TLR for a newbie

[brncr6]

I have been using a digi. and would like to try film. A TLR sounds

like it could be fun. What I would like is to have larger prints

than 8x10. Or do you think an SLR would be better to start with?

Thanks for you time.

[kaiyen]

Well, it's really up to you. I assume you're referring to medium format in either case, TLR or SLR.

 

A TLR is a good entry point, but using one is very different than an SLR. The waist level finder can take some getting used to, and is problematic if the focusing screen isn't super clean. On the other hand, without the mirror slap of an SLR, one can use much slower shutter speeds with a TLR and still get sharp photos.

 

The Hasselblads are really, really loud, too.

 

Any MF should get you to 8x10 without a problem (even 645).

 

allan

[rover]

Just a mention of a nice one I saw for sale

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=38649#post38649

[hakon_soreide]

Almost any medium format camera would make better enlargements than a 35mm camera. At 8x10, the differences would hardly be noticable, but once you get past that, and definitely past 16x20, the difference in detail will be significant.<p> Even a cheapish TLR or other medium format camera can produce stunning and superior images in enlargements compared to the most expensive 35mm cameras out there, despite what certain Leica enthusiasts might think. For what it's worth, however, they might possess the equipment best able to push the best out of the tiny 35mm format. Equally, almost any large format outfit will be able to produce results superior to any medium format kit.<p>

I've not tried TLR's myself, instead jumping straight onto a Mamiya 7II rangefinder as I loved rangefinder focusing after using a Leica M6 for just over a year, but I've read and heard much about the subject.<p>

Many photographers simply love their Mamiya C330s, the lenses, as with other Mamiya MF lenses are superb, bellows focusing makes it also capable for macro work, and prices on eBay for relatively new and good condition second-hand equipment are good as there are quite a few of them out there on the market at any one time. It's a heavy beast, though, but as it's a TLR, the weight is more comfortably held during shooting than a camera that you hold in front of your face.<p>

 

Other seemingly interesting cameras out there are older Rolleiflex cameras, which also include metering besides sharp lenses.

<p>

I remember Popular Photography Magazine used to keep mentioning the Chinese Seagull as a reasonable medium format entry with a new price way lower than most SLR kits go for these days, but as the second-hand market is ripe with better equipment, albeit for a few dollars more, and the results will definitely be better, I think that's a better place to go TLR shopping.

<p>

Of course, no matter what equipment you use, remember that it's always the photographer that takes the pictures, not the camera, and even the most expensive camera equipment available to man can make crappy pictures whereas the cheapest home-made soda-tin pinhole camera or cellphone camera can make artistically stunning images. As with all other creative endeavours, you should always strive for perfection as you see it yourself, finding ways to improve, to develop technique and artistic sense, seeing the possibilities within the constraints in what you have instead of thinking that different equipment will make you a better photographer. And, most importantly, have fun!<p>

<a href="http://www.hakonsoreide.com">www.hakonsoreide.com</a>

[jay ott]

TLR's are great, but they have limitations e.g. less DOF, parallex error, fixed lens, waistlevel finder, difficult to use in dim light, bigger and bulkier, etc.<p>

SLR's also are available in medium format, but for the occaisional big print a 35mm SLR should be O.K. if you have mirror lockup, tripod, slow film and stop down to f16 or f22.<p>

To answer your question, I say try both. There are lots of options out there at bargain prices.

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

Brain,

 

You sound like a really wonderful person. I can remember when I got bit by the photography bug, can you believe it, it was really the olden days of the 1950's, I first started with a medium format camera.

 

If your budget can handle it may I suggest a used Rolleicord. I'm like you in that I use a digital camera but I still take my Rolle's out and exercise them every so often. Check out E bay. I've had extremely good luck with my Rollei purchases. You may want to zero in on a camera built in the olden days, that's right in the 1950's!

 

If you've got further questions just write em up here as we want to help you.

 

Others may recommend other cameras so do some research on the internet to try to figure out what may be the next camera in your camera arsenal.

[ed_nazarko]

To be clear up front, I use both. While the SLR is wonderful for closeup work, for getting perfect framing, closer focusing, and all the other advantages people cite, it is noisy. Real noisy, compared to a 35mm slr. I have a Nikon F3 that is quiet enough that I can shoot without people looking, some of the time.

 

I have a TLR - a Yashicamat - that I use when I'm shooting in situations where I want to be as invisible as possible. Looking down into a rangefinder isn't something people instantly expect. The shutter on a Yashicamat is barely audible from a foot away. I'm working on a long term project on religions in the US, and I use my Yashicamat to shoot during services, and no one ever has noticed until I tell them. I use my SLR to shoot the portraits, the interior shots, the kids classes, where the sound of a mirror whapping up and down is no big deal.

 

Just for an unusual point of view - I was trained to use every fraction of a millimeter of a frame, whether shooting 4x5 or 35mm. As Jay Maisel says, there's no such thing as a neutral part of an image - everything that appears in a frame, very pixel or grain, is either working for you, or its working against you. What got me into the SLR I have (a Bronica) and the Yashicamat is the square format. It's very formal, and very suited to the subject of religions and the people who live in them. I started shooting it with 35mm but the images just felt wrong. Sure, you can crop to a square, but that just goes against everything I believe in.

 

Even from a camera as inexpensive as a Yashicamat, a 20x20 inch print is gloriously sharp. (Just don't shoot wide open, the same caution you get for any lens and camera. The Yashica lens peaks at about f5.6.) If you can find a good Rollei TLR inexpensively, that's great. A real "sleeper" of a camera, my opinion, is the Mamiya 330 series, which has interchangeable lenses, and will focus very close. Cheaper than it should be, probably cheaper than many Rolleis. Just a bit heavy.

 

Caution: composing for a square format will make your brain fizz the first few times you do it. It really is a different way of thinking, and valuable even if just for that.

[alvin_hear]

<p>Try looking at this <a href="http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/ricoh.htm">SITE.....</a>

[victorm.]

Here's a good deal...with two lenses!: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=38647#post38647

[francois_gauthier]

To try film in 35mm, get a manual focus SLR with DOF preview and a good normal (50mm) lens. It can be fully manual or aperture priority with manual mode. With 50 or 100 iso films, you get nice 11x14 prints (with proper technique).

 

To try medium format, wich has larger film for better quality enlargements, a TLR is the best value. Among them, the best bang for the buck are usually the earlier Yashica Mat without meters (you add an hand-held one). You can now go up to 20x24 and your 11x14 will look great.

 

Those figures are for the 'old way'. Now, if you intend to scan those instead of using traditionnal ('wet')darkroom, the scanner will be at least as important as the film in the process. You should be aware that the print is the result of a chain and the enlarger should not be neglected.

 

It would help us advise you if you tell how you intend to print your stuff and if you plan to do black and white, color or both.

[mag_miksch]

"jay ott , jan 22, 2005; 05:15 p.m.

TLR's are great, but they have limitations e.g. less DOF, parallex error, fixed lens, waistlevel finder, difficult to use in dim light, bigger and bulkier, etc.."

 

less DOF?

[Zootman]

Mag,

 

I was wondering the same thing. DOF should not be any different as long as they are both medium format with comparable length lens.

[cpj]

I've used everything from 4x5 to half-frame 35 mm over 40 years. I've never, ever, had any

noticible problem with a TLR's parallax error--which only applies to something within 3

feet of the camera anyway--or with Depth of Field (it's a 75 or 80 mm lens, not a 180 or

200 mm.

 

In some post a few weeks back I mentioned I was going to sell some Rolleiflexes because I

had 10 of them (plus complete systems for Hasselblad, Leica M, and Nikon--new F6 &

D70. Well, I don't like surprises so I sent five Rollei's, including one I wanted CLA'd and a

Maxwell Screen installed, to Harry Fleenor at Oceanside Camera Repairs in California, for a

"check." Of course, Harry found enough minor things wrong with each camera--(his price

for a CLA is $134) that I ended up "selling" four of the five to him, ending up with my

"keeper" being fixed for free w/new screen installed, and a $1000 check in my pocket to

boot.

 

The result is Harry has four cosmetically GREAT Rolleiflexes which he is fixing for resale

and equipping with Maxwell Screens. So, if you are looking for a bright screen TLR with a

guarantee from the best repairman in the business, contact Harry. (Yes, I lose, Harry wins,

but YOU win too!) There is a 2.8F Planar, a 3.5 F Planar, and two 3.5 E Planars, all will be

with woking and calibrated meters, shutters, CLA'd film transports, and bright Maxwell

Screens.)

 

Of course, I now have only 6 Rolleis, but I guess that's enough.

[rustys pics]

My first TLR was a Minolta Autochord. A great camera with a sharp lens. The bottom mounted focusing lever was arguably a big improvement on the Rollei sideways knob.

 

You should be able to get a good used one for around $125 U.S.

[harris_goldstein]

The Mamiya 220s and 330s are a lot of bang for the buck if in good condition. But be careful of the chrome lenses (the ring around the class is chrome) with a Seikosha shutter. The lenses are fine (though maybe not as good as the later "black" lenses) but parts are no longer available. If you do buy a chrome lens, makes sure there is a distinct difference between the 1 sec and the 1/2 sec speed.

 

Make sure you save enough $ for a good tripod.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Re <i>Harris Goldstein Photo.net Patron, jan 22, 2005; 11:13 p.m.<BR>

The Mamiya 220s and 330s are a lot of bang for the buck if in good condition. <b>But be careful of the chrome lenses (the ring around the class is chrome) with a Seikosha shutter. The lenses are fine (though maybe not as good as the later "black" lenses) but parts are no longer available.</b> If you do buy a chrome lens, makes sure there is a distinct difference between the 1 sec and the 1/2 sec speed.<BR>

 

Make sure you save enough $ for a good tripod.</i><BR><BR><BR><b>This is interesting; and abit funny; and abit scary too!.</b> I bought my Mamyia C3 with 3 backs; and 105 and 180mm lenses; regular and metered Porro prism from a Goldstein I worked with In Los Angeles about 23 years ago. It got the kit for 190 bucks; because of the "chrome lenses with Seikosha shutters" cannot be fixed due to lack of parts saga/myth. I have never had these used items CLAed; or repaired; and got a steal due to fears of the chrome lenses. If they ever do fail; do I get another chrome or a black lens?<BR><BR>If they failed real quick; I would have of course been ticked at my error. But since they have lasted more than 2 decades; I believe I got a great deal.

[jay ott]

I should have been more specific in comparing the DOF of 6x6 to 35mm. Using as an example an 80mm lens as a normal lens on 120mm film. Focus it at 10ft using f16 and the DOF calculator says that the near acceptable focus limit is 7.5ft and far acceptable focus limit is 15ft However, if you focus a 50mm lens at 10 feet using f16 in 35mm format the DOF calculator says that the near acceptable focus limit is 6.35ft and the far acceptable focus limit is 23.6ft. Unless, I've miscalculated, to me the difference is significant enough to at least be aware of and compensate for if necessary or desired.

[hakon_soreide]

Concerning the DOF, of course an 80mm lense in a 6x6 MF system has the same DOF as an 80mm lens in a 35mm system, but a wider field of view (and wider image circle), which is the difference, and since people are used to thinking in 35mm, that means that it seems to be less as the 80mm is thought of as a 50mm - but only in terms of field of view, of course, not depth of field.

 

<p><a href="http://www.hakonsoreide.com">www.hakonsoreide.com</A>

[jason]

The quality leap is enormous.The time to buy,really good! 120 film cameras have plunged in value, due to digital. I have seen Hasselblads selling for price of Rolleiflexes! So your choice easy..

The Mamiya TLR are heavy.They are real work-horses and fun! Interchangeable lenses are there.I liked the 180mm for portraits.

The "Porroflex" is dreadful.The Hasselblad lenses are truly the finest BUT very expensive,even now.I owned the Pentax 67.It is heavy.

I preferred at the time the rectangular format.I later disliked I always needed a "Pro-Lab" for color.Some pro-labs are not worthy of being in Wal-Mart or Costco.That is my bottom line.I sold the 67 but kept the Rollie Tessar.If you desire more "keepers" per roll. than 120 is the best learning curve.Yes, depth of field is a problem.

Personally I reccomend a Rollieflex Planar or Schneider versions.

A Lens hood and a roll of film and you are set. I know those lenses are a tad sharper than my Tessar.I won't trade as my camera is smaller. I have a yellow filter for B/W and thats my system!

Good luck. Remember it aint 35mm.Its gonna cost more! You will shoot slower.

[bacsa]

TLR's are real fun, you are right.

They have waist level focusing on a large screen which you look at with two eyes just like on a real photo. They are very silent to operate. They are built like tanks with not too many things to go wrong on them. They can be "handheld" (neck-held with a neckstrap) for 1/4 s without problems. They produce (almost)6x6 cm frames which are just great to look at, scan, print, project, everything. They produce square frames which are really great (for some of us). They are very cheap, unless you want the top of the top, or some collectible model. Except the Mamiya system, they are simple, lightweight and with not much accessories to carry around or to tempt you to spend more $$ on them. They mostly have very good lenses capable of results up to today's expectations. If you get bored or want to upgrade, you can sell them for about the same $$ as you payed.

 

Finally, with one 100$ service in 10 years or more, most of them are working reliable for 50+ years.

[carl photography]

What types of subjects do you want to enlarge?

 

Medium format provides more enlarge-ability, so choose a camera based on its usefulness for your preferred subject matter. We use YashicaMat 124G, Mamiya 645, and Pentacon Six outfits for different purposes.

 

The cheapest recommended option is one of the later YashicaMat cameras, which have a four-element lens that probably was copied from Rollie's Tessar designs. It is very sharp and contrasty, making very nice photos, when stopped down to around f11. However, it is soft at the edges when wide open. It doesn't focus closely, and is no good for tracking action or telephoto use (we have a Yashica telephoto adapter, but it is worse than a "real" lens). It is not a solidly-built camera (but our $96 "beater" does make great pictures!). The "'cord" cameras (e.g. Rolliecord) are good alternatives, but may be somewhat more expensive.

 

The Pentacon Six outfit makes nice portraits, but it's not good for a casual user (must be careful not to damage the film advance mechanism).

 

The Mamiya 645 is a wonderful all-around camera. We sell 16x20 color portraits that have excellent detail, even when stared at from two feet away. It is versatile and economical to use (15 shots per 120 roll). We have a 645E outfit -- http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=185992&is=REG -- and two other lenses.

 

You can find plenty of used 645 equipment at keh.com.

 

For metering, you could use your digital camera's histogram (if it has one) to determine the shutter speed and f-stop settings, and transfer those settings to your film camera.

 

A 6x7 outfit would be best for B&W photography, highly-detailed landscapes, and maximum print sizes. These outfits tend to be large, heavy or expensive, and they are more costly to use (10 shots per 120 roll). The penultimate is a 4x5 view camera with a roll-film back.

 

But first, determine how you will process and print the pictures. Check your local camera shops for 120 processing, scanning and printing prices, or you could buy A&I film mailers at bhphotovideo.com.

 

Good luck, and have fun!

 

"Brandon's Dad"

[robert_nancarrow]

Hi, you have a lot of great suggestions and responses. I suggest a Rolleiflex for a few reasons..Firstly, as mentioned prior and I'm sure you are aware by now, the quality of the pics are really second to none; second, it's a totally different experience using a TLR, it slows you down, makes you think about composition,lighting,mood,etc. all prior to taking the shot, not in post-development, from your post I assume that you are looking for this "different from digital" experience; third, I look at the cost of a camera as a function of what it originally costs me vs. what I will eventually sell it for, thus the great "bang for the buck" that is often stated about lesser or less respected/used/collected medium format cameras is not that big an issue, I've lost some money on turnovers of most systems over the years for the reasons stated in previous posts, if you invest in a Rolleiflex you can be assured that you will recoup most or all of your investment some day and maybe even make a little money. So I suggest you just go out and invest in a quality 2.8 or 3.5 F or D or E Rolleiflex and it will make you happy. Bob.

[brncr6]

I just wanted to say thanks for all the helpful answers. I am starting to watch ebay for a TLR. I will come back and let you know what I come up with. Thanks again.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

The Minolta Autocords are very good values - sharp lense, excellent ergonomics, and very good build quality. But look for one with a Citizen shutter - they are easier to get serviced. And don't forget to budget a CLA, which will probably run $100 - $150. I've read that Paul Ebel is good (not sure of spelling). I had Ross Yerkes service mine, but he includes hate mail with each camera serviced, which I didn't know before I sent my camera to him, so I'll never give him my business again.

 

Robert

[david_m]

This question must have been asked and answered a hundred times....