Holga Blog

This review is a wee bit different to others.  Two holgablog writers both ended up getting the same camera within a few days of each other (even though they live 1000′s of miles apart), so they have joined forces for a review-duel! Two holgalblog gladiators battling it out in the arena of…actually, I have no idea where I’m going with that. The camera-o’-choice was the Zeiss Ikon Nettar.

Derek Says:

I recently found a Zeiss Ikon Nettar at an antique shop and a huge rush hit me; it was only thirty dollars for a high quality folding 6×6 camera.  The same price as a Holga I thought, I couldn’t believe my luck.  I’ve always heard about the legendary sharpness of the Zeiss Ikon lenses.

I bought the camera not knowing they came with different grades of lenses, the Tessar and the Novar.  My model has the Novar and at F4.5 it would be considered a “fast” lens.  Little changed with the Nettar over the years with the exception of the top of the camera.  The early models had a metal frame with no glass that flipped up.  My model being one of the later models has curved sort of art deco looking top and a proper viewfinder which would put it in the late 50’s I think.  I really wanted a folding 120 camera, but I had no idea if I was over paying or getting a great price.  I decided that it was worth $30 to me, I didn’t have to pay shipping and I could verify everything worked before I brought it home.  And it had a leather case in great condition.

When I got home I loaded the camera with Kodak TMax 400 and shot a roll.  First thing you notice is that the build of the camera is really solid. The film is easy to load; especially if you’re used to using a Holga or Diana.  The second thing you notice is that to focus you must be able to either guess distance really well or use a measuring device unless you have an external rangefinder.  And you also have to remember to do this.  For someone who shoots with a SLR or rangefinder a lot this is easy to forget.  As an added bonus the exposure times are a little old fashioned. With a top speed of 200 and an f22 aperture fast film is a little difficult in sunny conditions with modern fast film.  I’m not sure if 400 film existed when this camera was made.

To open the camera you press a silver button and presto, the square flips down and a lens pops out.  It’s a lot of fun, sort of like a jack in the box.  A novelty in this day and age to be sure.  Your grandparents might not be impressed, but your kids or nieces and nephews will love it.  Be prepared, they’ll try to steal your camera and play with it after seeing it do this most impressive trick.  Next step is to guess your distance and set it on the front by rotating the lens.  Next you can set your shutter and aperture.  Ready to shoot?  Not so fast, you forgot to cock the shutter.  Okay, cock the shutter, it’s that little lever on the lens.  Now press the button and you have your shot.  I heard there is a mechanism to prevent double exposures and that your supposed to advance the film before it will allow you to cock the shutter again.  This was an attempt to make a smarter camera for dumber photographer.  Luckily my camera either does not have this feature or it no longer works.

My first roll was not what I expected.  My focus was off and I ended up with fairly soft and low contrast images.  Some people like soft low contrast images and I am okay with that if it’s what I’m expecting but I wasn’t so I felt a little let down by my first roll.  DIY black and white says a lot more about your skills as a chemist then as a photographer (unless you consider those skills a fundamental part of being a photographer, I don’t).  Like playing guitar, it’s easy to learn but really difficult to master.  There are  many things you can do to get sub-par results.  I thought it was unfair to judge a camera based on only one roll of Black and White so to be fair I shot a roll of Kodak 160 Portra VC, again in cloudy conditions, but I can’t change the weather around here.  I used a tape measure and tried to stay at a shutter speed of 150 or higher at around f8; I would use a tri-pod, but to me that’s not real world, who shoots a folding camera with a tri-pod?  The whole point is portability, something you can put in a backpack or purse.  I’m using the old rule of using a shutter speed that is equal to 2 times the focal length.  S = FL x 2.  Lenses perform at their peak between f8 and f16.  By peak I mean they have least amount of depth of field  so all objects will be at their sharpest.

After getting the “scans” back I have to say that sharpness is not my cameras best feature, even under fairly controlled but real world conditions.   I’ve gotten sharper images out of my Brownie Hawkeye Flash.

There’s an old joke about a train engineer travelling abroad.  When he gets to the station he notices that there are 2 clocks in the station, but that they are off and both show different times.  He makes a mental note to tell the conductor when his train arrives.  Upon boarding the train he tells the porter to please let the conductor know that the clocks in the station are not synchronised.  The porter replies, “What good would two clocks do you if they both showed the same time?”    I think the same could be said for cameras.  The lens has a nice character and will make a nice portrait camera or I’ll use it for a moody effect, but I still need to find a folder with a sharp lens.  I could go spend lots of money on one, but that wouldn’t be as fun as rummaging through junk shops looking for one on the cheap.  When it comes to cameras the old cliché, it’s not the destination, it’s the journey, speaks a lot of truth.

Andrew Says:

This is slightly bizarre, I live approximately 3000 miles away from Derek, yet bought almost the same model of camera within the same week!  I was even luckier, paying just £4 for the Nettar from a junk shop on the Isle of Skye (I also got a lovely Soligor 28mm Lens for my Praktica for £4! I like that shop).  My Nettar has a similar Novar lens, but the lowest f-value is 6.3, a blessing in disguise on a sunny day!

My model seems a little different to Dereks. According to Camerapedia.org my Nettar is the Nettar II 517/16, whereas Derek’s is probably 518/16. Both released in 1949, the only difference appears to be the aperture range. The shutter speeds and aesthetics of the cameras are identical.

I won’t delve into specifics on how to use the Zeiss, as Derek has already covered that, but I will say I found the Nettar a pleasure to use.  It fits nicely in your hand, the viewfinder at least fixes the horizontal parralex issue, and the whole lump of camera feels solid and dependable.  Even after fifty years, the bellows were in good condition with no leaks, and the cameras was generally clean. The only thing letting it down was the lens. I didn’t notice when I bought it, but looking at it now, it is fungus-affected! This has affected the colours,the contrast, and *possibly* even the focus on the camera, pretty much invalidating any ‘fair’ test!

The one thing that also threw me slightly was that this roll film camera was the first one I’ve used that wound on right-to-left, something I completely forgot about when coming to loading the film!

As soon as I got the camera, I loaded it up with some Ilford Delta 400 and took it around the island.  There was a reason for usng 400 ISO film: This is Scotland! The weather was grim and overcast most of the time, so I wasn’t taking any chances.  I used a lightmeter before every shot to get the best exposure, and, like Derek always kept the aperture over 8 for maximum sharpness and depth of field.

After developing the film, I have to say I’m disappointed. I am normally pretty good at guessing the distance to subjects, and normally get pretty good results with regards to sharpness, but, like Derek, I found the focus a little soft at closer distances , especially after hearing how great the Novar lens is.  Even in infinity focus, it’s not as sharp as I was hoping for(although by no means bad).  It also seems inconsistent: If I set the focus to around 6M, I get a sharp image(see the image of the fishing boat below)! The problem is, this could be just down to the fungus on the lens, so I can’t give a definite answer as to why the focus is soft, although it is strange that both mine and Derek’s camera have this focus ‘problem’.

Overall, it’s a really nice little camera, and it’s a great way to get a large 6×6 negative without the bulk of other cameras.  For me, the focussing lets it down slightly; it’s just a bit too fiddly to get the focus perfect. Make sure you get one with NO fungus on the lens though (doh!).

Gallery

Below you will see more shots of the camera, plus all the other photos taken with them. Click on them to see a larger version on black in a lightbox.

My proving ground (derek)

Close up focus test (derek)

Color example (derek)

A view of the lake (derek)

Nettar-back

Nettar-side

Nettar-front

Nettar-Lens

Nettar-closed

Nettar-open

Nettar-Side view

Morgan on Skye (Andrew)

Fishing boat (Andrew)

Armadale Pier (Andrew)

Morgan on Skye (Andrew)

Beth (Andrew)