TLR - Medium Format Camera

[montanhacz]

I want to buy a medium format camera (a cheap one). I would like to know what

is the best camera to buy: Lubitel 166B or the Seagull 4A. I would like to know

beetween these two models what is the best, and what model has the best

features and is more durable: Thanks for your help.

[mtk]

Hi Carlos! To answer your question directly, I think the Seagull may have a slight edge over the Lubitel....BUT...I do not know where in the world you reside, but I personally for about the same amount (or less) $$$ I would purchase any of the Yashica TLR's with the Yashinon lens....Yashica D, Yashica Mat, Yashica 124, 124G. Much more durable mechanisms and stellar lens performance. As far as bells-n-whistles...I use a handheld meter, or Sunny 16, so as long as the film advances and the shutter works, that's all that matters to me! Have Fun! Mark

[yann1]

Sorry, none of these 2; but that's only my own opinion. TLR are great to use, and addictive, so why not try a Yashica if you want something not too expensive, the Yashinon lens is great, and Rollei are getting affordable for anyone nowadays.

[montanhacz]

Well I am from portugal. The thing is that someone is going to sell me one of these two cameras and I have to choose, and I don't have much money, so... I know that these cameras aren't very good, and I would prefer a Yashica Mat 124G, but can't afford one right now. Why is the Seagull better than Lubitel? Thanks for your help.

[d_purdy]

In my experience with the Lubitel, it had rather a strange view finder. I would

choose the Seagul my self though there are different models of Seagul I think

they are all better than the much cheaper Lubitel. Who do you want to

support? The Russians or the Chinese?

[ian_tindale]

I can see why this is labelled so prominently with "IMPORTANT" in the title. I'd agree - buy neither. The thing I'm always telling people about the Lubitel is that it's such a waste of film putting any in one.

 

I recently purchased a nice old <a href=" title="Twenty quid from eBay - and in good condition, too">Rolleicord II</a> in an auction, for pretty much the same cost as a new Lubitel would've cost (ie, ridiculously cheap). The <a href=" title="Carl Zeiss - lens lust">Carl Zeiss Triotar lens</a> on it is very satisfactory, despite what a lot of people might think about a simple triplet, and I'm more than pleased with this little box that dates from probably around 1949. The lens is far above the quality of the cameras you've mentioned, giving me <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/tags/rolleicordii,epson,triotar/" title="All of these except the first one were shot on the Rolleicord II">enjoyable results</a>. As a usable camera, it's certainly durable.

 

Also, consider that if budget constraints are that tight, you'll probably eat up what it cost you to buy these cheapo cameras in your first ten rolls of film! You might as well be putting that film through something decent in my opinion.

[Andrew in Austin]

I'll second the recommendation of an older Rolleicord versus the Lubitel or the Seagull. If your goal post is soft photos with vignetting and evidence of light leaks then Lubitel may be the way to go.

 

There are other ways to shoot medium format inexpensively, as well. Ricoh made a Diacord that usually sells for twice the price of a Lubitel.

 

With regards to Russian gear an Iskra medium format folder has superb capabilities, but it uses a combined viewfinder and rangefinder versus a reflex mirror.

[gene_e._mccluney]

All of these "entry level" "amateur" style cameras have qualities (flaws) that can be used to

advantage for artistic results from skilled photographers. I have shot very nice photos

with my Lubitel's, and the light leak issues, which are usually related to the film being

wound irregularly on the take-up spool, are easily managable if you remove film in

darkroom. The Lubitel has a lens very much like a tessar. Not much to go wrong.

The Seagull line of Medium Format cameras are more complicated internally, and may

produce better results.

 

 

 

Gene McCluney

[aeaster]

Although the Seagull can successfully be used, it is a very fragile camera with many quality-control problems. I would strongly recomend you NOT buy a new one. For the same price or less you can purchase a used but quality-made TLR from better manufacturers.

 

Some one above mentioned the Ricoh Diacord. As far as I am concerned this camera is the full equal of the Rolleicord, Yashicamat or Zeiss Ikoflex but without the brand-name snob appeal of the others. They usually sell for half the price of a worn-out Yashicamat.

[paul_sauer]

I agree with the others -- absolutely do not buy either the Seagull or the Lubitel. There

are incredible bargains to be had an much better used cameras. If you buy the Seagull or

Lubitel, you will just end up with one of these anyway, or you will get turned off from what

actually is a very exciting type of photography.

 

I have a Minolta Autocord, which is the Japanese version of the Rolleiflex. It's great. It

cost me $140 on Ebay in great shape with a case, the box, and instruction manual.

 

Other great contenders include the Yashicamat 124.

[mike_bates]

My brand new Seagull TLR (given to me) lasted for less than four rolls of film before it locked up, never to be used again. This is in spite of my careful handling because I knew they were fragile.

 

I've heard of others who had Seagulls that lasted much longer, but many die an early death.

[joe tarrant]

I've never used a Seagull. A number of people on P'net have said they're unreliable.

 

<P>

I do own a Lubitel 166U and have put a few rolls of film through it. I love it because it's

very light; it's compact; it's been reliable over the past two years; I dropped it on the floor

from knee height and it survived and because I have been very pleased with the photos it

produces. Some samples <A HREF="http://homepage.mac.com/jptarrant/images/

lubitel/">here</A> and more on my <A HREF="http://

6cmx6cm.blogspot.com/">medium format blog</A>. I've also owned a Rolleiflex 3.5E

(gorgeous but heavy) and I own a Flexaret (like a lightweight Rolleicord) and an ancient

Brownie 4x4, so I've used/handled a few TLRs. To be honest, the Lubitel is my favourite.

 

<P>

However, as someone else else said, the viewfinder is... um... difficult. Once you get used

to using the little magnifier, you get a lot better and you can focus by distance (if the

subject is 5 metres away, set the lens to 5 metres). The Lubitel also has marks on the lens

and on the aperture ring to show the sweet spot of both - combining the two works well,

but it's not compulsory. One piece of advice I heard was not to change the shutter/

aperture settings once you had cocked the shutter: could be good advice with any TLR.

They're an acquired taste but look, they're cheap and lightweight and fun. The Yashica

could be a good buy too: I'd go for one of those if I were looking for another.

[scott_kinkade]

Carlos...

 

How much are you thinking of paying for one of the two cameras you named? I know it can be disappointing when people steer you away from a deal you had considered...if you give us a price range I'll bet you can get excellent advice on specific alternatives. The good news is that you can almost certainly get a great camera for whatever amount you have to spend.

[chris_waller]

Keep an eye open for a Mamiya C330 or C220. I bought a C220 in excellent condition just recently for a very reasonable price.

[montanhacz]

Well I'm thinking in spending about 21? (more or less). Yes, I know that with this amount of ? it will be very hard to find a decent camera. I do 35mm photography, but I just want to try now the 120mm (without selling any of my 35mm equipment of course). If you know some good auction to buy a reazonable camera for about 21? please let me know. Many thanks to all!

Carlos

[montanhacz]

I'm soory but it wasn't supposed to appear a question mark. What I mean was 21 british pounds.

[aeaster]

21 Pounds, that will mean a Ciro-flex or a Graflex 22. Good honest steel tlrs from the 1940s that are almost idiot-proof and hard to wear out. Thousands of these workhorses were made and a realy good one might go for even less than you plan on spending. I do not know about their availability in Europe, but there always seem to be plenty to be found on that internet auction site.

[Andrew in Austin]

For about 25 Pounds Sterling you'll be looking at a Yashica D or a Ricoh Diacord. Both of which are very capable.

 

With regards to the Yashica D, there some out there with the Yashinon and others with a Yashikor. The Yashica D with a Yashikor should run about 15 GBP British Pounds. The Yashinon is a four element Tessar-type lens runs a bit higher.

[ian_tindale]

Well, my aforementioned Rolleicord II (Triotar lens) also came in under your budget - it cost me twenty quid! Not bad. Pretty good, in fact.

 

Yes, I'd also recommend a Mamiya C-series TLR like a C33 or C220/330 (the one I have with me today is a C330) but you're not going to find one at such a low entry price unless you're astoundingly lucky, so I didn't mention them - typically more like about five to ten times the price, maybe.

[yann1]

See Carlos, you ask for MF users opiniion, they all more or less agree on this issue, now, try the Lubitel if you want, I'm sure you'll buy a Rollei or a Yashicamat later, I started with a Holga, and I have now 4 MF cameras. Good luck and share your shots with us. Regards

[sahmed]

I would recommend avoiding both of the TLRs you listed above, and instead spending your money on either an older Rollei TLR or a Yashica TLR with the Yashinon lens.

 

I was fascinated with MF and TLRs after seeing a brand-new Seagull TLR at a local photolab here in Toronto and was seriously tempted to buy the Seagull from them. Thankfully for me I came to my senses when I saw the pricetag on it: this photolab wanted to sell the Seagull for about CDN$350.00!

 

I instead bought a Yashica Mat 124 (not the 124G) with the 4-element Yashinon lens, which after a full CLA still cost me much less than CDN$350, and after having shot two rolls with it and really happy with it.

 

To make a long story short: consider something other than the Lubitel or Seagull (unless you are getting it ridiculously cheap).

 

Cheers,

[scott_kinkade]

Carlos, be sure to let us know what you finally decide!

[montanhacz]

Well... I decided to buy the Lubitel. Now, I am waiting to arrive the camera to my home, to start taking photos. I still have the dream to buy a Rolleiflex or a Yashica. Sooner I get some money I will buy one of these. Many thanks to all of you by your opinions. You've helped me a lot. Best regards.

[chor_eng_tan]

I have a beat-up Yashica EM (TLR) that I bought from a used camera store. I have taken many great sharp photos with it since 2000.

 

Last month, I stumbled upon a Lubitel 166B. It was made of plastic. The viewfinder was difficult to focus in dim lighting or indoor lighting. I didn't buy it because it looked like it will break and I couldn't focus quickly with it. I foresee myself having problems with it. At most, I would have used one roll with it and chuck it into the closet.

 

As for the Seagull, I saw a few over the past four years but I've never bought one eventhough they were newer and looked nicer than my old beat-up Yashica. Why? Because my Yashica has a good lens and has proven itself from my experience and other people's testimonials.

 

So the moral of the story is:

 

1) invest in a good lens

 

2) invest in a solid camera body

 

3) invest in a tool that won't frusturate you but make your photography enjoyable.

 

Most people in this thread has advised you not to buy either the Lubitel or Seagull. Me too. You are going to simply waste your time, money and expensive film on inferior equipment.

[rich815]

A Lubitel 166 was my first MF TLR. It took some very sharp, nice photos. Until it feel apart in my hands in less than 6 months. Had a few Seagull TLRs too. Too much QC issues with some having sharp lenses others not (I lived in China for 5 years and had may ops to buy and try a few or more). One I had gave me gorgeous negs and was very sharp---until the day the shutter sprung out and went every where---after only 3 months of use. That was that. I found a $50 USD ugly Rolleicord on eBay a few years back with a Xenar lens. Other than a light seal that was easily fixed it was three times the build quality of the Lubitel and Seagulls, and the Yashicas I had handled. Sold that later when I found a very ugly Rolleiflex 2.8E Planar for $150 USD. One CLA later and it works like a charm. Talk about lens quality and build quality. It'll likely out last me. Be patient and look around. You'll find either a working, but ugly Rolleicord for a very affordable price. Or be even luckier, like I was last week and find a MINT Rolleiflex 2.8C Xenotar, recently CLA'd, for only $285 USD shipped. Just got it yesterday. I'm in bliss. Patience has it's virtue.