Zeiss Ikon Bebe Camera

Zeiss 342 Bébé – Resurrecting a 1930 Ikon

By Richard Becker

I don’t ‘collect’ old cameras, it is the process of using an old machine for the purpose it was made that I enjoy.

My family may disagree with the first part of this statement.

So when a 1930 Zeiss Ikon 342 Bébé came unexpectedly in a box of cameras bought unseen from a local auction house I wanted to take photos with it, not put it in a drawer or sell it.

Zeiss Ikon Bebe Camera
Zeiss Ikon Bebe Camera
With plate holder attached and dark slide still in place. It does mean you cannot see through the viewfinder until the slide is out – a useful reminder.

The Bébé is one of the cameras carried over from the merger that created Zeiss Ikon, in this case a camera range from ICA; small strut-folding plate cameras in 6.5X9, 6X6 and 6X4.5 cm sizes. This one is a 6X4.5 and came in it’s original case along with 6 plate holders and all in good order. The camera has a rim-set Compur shutter and a f/3.5 7cm Tessar lens. Along with the ground glass back there is a wire ‘sports’ finder and a folding reverse-Galilean one as well, so there should be no excuse for messing up the framing. I have been using the folding viewfinder as it is accurate and bright and I find that bringing the camera to ones eye helps to steady it for handheld photos and the shutter release is then in a more convenient position than when using the wire sports finder. The ground glass focussing screen is really too small to be useful, the camera would need to be on a tripod anyway, but some sort of magnifier is needed to be able to make use of it.

Zeiss Ikon Bebe Camera
Options for framing the scene.

It is a small camera folded and not much bigger extended, smaller than my Certo Dollina for example both when folded and open. It slips into a pocket or small bag and is quite discreet in use, not really looking much like a camera anyway. Which leads to the question is this a large format camera or not? Doesn’t taking single shots on glass negatives in plate holders make it Large Format Camera albeit a very small one?

Zeiss Ikon Bebe Camera
Beside my 6X6cm Super Ikonta, which is compact for a medium format camera.

But how was I going to take photos with it in 2026?

From the limited information available it seems only plate holders and a film pack back were made for the smallest Bébé. It is in any case far too small for a roll film back and I am not at all sure sheet film other than in film packs has ever been available this small. Even if sheet film holders were made in 6X4.5 size the Bébé has an unusual mounting for the plate holders and focussing screen. On the bottom short side of the plate holders there is a flange that slots into the camera and then the plate clips onto the camera at the top. Other plate holders in 6X4.5 size turn up occasionally, but they have all been the more conventional type that slide in from the top with flanges on both the long sides.

It took a while before I came up with a plan. I decided glass plates were out as I would either have to make them myself or order a custom size, neither seemed very sensible for a camera which was untested, and it appears 6X4.5 glass plates were quite unusual even when the cameras were being made. Small pieces of cut film looked to be the way to go. I discarded the idea of buying sheet film to cut down as also too expensive for an untested camera, but pieces of 120 film cut across the roll would be almost the correct size. The glass plates were actually 59 x 44 mm so film sheaths (see below) would also be the same size with sheets of film 43mm wide to slide into the sheaths.

Cut Film Sheaths/Holders

In the early part of the 20th century as sheet film became widely available a method of using it in cameras designed for glass plates was desirable. Cut film sheaths are made from thin metal sheets (usually aluminium) folded to hold a sheet of film and to slide into a plate holder in place of the glass negative. In order for the sheath to be the same size as the glass plate the sheet film needs to be slightly smaller than the corresponding glass plate size. The sheaths have a folded back lip top and bottom to match the thickness of the glass, but in order for the sheath to hold the film the emulsion surface will always be a little below that of where the emulsion of the glass negative sits. This potentially leads to focusing errors so the lens has to be stopped down to ensure that there is enough depth of field to still focus on the film. Not really a problem in those days as nobody was daft enough to use lenses wide open anyway. Their use in large format photography declined as dedicated sheet film holders as an alternative to glass plate holders became available in a variety of sizes.

I realised I would have to use a film that lays flat readily, it would need to be cut into pieces across the roll, mounted into film sheaths and those placed in the plate holders. Then after exposure remove it from the sheaths and develop the pieces somehow.

It started to get a bit difficult.

Film sheaths are very hard to come by, and were they ever even manufactured this small? So it looked as if I would have to make them.

How was I going to accurately cut pieces of film and mount them in the film sheaths?

And how was I going to develop the small pieces of film?

It quickly became clear none of this was going to happen in a changing bag, and I didn’t have a darkroom. Even if I did it seemed unlikely it would be possible in complete darkness, small film pieces, sharp knives and all that. Orthochromatic film looked to be the only possibility, Ilford Ortho+ 120 then became the likely medium as I knew it would stay reasonably flat.

So I had to build a darkroom. I was pointed to the nearly derelict outside shed of the house and told to build it in there, next to the outside loo in the alcove where the washing copper was once housed, was still housed actually. So I built it there, it is small, turning around is quite difficult and I still need to sort out ventilation. Not to mention heating.

Then holders for the film. Cut film sheaths probably havn’t been made for 70 or 80 years, most were discarded decades ago and quite possibly 6X4.5cm ones were never made in the first place. I eventually found on Ebay a seller with some Kodak ¼-plate film sheaths which I could use to base my small ones on.

Film sheaths
Back and front of Kodak quarter plate film sheaths with one of my homemade ones between them.

The Kodak sheaths are made from thin aluminium but I decided to use 0.12 mm brass as it is more available and slightly stiffer, flexibility is probably not a problem anyway with these small sheaths but I wasn’t going to be able to replicate the stiffening ribs of the Kodak ones if it proved necessary. I found there is little margin for error in the folding of the sheaths, just a tiny bit out and they either won’t hold in properly, or will not go in the plate holders at all. I had hoped to make sheaths 61mm high to take the full width of 120 film. But no chance, these are Zeiss Ikon plate holders and it is 59mm or nothing. As anyone who has worked with a Zeiss Ikon camera will know tolerances are tight. Eventually I made 4 sheaths that work well and another 2 or 3 that work with careful handling. And I have a lot of discarded pieces of brass sheet.

Next up a way to cut the film.

I needed to make straight parallel cuts at 90 degrees to the film edge and 43mm apart with no more than 0.5mm error. I came up with this cutting jig. The film lies in the channel and is held down by light seal foam above and below when the top piece is hinged down. If the end of the film is at the end of the jig when a knife is run through the slot a piece 43mm wide will be cut off. It works well often enough to not be too wasteful. I then slide the piece into the sheath and trim to size with a pair of scissors.

Zeiss Ikon Bebe Camera
Cutting jig, I lay the film in the channel from the left, run the knife along the slot and am left with a piece of film as shown.
Loading a film sheath
Slide the film into the sheath, trim the excess, then mount into the plate holder.

Developing became the next issue. In a tray under a safelight was my first idea, but a bit of experimentation showed small pieces of 120 film were really too light for tray development and had a habit of clumping together anyway. Developing one at a time seemed to be an unnecessary faff. I toyed with the idea of using or modifying a reel, one idea I came up with was using a reel set for 127 film, the 43mm width of the pieces is roughly that of 127 film. So would they slide into a 127 reel? Yes they do is the answer but they won’t stay in place.

Just as I was running out of ideas this appeared on Ebay:

Klimax developing tank
Butchers Klimax developing tank. Lift out the lid and frame and invert. Slide the base to the side and load the frame, push the base back over the plates or film, then lower back into the tank.

It is a Butchers Klimax developing tank for ‘glass plates and sheet film’, the last part is how an original advert described the range of Klimax tanks, which went up to at least ½-plate size. This one looked to be roughly the size I was looking for and an internet search revealed that Butchers had indeed made them for 6X4.5cm, as fortunately this one turned out to be. So £12 bought me a working period developing tank, but it would have been useful if the size had been marked on the outside, and also a note of the volume of liquid required for that matter (it is roughly 300ml, so probably 10 fluid ounces or 284ml). The only drawback is that it takes over 2 minutes to drain the liquid through the tap at the bottom, not good for developing evenly. I find turning it upside down over a large jug and emptying it through the lid is the only way.

One day after several months of planning and building I suddenly realised that I had done everything needed and would now need to actually put it to use. I cut film, loaded pieces into the sheaths and then sheaths into the plate holders. I stepped outside and took 3 images in quick succession, went back into the darkroom loaded the Klimax tank and developed the film pieces. I did have the presence of mind to include a piece of film that had not been outside the darkroom so I could narrow down any failure points. To my surprise I lifted out of the tank 3 acceptable negatives. The middle one has some uneven development which I think is due to the slightly curved film pieces touching in the middle. Since then I have loaded the film pieces in pairs with emulsion side out and with a gap between the pairs, and have not had the same trouble.

3 photos

So having proved the camera and everything worked I took some more photos, a few around the garden to practice and then on a day in Machynlleth I took 4 plate holders loaded with film. Presented here as they came out, dust, scratches and fingerprints included. Handling small pieces of film is fiddly with plenty of opportunity to damage the emulsion, and developing in a 100 year old metal tank doesn’t help. The negatives look like they have been in a drawer since 1930. Which I think has a certain charm.

Zeiss Ikon Bebe photo
Woodland Gate
Zeiss Ikon Bebe photo
The Olive Jar
Zeiss Ikon Bebe photo
Machynlleth Clock Tower
Zeiss Ikon Bebe photo
Outside a Machynlleth junk shop.
Zeiss Ikon Bebe photo
Market Day
Zeiss Ikon Bebe photo
Cornelius still busking.

I need to decide on the next step, I do now have some sheet film for another project, but cutting accurately might be an issue. So I think changes to the way I am using the camera will have to wait until I can find or make some glass negatives.

Share this post:

About The Author

By Richard Becker
Farmer, photographer and naturalist. Living in Wales.
Read More Articles From Richard Becker

Find more similar content on 35mmc

Use the tags below to search for more posts on related topics:

Donate to the upkeep, or contribute to 35mmc for an ad-free experience.

There are two ways to contribute to 35mmc and experience it without the adverts:

Paid Subscription – £3.99 per month and you’ll never see an advert again! (Free 3-day trial).

Subscribe here.

Content contributor – become a part of the world’s biggest film and alternative photography community blog. All our Contributors have an ad-free experience for life.

Sign up here.

Make a donation – If you would simply like to support Hamish Gill and 35mmc financially, you can also do so via ko-fi

Donate to 35mmc here.

Comments

Roger on Zeiss 342 Bébé – Resurrecting a 1930 Ikon

Comment posted: 18/09/2026

What dedication! I think most people would have given up. I particularly like the image of the violin player which shows what the camera is capable of doing.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Richard Becker replied:

Comment posted: 18/09/2026

Thank you Roger. Obviously if it had been a complete failure I would have given up quite quickly and nothing would have appeared here. The camera is good and has a very good lens, just isn't a machine that was future proofed.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Gary Smith on Zeiss 342 Bébé – Resurrecting a 1930 Ikon

Comment posted: 18/09/2026

The things we do for love!

I'm sure that your sense of accomplishment was high once you saw your results!

Good job!
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Richard Becker replied:

Comment posted: 18/09/2026

I was more surprised than anything, there were so many things where it could have gone wrong. My first time using film under a safelight for one, turns out it really doesn't respond to red light.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

RichardH on Zeiss 342 Bébé – Resurrecting a 1930 Ikon

Comment posted: 18/09/2026

Well done, Richard! I admire your fabrication skills, particularly the absence of light leaks on your negatives. Thank you for bringing a fine old camera back into service. Orthochromatic film is appropriate for the camera’s age, and you can slow down the development time with diluted Rodinal if that helps with slowly emptying the tank. Cheers!
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Richard Becker replied:

Comment posted: 18/09/2026

Than you Richard. Lack of light leaks is really down to Zeiss and their build quality. I could use Rodinal 1+100 but havn't trusted the tank outside the darkroom yet, and the thought of a hour trapped inside.....

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Tony Warren on Zeiss 342 Bébé – Resurrecting a 1930 Ikon

Comment posted: 19/09/2026

Well done Richard. A most impressive story and some excellent results. The fiddler in particular is impressive. Having done something similar with an Ensign Klito and a Zeiss Ideal in the past I know how difficult this must have been. My experiences involved using 5x4 in various ways. Working with this small format is mind boggling. So satisfying too.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Richard Becker replied:

Comment posted: 19/09/2026

Thank you Tony. It is a good camera and interesting to use, almost as far away from my digital as I can get. I am currently using an ICA Trona which is virtually the same as your Ideal. But it came with both a set of plate holders and a set of cut-film holders for 9X12cm so I havn't had to do anything complicated to use it.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Tony Warren replied:

Comment posted: 19/09/2026

That's a good find Richard. I had to make a 5x4 back for the ideal which had a fairly unique back system. It had been modified when I received it but still without holders. Made it more bulky but worked.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Jeffery Luhn on Zeiss 342 Bébé – Resurrecting a 1930 Ikon

Comment posted: 20/09/2026

Richard,
I am sooo impressed by the challenges you overcame to get that vintage camera to produce such good images! The thing that fascinated me was your photos seem like they were taken 90 years ago. The debris in the sky, the thumbprint, the lens flair, etc. Even the shot of Cornelius, whom I recognize from your other postings, seem to have been taken a very long time ago. Of course his sandals... None the less, it's a brilliant demonstration of what is, in effect, a time machine. Thanks for a great read!
Jeffery
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Richard Becker replied:

Comment posted: 20/09/2026

Than you Jeffery. I hadn't intended the photos to look as they do, to begin with I was just satisfied to get an image from the camera. I was trying to improve the quality, but now maybe I won't. One issue is that the film sheaths are tight in the plate holders and can get squeezed so they pinch and hold the film too tightly to be removed easily, I am trying to improve that. Cornelius is indeed from another age, though he will take contactless payments. He was pleased with the prints I gave him.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Jeffery Luhn replied:

Comment posted: 20/09/2026

I also have a good relationship with musicians that regularly busk in my area. The tiny town of Columbia, which grew up during the gold rush of the 1850s was in disrepair and slated for demolition around 1960. Locals convinced the state of California to take it over. It is now a state park and fully restored. A working stagecoach, assayer office, restaurants, and six or seven good quality buskers! Great photo subjects to test my camera collection. They all get prints! Jeffery

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

JA on Zeiss 342 Bébé – Resurrecting a 1930 Ikon

Comment posted: 20/09/2026

I thoight my little 6.5 x 9 certosport was pretty small but thats tiny. I have much the same plan but haven't sourced some sheet metal for a sheath.
Re the tank being slow to empty. Does it improve if you crack the screw top to allow it to breathe?
As for cutting to size a roll cutter or guillotine works well, you can use the tape used for label makers to create a stop thats jut raised enough to to engage the film without generally getting in the way.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Richard Becker replied:

Comment posted: 20/09/2026

6.5 X 9 is huge! And has the advantage of sheet film still being available as a standard size for FP4. The Klimax tank isn't airtight so no it makes no difference, I'm not convinced it is light tight either so am using it in the darkroom. I do have a 1920's photo guillotine so may try that, but the blade is lethal and in the dim light of the darkroom I worry about my fingers.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

JA replied:

Comment posted: 20/09/2026

I meant for a plate camera. Really small is my ensign midget

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *