Rollei SL66

[photography by a.f. smith]

I'm thinking about getting an SL66 with an 80mm planar. I have a couple of

questions though. The first one is simple: The lens says Rollei on it, not

Zeiss. Who actually made it? If Rollei did make it, what is the quality?

The second question is simple, but I'm sure has a more complicated answer. What

do you think about the SL66?

[tvih]

Rollei manufactured their lenses on license from Zeiss. The quality is pretty much the same. I can't remember the exact details and have no reference as SL66.com went down, so not sure when Rollei started making them for themselves. But in any case quality is not an issue.

 

As for what I think about the SL66... well, it's a nifty system. Too bad I only have the 80mm lens for it. Of course it's no action camera, but for more thought-out photography it works nicely. The feel of the camera is nice and solid, and on a properly serviced unit the operation is very smooth. Viewfinder is of course big, but I'd suggest getting a non-standard focusing screen. I got a Rollei Ultra Bright with mine, and it really is very bright compared to the dim original.

[stb]

I used to have an SL66. It is an excellent camera, the lenses are first rate, it does not

matter one bit wether it is written Rollei or Zeiss on them.

 

One thing I found did not work that well is its tilt feature. The tilt axis is located way

behind the lens and it creates a weird movement of combined tilt and shift, making it

sometimes impossible to get the intended framing and ost of the time it is quite difficult

to use.

 

I have since replaced it with a 6x9 view camera. My bag is about the same weight with the

same number of lenses. I gained better movements and flexibiity and lost marginaly on

the operation speed.

 

For hand-holding, I have an M6, a Sony DSC-R1 and a Pentax 645NII, all much much

better suited for tripod-less usage.

[gary_ferguson1]

I used an SL66 for a few years. It's got plenty of great features but there's a few negatives. I'll leave the SL66 enthusiasts to sing its praises and I'll concentrate on the reasons why I sold it.

 

1. The unique feature is lens tilt (there's no built in shift capability but there's at least one compatible shift lens), but it's very awkward to use. Unlike say a Hasselblad Flexbody which has a geared tilting back, the SL66 simply has a lens that flops up and down, so if you're using the camera tripod mounted you have to recompose after tilting the lens, which in turn demands a further tilt adjustment, and so on...And with manual, ungeared adjustments it's dificult to get the degree of precision needed for large scale enlargement.

 

2. The wide angle lenses are showing their age, there's been some significant developments in wide angle optical design after the SL66 lens generation. Don't misunderstand me, they're fine for moderate enlargements, but if you plan on scanning the negatives and printing to the full capacity of current ink jets you'll struggle to maintain quality.

 

3. They're fairly reliable if used sensibly, but you've no idea how many previous owners your SL66 will have had, and how sensitively they handled the camera. Make sure the roll film insert serial numbers match the back, and check it operates smoothly and shows no signs of mishandling. There's some horror stories out there about the problems you'll have if you're unfortunate to get stuck with a dog. This makes building up an SL66 outfit something of a gamble, and it can take a long time to track down some of the rarer accessories that may be critical for your photographic applications.

[helenbach]

I like the SL 66 system quite a lot. The main disadvantage I see in getting into the system now is exactly what Gary said in point 2. It's a lot easier and cheaper to get good, modern Hasselblad wide-angle lenses. I have the 40 FLE and the 65 - these are quite difficult to get for the SL 66, and the 40 FLE, although it is the last design made for the SL 66, isn't the greatest 40 mm out there. It's no dog either. The 65 is good though - but the Hasselblad version is much easier and cheaper to get.

 

The SL 66 system is good for using with other lenses because of the bellows and the focal plane shutter. It is also good for macro and close-up.

 

Best, Helen

[michaelging]

If you get a chance , look at the Photo book called the "Edge of Darkness" by a outstandng photogrpher named Barry Thornton ,who died about a year ago. Most, if not all photos in this book were shot on a Rollei SL66 camera. I have owned and still own many medium format cameras , but after reading this book , the SL66 shines as a outstanding camera .

[jeff_s]

The SL66 was a favorite of mine because I used to do lots of closeup work, and the camera really shines here. Rollei quality seemed like a mixed bag, with jewel-like machining on the tripod QR clamp, and overpriced indifference for items like the rear body cap. Perhaps I will buy another one someday.

[gary_ferguson1]

Like Michael it was Barry Thornton's writings that also inspired me to try an SL66. However, the medium format world has moved on a long way since Barry's books were published, and I don't believe the justification for the SL66 that was true then still holds true today.

 

When Barry was writing the SL66 was an economical alternative to Hasselblad, that simply isn't the case anymore. There's still a reasonable collector's market for the SL66 which has kept prices reasonably bouyant, but the prices for used Hasselblads have fallen sharply, to the point where they're stunning value for money. Consequently you can now assemble a Hasselblad outfit more cheaply, and if you hunt around you'll be able to find a reasonably priced Hasselblad Flexbody which will give you far better tilt performance than with an SL66, as well as offering some modest shift capability. Furthermore, with a Hasselblad V system you'll be well placed to take advantage of second hand digital backs should you be interested in the future, something that is impossible with the SL66.

[bob_the_builder1]

Gary, I read Barrys book too. Great book. It is not however a justification for buying an SL66,

it is an exploration or a journey to find maximum image sharpness. Current basic SL66 kit

prices are very cheap, cheaper than Hassy, however they are not as plentiful on the SH

market as Hassy. Image quality wise an basic SL66 with HFT planar is as good as it gets in

MF. Even today. Where there have been advances is in the other lenses, particularly wide

angle, but I would not go so far as to say that the difference is as much as you make out.

The SL66 is still a great camera and cam more than hold its own against a hasselblad, and in

some areas such as macro it is way ahead. Even today.

[gary_ferguson1]

"The SL66 is still a great camera and cam more than hold its own against a hasselblad, and in some areas such as macro it is way ahead. Even today."

 

Bob, I agree that the SL66 is a great camera, I certainly enjoyed my time with one. But I don't see how it's "way ahead" of Hasselblad for macro applications. The built in bellows and reversing lens rings of the SL66 are an asset, but most medium format systems including Hasselblad have a bellows accessory and dedicated macro lenses, the Hasselblad Flexbody also has a built in bellows.

 

The key weakness of the SL66 for macro is the metering. TTL metering is a significant advantage for macro photography, but with the SL66 you're stuck with an ancient swinging arm metering hood of dubious reliability, and that's assuming that you can actually find one.

 

I don't have a grudge against the SL66, I had some fine photographs from mine and after all no camera is perfect. But if anyone's thinking of buying one it's better that they do so informed by all the facts.

[bob_the_builder1]

Gary wrote: "I don't have a grudge against the SL66, I had some fine photographs from mine

and after all no camera is perfect. But if anyone's thinking of buying one it's better that they

do so informed by all the facts."

 

Funny you should mention that...

[h._p.]

I think your summary of the SL66 is entirely fair, Gary. It's a beautiful piece of equipment but not quite up to the flexibility of the Hasselblad system. As you say, with the current prices of second hand Hasselblad kit, the comparison sways even further in favour of Victor's brainchild.

[bob_the_builder1]

HP, do you even own an SL66? What is less flexible about it? It has a few more lenses yes. So

what. The 6000 series Rolleis have more lenses than hasselblad. With its retro mountable

lenses and tilts the SL66 is far more flexible than hasselblad with its need for additional

attachments. I can focuss as close as I want with my HFT SL 66 lenses. What exactly is it that

the 500 series hasselblads are supposedly so much better at?

[bob_the_builder1]

Gary wrote: The key weakness of the SL66 for macro is the metering. TTL metering is a

significant advantage for macro photography, but with the SL66 you're stuck with an

ancient swinging arm metering hood of dubious reliability, and that's assuming that you

can actually find one.

 

There is no TTL metering withe a 500 series Hasselblad either. Both the Hasselblad can be

fitted with metering prisms. Personally I, like many other pros, use a handheld meter. You

are clutching at straws with your criticisms. Dubious reliability? Says who? There are plenty

for sale on eBay.

[bob_the_builder1]

Gary wrote: "But I don't see how it's "way ahead" of Hasselblad for macro applications. "

 

Try reverse mounting any of your Hasselblad lenses to your standard body. You cant. That is

a massive advantage to the SL66 for macro.

[h._p.]

There's nothing wrong with the SL66, Bob. It's a jolly nice camera and I enjoyed using one when I was given the chance. I just happen to think that the Hasselblad is more versatile because of the large variety of bits you can get for it, at lower prices because of the much bigger market.

 

You're quite right about the lens reversing trick, which is the one place where the SL66 does outshine the Hasselblad, although I suppose you could get someone like SRB Film Service to make you a reversing adapter to fit a Hasselblad focal plane shutter body, if you had a need for such a facility.

[mskovacs]

I'll weigh in on this discussion having used both SL66 (my current choice) and Hasselblad V series. Both are excellent systems. If you need a decent flash camera (1/500 synch), forget the SL66 (1/30 synch except on two leaf shutter lenses).

 

<p>Prices for the Hasselblad are still much higher IMO. Can I really score a 150/4 Sonnar for $350 and a multicoated 50/4 Distagon for $400 in Hassy mount? These lenses were perfect right out of the box. Since I repair/maintain my own gear I don't mind the risk of ebay - SL66 dealer prices may not be in the same league. There is little to go wrong with the lenses - no focus mount = no lubricating grease to oil up the optics and shutter/aperture blades.

 

<p>The backs for the SL66 are much less prone to light leaks. The seals are thin strips of brass, not foam like on the Hasselblad. Read the archives and see just how many Hassy users have had light seals fail, not to mention the infamous Hasselblad jam. The weakness is also the backs though - never EVER jam a dark slide in if the camera isn't cocked or you will break the camera. Always keep the SL66 cocked at all times and it won't do you wrong.

 

<p>Something else I think hasn't been mentioned - with the blank lens boards you can mount a variety of enlarging, microscope, barrel and shuttered LF lenses to use with the SL66. This can be a great way to expand your capabilities for cheap.

 

<p>TTL metering can be done on the SL66 with one of the Baier Photo adapters and the Kiev TTL prisms. Myself, I find I don't need it and I've shot a load of macro with mine. Knowing the extension from the millimeter scale is enough to quickly calculate any bellows extension factor.

 

<p>TTL is a crutch IMO, often more trouble than its worth to move the camera around a tiny macro subject to get the correct area metered, meanwhile shifting a nearly non-existant plane of focus. I find incident metering much more reliable.

 

<p>Gary's point about the digital backs is well-taken if you intend to shoot digital in the future with a MF camera. For me, the things are so far out of reach its not a concern.

 

<p>The tilt is indespensible IMO. +/- 8 deg is more than enough to hold many landscapes in focus at the optimum lens apertures.

 

<p>The camera works superbly handheld, especially with the accessory grip. The mirror is extremely well damped and the controls fall on my hands exactly like a Rollei TLR. The biggest drawback is the weight, I estimate about 1.5 equivalent Hassy V bodies.

 

<p>Enjoy, whatever your decision. MF SLRs are a very powerful tool to have in your shooting arsenal.<div></div>

[john_stockdale2]

The tilt is the deciding factor for me. I set the tilt before framing and then only have to make small adjustments from there.

 

I agree that the wide lenses are not brilliantly sharp.

 

Helen, you have a rare collection of SL66 gear! Those two lenses you mention I've never seen for sale, and the 65mm was available for only a very short period according to the old brochures. Have you compared the 40mmFLE with the previous 40mm (the heavy one)?

[helenbach]

Hi John,

 

I'm afraid that I haven't compared the two 40 mm lenses because I don't have the older 40. I got the 40 FLE when I first got into the SL 66 system, but only got the 65 recently. It took a few months of searching to find it. I nearly resorted to buying a Hasselblad.

 

Best, Helen

[mskovacs]

One of those 40 FLE distagons sold yesterday on ebay for $2500. (!) You are one lucky lady Helen.

 

The 30/3.5 fisheye would be a neat lens to have in the bag too.

[martin_reekie]

Agree with the comments about there being no real difference between the Rollie lens and a Zeiss equivalent.

 

I've had my SL66SE for 20 years now and really love the thing! The tilt was only ever intended to give you greater depth of field, not as a view camera substitute. You very quickly get used to the movement and framing is no problem.

 

I use 40, 50, 80, 150 and 250mm lenses and all are great. I've a SL66E as a back up, good camera too.

 

They are getting on but with care they should last for years. Being fully mechanical (the electronics for the metering don't effect the camera) you can usually find someone to fix them.

 

I'd agree that getting a good example is key, preferably one not used professionally as it may well be worn! There are still "as new" examples to be bought. The desire to own and the reluctance to sell only push up the prices.

 

All the best,

Martin

[bob_the_builder1]

Mike,

 

Nice pic.

 

The SL66 with 80mm lens and magazine weights in at 1995g, a 500CM with lens and

magazine is 1555g.

Not a lot in it. The SL66 neck strap increases portability imensly.

 

It compares well in terms of size also: SL66 with 80mm lens= 175mm(l) x100mm(w)

x105mm(h). 500CM with 80mm lens = 170mm(l) x109mm(w) x104mm(h).

 

I agree with you about prices. SL66 is still cheaper on SH market.

[jean-louis llech]

Bob,<br>

I agree with you... but don't forget that for this weight of 1995 gr. the SL66-SE has a <i>complete TTL light metering system</i> :<br>

- Average center weighted measure, <br>

- Spot metering <br>

- TTL flash metering with automatic exposure via a SCA 356 adapter.

<br>

If you add the weight of a PME 90 metering prism to a 500 C/M, : 580 gr. (less, of course, the weight of the WL finder).<br>

And with the SL66-SE, you can still use the waist level finder !<br>