went to 1/500th second). For
another $10-20+, these cameras would repay the extra investment. The Rolfix Jr.
offered 6x9cm or 6x6cm shots, using a 105mm f/4.5 Frankar lens in a Vario shutter
limited to 1/25th, 1/50th, 1/200th, and Bulb. As you might expect, this camera sold
for less, and sells for less today (often $20-30).
On our folder FAQ pages, we outline some tips on buying
older folders. The Rolfix series illustrates some of these points. If the shutter
speeds are limited, that is a sign of a modest (read as low cost, or even cheap)
camera model. A full range of shutter speeds from 1 to 1/250th or better is a good
sign. A slow lens is usually found on economy models (e.g., f/6.3, f/7.7), while
faster lenses are on the better models (e.g., f/3.5). Shutters you have heard of
on big name cameras (e.g., Hasselblad) like synchro-compur are a better sign than
less familiar manufacturer names. None of this is cast in stone, and many cameras
have collectible value or are rare and so justify higher prices. But you can usually
be better off by spending just a bit more for a better, faster (four element) lens
and a wider range of shutter speeds. The extra costs will rarely be more than the
price of a few pizzas, but the utility and results from your folder photography
will be noticeable!
Condition: Camera in excellent condition, slight edge peeling on front right leatherette section. Outer case leather good condition slight wear on edges, inside of case shows cracking on top flap. Description: Back of camera reads: "Made in Germany U.S. Zone", "Frauka". Front left of camera reads "Rolfix". Lens: Schneider-Kreuznach Radionar 1:4, 5/105 #2981483.
This photo is particularly interesting as it shows clearly how a larger format 6x9cm folder can be reduced to a 6x6cm using this mask kit.
From: Bill Overson [email protected]
Subject: Response to Frauka Rolfix II folding camera
Date: 1998-06-03
I couldn't find any info on a Frauka, but there is a Franka Rolfix II.
Camera that was produced between 1951-57, sold in the USA by
Montgomery-Ward. If it's the later model, it should have a Synchro-Compur
shutter with speeds to 1/500th. Early models didn't have flash synch.
That's about all I could find on them, I can't help you with the missing
mask. Good Luck!
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Beginning 6x9 Folder?
Date: 25 May 1998
This is interesting...
I have a Franka Rollfix Jr in front of me right now which sort of violates
Steve's quality code. It has a Vario 3-speed shutter (25,75,200) with
unknown (I would assume M) synch. So far it sounds cheap, but it has a
105mm f:4.5 Schneider Radionar coated lens! Cheaper shutter with good
glass!
Personally, I prefer the cheaper shutters as the greatest single cause of
shutter problems is in gummed lubricant in the slow speed gears. As a
result, I actually prefer these simpler and more reliable shutters. I
have a Kodak Tourist with a similar shutter and a coated f:8.8 Anaston
lens (also a Cooke triplet type) which I'd love to death if only I didn't
have to deal with the 620 film mess. The lens is an absolute joy for
sharpness.
I've got a few really nice "top of line" cameras here whose 7 and 9
speed Compurs need expensive work that I feel is beyond my resources
and competence to repair. The cost of repair is several times the
value of the cameras that they're on! Conclusion? To me at least,
avoid the deluxe shutters but look for good glass!
My $.02
Ed Lukacs
Washington, DC
steven T koontz [email protected] wrote: : Erynn/Lorax wrote: :> :> Having spent a year with my Rolleicord, I find myself wanting to try a 6x9 :> folder. Could I have a few recommendations for one that won't cost a fortune :> but still deliver good results? I'd prefer one I can mount filters on, if :> that's possible. :> : I've had very good results with the "franka" camera's. They seem very : well made. One way to determine how good the camera is by seeing how : many speeds the shutter has. the good ones go down to 1/2 sec or 1 : sec. Also I would make sure it has a coated lens as this means it is a : fairly late camera (post WWII) and will be better for shooting color : and in funky lighting.. Also will have more contrast. The radionar and : enar lenses work well and ussually can be bought cheap compaired to : the zeis tessar ect lensed camera's. I have a rollei with a xenar and : can't really see much diff in it and these folders until you start : getting real big enlargements.. And then the 6X9 negs size makes up : for the unsharpness of the cheaper lens.. : -- : steve's photography & Z car stuff @ http://www.mindspring.com/~skoontz : [email protected]
>I recently bought a Franka Werk folding 6x4.5 camera. It comes with >Steinheil Culminar 1:2.9 (and it doesn't come >with a built-in rangefinder!) f=7.5cm in Compur. It comes with a clear >viewfinder. I have been told that it's a prewar camera. >I don't know about this Franka Werk company and I would like to know where >it was along with all the significance. and >if there is any literatures available, I would like to read ones. Any help >will be appreciated... >Thanks > >Tom K
Tom,
Franka Camera Werke used to be a company in Bayreuth/Bavaria, Richard
Wagner's (the music composer's) festival town. That coincindental
association with the name Wagner is about the only thing glorious about
them. They used to build solid user cameras for amateurs from cheap,
beginners' cameras up to middle class models, all unspectacular but a good
value for the money. I personally don't know of any Franka-originated
invention or milestone, not even some oddball design which would have
entered them into the history books of photography. Those are written by
the makers of Ferraris, Porsches, Mercedeses and the like and Franka made
the equivalents of pick-up trucks.
They were founded in the early 1910s (before WW I., a few years before
Franke & Heidecke!) and a charming ad of the era says "Franka-Camera-Werke
Bayreuth, Camera factory, Optical institute, Metalworking factory,
Bookbinders [!], Mechanical shop, Carpentry". The logo used to be a pelican
and an owl sitting behind the groundglass of a bellows camera.
Their prewar (WW II.) cameras used to be glass plate or later sheet film
folding models of the then popular formats, like 9x12cm, etc., some simple
strut-type models (similar to the Makina) and roll-film folders, like
yours. After the war they continued strong with roll-film folders, one of
their specialities being 6x6cm cameras with a reducing insert for the 4x4cm
superslide format. Their Solida III model with rangefinder must have been
something like the poor man's Super Ikonta in the 1950ies. They got into
the 35mm format as well with simple, zone-focussing or rangefinder amateur
cameras of the type Agfa, Voigtldnder and Zeiss made hundreds of thousands
of. Franka competed with those purely on the basis of price, not features.
That's why their lenses were also of the cheaper variety: never a Zeiss
Tessar or similar. The better (= more expensive) models might have had a
Schneider Xenar as a maximum, otherwise lenses from Steinheil, Enna or Isco
(the cheap version of Schneider. Isco = Joseph Schneider Co.). Not that
these companies necessarily made inferior lenses! But they specialised in
the middle to lower price range market, that was their niche. The cheaper
models had Frankars or plain Anastigmats without a name. With todays
emulsions and the larger format of a rollfilm the results should be
pleasing, even with those lenses.
Franka must have bitten the dust sometime in the 1960ies. The last ad I
have in my reference is from 1961.
Hope, this is useful!
From: steven T koontz [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Beginning 6x9 Folder?
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998
I've had very good results with the "franka" camera's. They seem very
well made. One way to determine how good the camera is by seeing how
many speeds the shutter has. the good ones go down to 1/2 sec or 1 sec.
Also I would make sure it has a coated lens as this means it is a fairly late
camera (post WWII) and will be better for shooting color and in funky
lighting.. Also will have more contrast. The radionar and enar lenses
work well
and usually can be bought cheap compared to the zeiss tessar ect lensed
camera's. I have a rollei with a xenar and can't really see much diff in
it and
these folders until you start getting real big enlargements.. And then
the 6X9 negs size makes up for the unsharpness of the cheaper lens..
--
steve's photography & Z car stuff @ http://www.mindspring.com/~skoontz
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998
From: Steven T Koontz [email protected]
Subject: Re: [CCCU] Guess focusing?
> The "feel" of a >camera in the hand is so important to me as to whether I'm going to use >it a lot.
I know what you mean. I carry an old franka 6X6 folder with a 75 ena werk
lens everywhere and while I know my minolta auto cords or my rolleicord
will shoot much sharper negs, they are more of a pain to carry so they
don't get taken sometimes.. I'm thinking about getting this Ikonta B with a
tessar for just this reason.. Hopefully will get the best of both worlds
with a coupled rangefinder to boot!!
"why do today what you can put off until tomorrow?" j?j
steve's pictures @ http://www.mindspring.com/~skoontz
Date: 08 Dec 1999
From: [email protected] (WardCheese)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Color pictures with old 6x6 folder
>I want to buy an old 6x6 folder with a Tessar design >uncoated lens (Agfa Isolette with uncoated Solinar lens). >Does anybody has experience using such an old lens for >color photography?
I have a zeiss nettar with a 135mm tessar and a franka rollfix. The
franka has a mask for shooting either 6x6 or 6x9. These cameras are great
fun to use, and you will be surprised by the quality of the shots. Focus
is very fine, and they are so portable compared to my bronica! they may
be a little lacking in contrast, due to the lack of lens coating, but just
be careful about any light falling on the front of the lens when you
shoot.
Take them out and mess around! I love mine!
--ward
[Ed. note: thanks to Josef for this info!]
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000
From: Josef Brugger [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: franka rolfix
Just to add to the Franka information:
I have a Frank Rolfix, 6x9 complete with 6x6 mask, in excellent
condition. The lens is a Schneider Kreuznach Radionar 105mm f/4.5. The
shutter is a Prontor-S with speeds from 1 sec to 1/250 sec and B. Stops
go down to f/32. The lens has a faint blue/violet coating. Performance
is good from f5.6 on down and best around f/11-f/16. Serial number on
the lens is 2715870.
This one appears to have spent much of its life displayed; the top of
the bellows was dusty and the lens is unmarked. The bellows is nice and
flexible.
All it asks is some attention to placement of the light source and a
more contrasty film than you might use with modern gear. The loading
system, with tilt-out carriers for the film spools, is convenient once
you get used to it.
As far as quality, what passed as consumer-grade from Montgomery Ward in
the 1950s includes nice smooth enamel, nickel plating and a grippy
non-slip covering (maybe plastic, since it appears to be heat-stamped).
Since the Franka came from the same part of Bavaria as my mom's family,
it's a nice piece to have and use.
Josef Brugger