OT (Totally) Rolleiflex? Someone stop me doing this again!

Trevor,

 

I have sent you an email advising on an apparently nice Rollei I have seen for sale on a UK dealer's website U.K. Worth considering, although you asked for dissuasion not persuasion!

Trevor, buy it and keep it. I learned the hard way never to sell a Leica, and I think the same is true for a Rollei. You'll always find a use for it, and when you don't have one, you'll want one!

 

My Fuji GX680 kit is gone and my Pentax 6x7 kit is for sale as we speak. I'm all digital for my professional work now, and haven't shot a roll of film for more than a year. But my Rolleicord Vb and Leica M3 stay, even if I do nothing but fondle them for the rest of my life.

http://www.geocities.com/chendayuan2001/rollei1.html

check here there is some accessory

For Rolleiflex, Ithink the best still the Tessar type model, it have its own style and it is lighter cheaper comapre to other model.

That's (I think) an MX-EVS Automat with a rolleimeter rangefinder attached.

Woops, it clearly states that with the pic. sorry....

I own one of the older Rolleiflexes.. a 1955 Rolleiflex 2.8D with the Schneider Xenotar f/2.8 lens. I purchased it a couple of years ago ($325 I think) after I had been drooling over TLRs for about a year. No built in meter but incident meters are more accurate anyway, right? ;) I have never had a single photo come out over or underexposed with my Polaris meter.

<p>

Focusing accuracy can be tough. Then again, mine is probably in dire need of focus calibration and has a 50 year old focusing screen and mirror that both need replacement. The 80mm focal length on 6x6cm is approximately equal to 50mm on 35mm film which means it is usable in nearly every situation if you're creative. Image quality is immense. The only hassle is the film itself. You need to find a reputable lab to process it and then have to worry about prints or scanning it in. I have a medium format scanner which removes part of that problem and I also process my own B&W film at home which means I only need to take it to a lab for color films... though loading 120 film on reels is enough to make you pull your hair out. I've considered selling it but don't think I could bring myself to really do that. It's a great piece of equipment.. a 50 year old camera that can output images to rival or beat ANY 35mm or digital camera (ok.. maybe not the Canon 1Ds MkII 16.7 megapixel body or medium format digital backs/bodies). You can see what I mean about focus accuracy in the cycle photo below (if pbase.com is working and displays a photo, that is).

<p>

<img src=http://www.pbase.com/chiapuke/image/35306921.jpg>

<p>

<img src=http://www.pbase.com/chiapuke/image/28784608.jpg>

I loved my Rollei 2.8f and used it for the majority of my work for several years. I foolishly

sold it when I had a fit of going "cold turkey" onto digital, and I soon regretted selling it.

All the more so once I decided I was being foolish, and tried to replace my missing Rollei

by purchasing two more. Neither was as good as my earlier one, and I sold those too.

 

Now it's Leica or 4x5. Which is fine. With the square I was creating too many centered

compositions by default, instead of investigating the possibilities. And also, the 2.8 lens is

pretty borderline slow for a lot of difficult lighting that I encounter. I do miss the tactial

quality of the Rollei, and the delightful bokeh, and I do get tempted to shoot square

photos because they look cool - but I get better low light photos with the Leica, and better

formal photos with the 4x5 - which means the Rollei was a compromise. A really nice

compromise, but why compromise if you don't have to?

How does the Yashica 124 compare with the Rollei in terms of photo quality, ruggedness, ease of use, and initial cost. I have generally heard good things about the yashica.

The Rolleis are unsurpassed in terms of TLR build quality. I own a Minolta Autocord, but it is not as rugged as my Rollei. Not bad though.

Nathan, I've owned a few of those single stick fours. Nice to see, thanks!

A late Yashica-Mat is probably a better choice than a funky Rolleicord for the same money.

The build quality and smoothness of winding isn't as nice as a Rollei but there is nothing

at all wrong with them and they have a nice feel.

 

You pretty much get what you pay for. I think the best "bang for buck' is a 2.8 E2 or E3 -

they are practically an F. Avoid the worthless meters and 120/220 capabilities to save even

more money ($500-$600 for a clean one.) For $150-$200 or so, I'd stick with as nice a

Rolleicord or YashicaMat as possible, as most Rolleiflex would have "issues" at that price.

 

Rolleis need consistent cleaning and service, they do gum up. You probably need to

budget a CLA into anyone you buy for serious work. Also, be sure to check focus wide

open and close up - it is not uncommon to get back or front focusing over time.

I have a 2.8E and its my baby. I couldn't imagine letting it go. Its quite a different tool than a 35mm rangefinder or SLR yet it handles as fast. You have one lens, but oh what a lens it is!

 

I for one don't see the big deal about the 2.8F. The selenium meters (if working) are only marginally useful, and all the F model really adds is coupling to the meter. Any Planar or Xenotar model is going to kick ass if its in proper working order. The Tessars and Xenars are no slouches either, especially for scenic work when you can stop them down a bit. If I really had to have a meter in a Rollei TLR, I'd consider a GX or FX with a TTL meter.

The best advice I got when I was considering a Rollei was to just buy the one in the best condition I could find and start shooting. The 2.8 lenses are reputed to be sharper in the corners and edges than the 3.5 lenses, but if you shoot stopped down to get more depth of field, you won't notice. You would stop down two more stops with a 75 or 80 mm lens than with the normal lens in a Leica. The Minolta Autocord stopped down to f8 will produce a negative which is indistinguishable from that produced by a Rollei at f8, in my experience, but the build quality is not as solid. The Yashica 124G is ok, not as solidly built as the Rollei, and seems to me to provide a somewhat softer image. In any event, the Yashinon lens is reputed to be better than the Yashicor lens.

 

The amount of detail which you can print from the 6x6 cm negative is wonderful. Some Rollei models are heavier than others. Also, they come with at least three different types of bayonet mountings for lens caps, filters and such. The bayonet I peripherals are far cheaper and more readily available than are the bayonet II, and peripherals from Yashicamats can be used on Bayonet I mounts. As I recall, Bayonet III equipment is for the 2.8GX. I am oversimplifying, but Bayonet I tends to go with f3.5 taking lenses, and Bayonet II with 2.8f lenses.

 

I was shocked to learn that Rollei TLR fans agree Rollei produced a BAD model which they would not let their friends buy. It may have been the model A, but my memory is vague on this point, so you'll need to check this out if you want to pursue these. I'm sure Jerry Lehrer remembers which model it was. He is quite knowledgeable about Rolleis. Ferdi Stutterheim maintains a list of recommended repair people for Rolleis; the list includes repair persons in Europe.

 

Hope this helps.<div></div>

Is that from a Rolleiflex? My Holga did a better job than that ;-)<div></div>

Maybe the issue is with the scan, rather than the negative.

I use and have used lots of cameras varying from Leica M to Contax G2 in 35mm. For MF I use a Rolleiflex and Rollei 6008i but the latter is heavy and better for studio than outdoors. Of all these, my favourite for considered shots is my Rolleiflex 3.5F Planar. It is light, easy to use (particularly with the Maxwell screen I installed and a prism finder, which I prefer to WLF) and, after an excellent CLA by Brian Mickelboro here in the UK, so smooth to operate. The photos I have taken are technically up with the best of all the cameras I have used - quite remarkable for a 40 year old camera. There are quite a few around on eBay and provided the seller is reliable and the lens is clean you should be fine, but do invest in a CLA costing around GBP 100. I mainly use Velvia and scan on an Epson 4870 and the results are stunning. If I had to own one camera only this would be the one.

Just noticed one of the posts said the Rolleiflex metering is useless. I heartily disagree. With careful use of the exposure compensation dial I have had the best exposed shots of any camera I have used. However, these meters are selenium based and can wear out in time. Mine hasn't though.

The meter on my old 3.5F was also quite good enough, used intelligently. I.e. I didn't include too much sky when metering etc. depending on the circumstances. In fact I was able to use slide film without too much trouble. However, the meter assembly is a little bulky on the side of the focus knob, but no big deal.

I own a Rolliecord, a Mamiya C220, and a Fuji GA645. Personally I like the Mamiya the best, then the Fuji........for some reason the Rolliecord just don't feel right in my hands.........anyhow.......that's not the advice I wanted to give.

 

Buy the medium format camera of your choice and at exactly the same time buy a medium format dedicated film scanner (ie not a flatbed). That's the ticket. Unfortunately, I have 3 MF cams that I rarely use because I can't stand the scans from a flatbed. Hopefully soon, the film scanner will be bought.

Trevor,

<p>

if you are in the market for a Rollei TLR then have a look at german eBay: You should be able to find a C or E 2.8 model starting from around EUR 350 from a reputable seller, 3.5 models may be even a bit cheaper. The F models are overpriced IMHO, and the T models are not on-par with other Rolleiflexes in terms of build quality (my own experience). But the older Automats are still great buys - for around EUR 150.

<p>

As for scanners: I am quite happy with my old Epson 1260 for web use - for printing prefer lab work still - it is cheaper as well if you calculate in the cost for paper/printer/scanner.

<p>

I sold the third of my Rolleiflexes just two weeks ago, and it was harder to part with it than with a Leica lens. I may sell another one, but one will stay with me for sure. If you happen to be in switzerland in the near future I can borrow you one, but do not expect that you will ever keep it :)<div></div>