Is a Rolleifix really necessary when using a Rolleiflex on a tripod?

I mostly use my Rolleiflex 3.5F handheld, but sometimes do mount it on a tripod. I have a modern Manfrotto quick release plate screwed to the tripod socket underneath the camera, and all seems to work fine.

 

However, I have of course read warnings on forums etc warning that the body of the camera could bend under its own weight if the camera is locked on the tripod head at an excessive angle, and that a Rolleifix tripod plate would really be safer.

 

Since it's not a cheap accessory to acquire, I'm just wondering from other users around if they have ever actually seen/experienced this failing in reality, or if it's more just a bit of a legend that's perpetuated. I also can't visualise how the Rolleifix would really make the Rollei camera body any better able to withstand forces when it's mounted at an angle.

I used Rollei TLRs for many years on tripods without the Rolleifix plate and never had any problems with camera damage. The only issue I ever had with Manfrotto quick release plates on Rolleiflexes was the necessity of removing them to reload the camera. I had a few fashion jobs where I would load my three Rollei cameras and then stop to reload all three to continue while models were changing into their next outfits.

Never used a Rolleiflex on any of my TLR bodies, but I never locked them at excessive angles either. I suppose if I did frequently use them at excessive angles I would use whatever tools available to avoid putting unusual strain on them. YMMV.

When I was shopping for Rolleiflex I handled several with slightly warped bottom/rear plates. Typically identified when you put the camera on a flat surface and it tilts a little.

I can't say if the reason was drop or if they had taken an impact while mounted on a tripod, of course.

The point is, that the sheet metal used for the bottom/rear is not super rigid and the Rolleifix distributes some of the potential tension to the aluminium structure of the camera through the front plate fix points.

Relative to the general cost of a Rolleiflex in good condition and the price of Rolleiflex service, I don't personally think ~$50 for a Rolleifix is too bad.

I have got a Rolleifix but I very rarely use a TLR on a tripod. It's worth remembering that Rollei's were only given the necessary groove for the Rollefix to work in the mid 1950's. So with earlier models you had to attach then direct anyway. And that applies to all non-Rollei TLR's which are mostly made in the same way.

 

It's sometimes possible to find a Rollei Pistol Grip, which contains an easily removable Rolleifix, for much less than the cost of the Rolleifix alone.

Because the Rolleifix has two pins at the front of the camera, the stress is better distributed to prevent bending. Note also that a Rolleifix is needed to properly align the camera when using the panoramic device.

Look for a Rollei pistol grip. They usually have a Rolleifix attached and sell for less than the Rolleifix alone. I don't remember the details, but it was easy to remove the Rolleifix.

Indeed they can be got for cheaper than I first thought - I just ordered one for £25 + shipping.

A Rolleifix engages a circular, beveled plate attached to the bottom of the camera. A tripod socket is located in the center of this plate, which serves to reinforce the body. It's. unlikely that any damage would occur even if the camera were tilted horizontally. An Hasselblad has a similar mounting plate, only rectangular rather than circular, which is used with a proprietary clamp. I used an Arca-style plate, with a lip to reduce the tendency to rotate, for many years without a problem. The same plate (or style) works on a Rollei too, but you must be careful to not interfere with the mechanism which opens the back.

I don’t understand the reluctance in spending a few $ for the Rollei quick release, especially when specifically designed for Rolleiflex. Sometimes we are guilty of false frugality. An all too human tendency we are all guilty of sometimes.

Bought my 2.8F with accessories for a price I couldn’t resist in early 1970s and camera still in great shape. Among the accessories was a quick release.

It doesn't make much sense to use a proprietary mount on a tripod when you have several camera, and possibly several tripods to be used interchangeably.

It doesn't make much sense to use a proprietary mount on a tripod when you have several camera, and possibly several tripods to be used interchangeably.

Depends.

If you are going to use one camera on and off a tripod for a while, it makes sense to add the appropriate mount even if you will have to change it the next day. (And it is not a lot of work to change).

You could also adapt different cameras to one type of QR mount on your tripod(s).

Or you could use different tripods, with appropriate mount, for different cameras.

 

I do all three of the above. Works fine. No annoyance.

I have gone one step further, and use an Arca style clamp on several tripods, making it easy to swap between video and ball heads. It adds less than 1/2" to the stack height, and has no effect on stability. I also have a couple of motorized gimbals which can be exchanged with a conventional head, and a jib is on my short list. A fourth tripod has the option of exchanging a 100 mm ball adapter with a leveling head (or straight platform).

 

Video proves to be more demanding than still photography in terms of mounts, heads, and tools to make things more interesting. It also pays a lot better.

My mistake. Those numbers refer to serial numbers above.