Should I jump in to the TLR world?

<p>I have been using an old Konica manual SLR and I turned to digital SLR now. Recently, I'm interested on learning more about manual cameras and stumbled into a Rollei. I've been researching and couldn't figure out which one to buy. I have a budget of $200-$400. Any suggestion for a beginner user? :)</p>

<p>I found one Rolleflex T type 1 on ebay for $425. It's clean but the back casing has been changed (said the seller). I called Krikor to find out what types he has, and he said that I shouldn't buy a T because it's easily broken and hard to fix? He has one for $500. Should I splurge and get his instead?</p>

<p>Please help me...I'm confused...</p>

<p>You should check the date the camera was made. This is easy on the internet. The older Rolleis had lenses that were softer. You might prefer that look. If you want a really sharp one, get one from the sixties or later. My favorite little camera for shooting in natural light is a 1958 Rollei with a Zeiss f3.5 lens.</p>

<p>Take note of Bruce's advice, and yes the photographic experience with a good Rolleiflex TLR is very enjoyable. As well as getting back to basics, they are capable of delivering beautiful images, and it's all up to you.<br /> <strong>You will learn more about photography</strong> with one of those, than with any digital SLR thing.</p>

 

<p>Condition is an important factor. If a TLR is in good spec and has had a recent CLA by a good tech, that is worth at least a couple of hundred dollars to you as a buyer.</p>

<p>My choices would be Rollieflex Automat from the 1950's or Rolleicord, same vintage! Wonderful simple cameras with great lenses and build quality.</p>

<p>1) If you can afford it, and 2) get a sample that has the superior Planar or Xenotar lens, and 3) get one in good working order (especially the slow shutter speeds apparently), then you will probably have a winner.</p>

<p>I settled for a really cheap 1938 Rolleiflex Automat. It has the lesser Tessar style lens, and is uncoated, which makes for hellacious flare. But it works correctly, and gives decent results. I'm very happy because I got a deal and I get to try out TLR without spending many hundreds. But I still / now lust over the >$500 clean / functional / Xenotar.<br>

<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/10157537-md.jpg" alt="" width="679" height="685" /><br>

More here:<br>

<a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=941291">http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=941291</a></p>

<p>Rolleis are superb but consider other options. I have three Mamiya C series TLRs. This is a shot taken on my C220.</p><div></div>

<p>... and here is the detail in the centre.</p><div></div>

<p>Well Brad, that tops anything I've seen for a while. Beautiful ... <em>everything</em><br>

Agnes, note Brads excellent use of the 6x6 format.<br>

And by the way, Welcome to Photo.net!</p>

<p>The Mamiya C series TLR's are great for their interchangeable lenses, but are bigger and heavier, especially the C330. Some other possibilities if you can't find the Rollei you want and find the Mamiya too heavy: Yashicamat (especially the 124G), Minolta Autocord, and the Ricoh Diacord.<br>

Avoid the new Seagull TLR cameras. A used Rollei or other TLR is likely going to be more reliable.</p>

<p>Agnes, for that $500 you mentioned, you could pick from a great many medium-format cameras. The advice above is excellent in its way, but let me add one slightly different opinion: You MIGHT consider getting an inexpensive Yashica TLR as a starter camera in medium format. When I first wanted to try medium format, I bought a cheap Yashica TLR on a big auction site. I had a world of fun with it, and when I finally bought a MF SLR, I sold that Yashica for more than I paid for it in the first place. (And since then I've bought another Yashica TLR just for the fun of it.)</p>

<p>Anyway, the Yashica C or D -- or even the A model -- isn't as good a camera as a Rollei, but it WILL give you very good images at medium apertures, on HUGE 6x6 negatives, and will let you see if you like medium format at a very comfortable entry price. And if you love using a TLR (I certainly do), you can always start shopping for a Rollei. Just MHO--good luck, and have fun!</p>

<p>Hej Agnes,<br /> Är du svensk? Don't get a Rolleiflex T for $425 although a good camera it is just too much. Be patient and check "Blocket", Lp-foto auctions, if you're Swedish of course. I was offered a Rolleiflex 2.8 with Planar just a couple of days ago but I just ordered a Hasselblad. If you're interested I can give you the phone number of the seller. I have no idea how much he is asking but there are regular Rolleiflex bargains in Sweden. Also check Apug classifieds, Photo.net classifieds, Craigs Nationwide (craigslist) for good deals. I saw a Rolleiflex 2.8C in nearly like new condition +extras just sell for $450 on the Rangefinder forum. A good cheaper alternative are older Yashicamats like the LM, EM and 124 (not the 124G). I bought a Yashicamat LM in a Swedish thrift store for 4 Euros. Yashicamats with the Yashinon lens are just excellent. I have a few <a href="http://cceder.com/6x6/6x6_gallery.html">images</a> taken with it.</p>

<p>I agree with Krikor as far as durability. The T is expensive and fragile compared to an Automat, and although its late Tessar lens is very nice, that's not much help when you can't tell what aperture or shutter speed you've got set. You can get an Automat MX for $200 or less that will give better service.</p>

<p>For what it is worth, through the years I have had and used many TLRs. I think it comes to 3 or 4 Yashicas of which I still have one, inoperable. They were cheap cameras and, well, they were made cheaply. I've had and still have 2 Minolta Autocords. Great lenses and I like the handling. They are a good value for the low prices asked for them as long as the focus is operating smoothly. Rolleicords, I had one about 40 years ago. I'd put them in the class of the Autocords. A really nice one will cost as much as a Rolleiflex so.... Rolleiflexes, 5 or 6 I think. I still have two, a 2.8C Xenotar and a 3.5F Planar. There is no finer picture taking machine on earth than a 3.5F. Mamiyas? I picked one up once and immediately decided there would be no fun taking a dump truck to a sports car rally. I also have a Ricohflex somewhere and a couple of Kodak Duoflex 620s (my first TLR when I was a kid) but they don't get used too much anymore.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I think it comes to 3 or 4 Yashicas of which I still have one, inoperable. They were cheap cameras and, well, they were made cheaply</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The Yashicamat LM that I have is of excellent external build quality and it is still going strong although it's 50 years old. Ok, the shutter goes on strike once in a while, but after some fiddling with the release button it has always started going again. A tip for using old Yashica Mat TLRs is to wind the film slowly. Great camera.</p>

<p>Wow...thank you so much everybody for the advices... Hadn't known about photo.net before I searched for rolleiflex. I have a few more questions though if you guys don't mind.. MX-EVS type 1 is equal to an Automat? Which is better, a MX-EVS or an older 2.8A? But both with good condition...and below $300.</p>

<p>@Brad: That's a really nice picture... =)<br /> @Kevin: Thank you...I think I'll have a great time here with lots of nice people giving honest advices =)<br /> @chrise boris: sorry I don't speak swedish....I'd like your advices on where I can get good Rolleis if you don't mind :) Been spending a lot of time at the famous fleabay without finding a good one within my budget...</p>

<p>Sorry I have too many questions...a newbie at these things...</p>

<p>I'd recommend a Rollei anyday - of course I have my father's TLR D, a GX, etc. They take wonderful images, and are light enought o carry around quietly all day. Don't (if you can avoid it) buy anonymously (ebay) but rather from someone known - like Harry Fleenor, or Krikor, or one of the photo sites. $200 is too cheap for a good one (probably) and condition is everything - esp lens and rack, not nec.the body. So if you can, spring a bit higher ($400-500) and you'll find what you need. <br>

I posted somewhere a site which tested the 50 yr old Rollei vs. hassy and the Mamiya 7 - which was the best. But the surprise was how well the old Rollei did - right in there, all the way. Great cameras. </p>

<p>I'd recommend a Rollei anyday - of course I have my father's TLR D, a GX, etc. They take wonderful images, and are light enought o carry around quietly all day. Don't (if you can avoid it) buy anonymously (ebay) but rather from someone known - like Harry Fleenor, or Krikor, or one of the photo sites. $200 is too cheap for a good one (probably) and condition is everything - esp lens and rack, not nec.the body. So if you can, spring a bit higher ($400-500) and you'll find what you need. <br>

I posted somewhere a site which tested the 50 yr old Rollei vs. hassy and the Mamiya 7 - which was the best. But the surprise was how well the old Rollei did - right in there, all the way. Great cameras. </p><div></div>

<p>I have a 2.8A and an MX. The 2.8A is a nice collector's item and a very decent picture taker, but the MX-EVS will be a bit sharper and the better choice as a user. If you get up into the $400+ range where the T was, I'd look for a 2.8C - better in every respect that I can think of than the T.</p>

<p>I'm a little puzzled by the comments here re: the Rollei T's fragility. I've had mine since 1980 (bought second-hand, of course), and it hasn't given me a single problem. The film-loading system is technically less complicated than the automat models, and so there's less to go wrong. Results-wise, you'll probably not be able to tell the difference between photos taken with the Tessar lens and those from (much) more expensive Planar and Xenotar models (Rollei engineers never could). As for the price, $425 sounds a little too much. I've seen a near-mint example here in the UK recently for £175 (about $300).</p>

<p>I have a Rolleicord V and a Rolleiflex MX-EVS, and love them both. Great photos. Basic camera. Love composing on the big groundglass, love the precise feel of the controls, and love the results.</p>

<p>Yes, your skills with a camera will most likely improve from chronic use of one of these icons. They force you back to the basics, in a very good way.</p>

<p>My father has a T that that has seen good use since the 1960ties and is fine. I broke mine within two months and when I opened it I found it to be a complete dissapointment compared to my Automat. I would not advise anyone to buy one, the clutch mechanism of the handle is so primitive that when it fails it is almost impossible to fix.<br>

An Automat sells for the same money as a T and is a joy to own. If you are on a tight budget you might consider a Rolleicord Vb, those sell for around 150 euros my part of the world.</p>

<p>Rolleiflexes have delicate mecanisms. In particular the T. But if you use it as it is supposed to be used, it will work for years. I had myself a T made in the late 60's and it worked as a swiss watch !<br>

The T and the automat have a tessar lens. You can also find a 3,5 E for exemple quite cheap with an even better lens.</p>

<p>Laurent</p>

<p>Ditto on the Planar; best lens on a Rollei, IMHO. But, as many classic camera fans would agree, there's something about those uncoated Tessars. I've been through two dozen Rolleis but kept an Old Standard,a 39 Automat and my wife's grandfather's 3.5E Planar.<br>

Krikor is the best. I'd gladly pay a little more for his service ( because he's 10 minutes away from my house and is usually up for a good chat if only I'm just stopping by for a friendly visit ). <br>

I've owned and used dozens of Yashica TLRs. My advice is to stay away from the 124G. The film crank is annoying, slow speeds often fail, meter is kah-kah and it's generally overpriced. <br>

$50-75 is well-spent cutting your teeth in the Twin Lens realm if you get a good, clean Yashica D. <br>

I had two Minolta Autocords that I used regularly for over 10 years. I retired one immediately after 9/11, the other I sold a month after it received a CLA. Good ones are priced right up there with Rolleiflexes. </p>

<p>If you're looking to slow down and get back to basics, TLR's are wonderful. I've used several and now own a Rolleiflex 2.8C with the Xenotar. Of all the cameras I own, it's my favorite. It's been CLA'd by Harry Fleenor and he installed a Beattie screen for a brighter viewfinder. It's light enough to carry around all day and the lens is razor sharp. While the square format isn't for everyone, I like it. It dosen't have a meter, but I use a handheld meter anyway so I don't care. I normally use it on a tripod, but would use it handheld anytime. If you buy a TLR, spend a little money and buy one in good shape and has been recently CLA'd. TLR's are not for everybody, but they're a great way to get into MF photography.</p>