Rolleiflex SL66

[sasho1]

<p>Hi all<br>

I think I need your opinion about this one. I'm in position to buy used Rolleiflex SL66 with Planar 2.8/80mm, it <em>looks </em> just fine for me, in fact it looks really cool :-). But till now I haven't found some hard core comparation btw this camera and some other of its class. So, basically-what do you think about this camera? And the leneses? what about other lenses for this mount? are they better or worse than the zeiss lenses for hassies? Repairs?I think for a similar budget I can get an Hasselblad 500 C in a good condition, but this one looks kinda better built, or lets just say, i like its design more...I have used a couple of Yasica Mat's, Pentakon six and now i think its time to get something more serious, more reliable and with interchangeable lenses :-). I really do not need auto anything, in fact I really enjoy the "slow analog process" these previous cameras got me into. I tend to use it mainly for color/B&W negative portraiture photography, using natural available light. So, any thoughts/experiences to share ? Thank you !</p>

[bueh]

<blockquote >now i think its time to get something more serious, more reliable

</blockquote><p>

Then avoid the SL66. They have a poor reputation for reliability today. The camera and its features look good on paper, but finding a fully working one nowadays is hit-and-miss and for this the old Rollei <abbr title="single-lens reflex cameras">SLRs</abbr> are just too expensive (and they are virtually unrepairable).

<p>

If you want reliability and a great system for not-so-much money, check out the Mamiya RB/RZ67 cameras. A. Conti said it best in <b><a href="http://www.photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00FrXw">this thread</a></b>: "<i>The RZ is one hell of a tool. Not a sexy tool, but a very effective one.</i>"

[jack_welsh]

<p>Have the RB, and agree with Bueh.</p>

[ronald_moravec1]

<p>RB and RZ are big and heavy and not so easily transported. <br>

Hassy 500C are outdated and commonly needed repair parts are not available.<br>

Sl66 pics are beautiful, but I have no knowlege of repair availability. Considering it was a low volumn camera and is getting old, you are taking a chance.</p>

<p>Considering nothing but picture quality, SL66 would be my first choice. Hassy second only because the C lenses are older. RB lenses are typical Japanese lenses, ok if you have never used Zeiss or Leica. </p>

<p>I would tell you to save your money for something better.</p>

 

[sasho1]

<p>Thank you dear Bueh and Jack<br>

I forgot to mention above that Im (kind of) trying to avoid the Sekkor lenses, and I'm more a Zeiss kind of taste. I know that some of the Sekkor lenses are killer sharp but the "sharpness| or taste that Zeiss provides IMHO is more natural, at least for my (-1.5 dipoter) eyes :-). I've read the thread some time ago and I red it again ......I may end up with an RB/RZ... and I really don't need a <em>sexy tool</em> , trying not to mix the tools if you know what I mean :-).... so, now I'm sitting on a double fence, heh :-)</p>

[bueh]

Sasho, the problem with the SL66 is first finding a camera in proven working condition. Then the system (lenses and accessories) is pretty expensive. All in all it is a dead-end camera -- overpriced, overengineered and issues-prone.

 

And I guess from your comment about Mamiya vs Zeiss that you have never used Sekor lenses. Give them a try, they produce wonderful pictures.

[peter tresize]

<p>If you're not doing macro or need the lens tilt, then another simpler camera is probably better in terms of reliability. I'd miss the Rollei lenses though....<br>

If you do buy it and eventually need a CLA or repairs, Juergen and Harry can help:<br>

http://www.jurgenkuschnik.com/<br>

http://www.rolleirepairs.com/<br>

<br /></p><div></div>

[sasho1]

<p>Dear Bueh, reading your posts here, and in another threads, as well as other forums I get the feeling that you are right about the complexity and that the camera is overpriced and overengineered... I just may give a try of the Sekkor afer all :-)<br>

Thank you Peter :-)</p>

[laurent1]

<p>The sl66 is a <strong>mecanical masterpiece</strong> . On the SL66 (without E or SE), there is no electronical part and no light measuring equipment. If you like Rolleiflex TLR, you will certainly love the sl66. This camera is really excellent in the macro field. If you find one that has been cla and that is working fine, I don't think that you take a great risk about reliability. The lenses are exactly the same as the Hassie's of that time, with another mount. But as they more expensive as they are harder to find. If you want Zeiss lenses, why don't you try a rolleiflex from the 6000 series ? Lenses are very cheap on the used market (I got a 250 mm for less than 200 euros) and 6006 bodies also. These cameras are in another word : full electronic and are working on batteries. But you can make up to 1,5 frame per second and you get ttl flash. It's another world, but same lenses.</p>

 

[laurent1]

<p>I forgot :<br>

www.sl66.com<br>

You get all the infos.</p>

[desmond_kidman]

<p>Sasho, I think you are getting the idea that the SL-66 can be a nightmare, unfortunately even the non-electronic units are subject to wear and repair is very difficut. I have been tempted many times but resisted due to headaches.</p>

<p>As far as Zeiss lenses, be aware that some of the best Zeiss were not offered for this mount, the Superachromats, I think the 50 fle, and I also think the 180.</p>

<p>Regarding wanting to get the flavor of Zeiss lenses, the latest RZ lenses and the best Zeiss lenses really converge, based on my tests. I would defy anyone to identify my comparisons of the Zeiss 50 fle to the RZ 50, the Zeiss 100 compared to the RZ 110, the Zeiss 250 SA compared to RZ 210 Apo. I won't say they are identical, but they are all extremely sharp, really don't show serious differences in out of focus rendition, and are similar in contrast. I pored over them all for yours on a light box trying to find a "house look" and could not. Black and white statements like "German lenses are so and so in look, Japanese lenses are such and such" are eroneous simplifications. There is more difference between the look of certain Zeiss designs than the difference between all of the above lenses. I could say the same about the range of Canon lenses I own, all current models. </p>

<p>Modern, extremely sharp, very well corrected lenses that are executed to very high levels often don't have that "house look", which often is caused by certain compromises in correction of certain models. I would also say that the Canon superteles with fluorite elements remind me much of my 250 Superachromat..........so much for brand or country differences.</p>

<p>In the end, I would go for either a Hassy if you are going to hand hold for extended periods, or the RZ, get the best lenses, and then forget about the gear and shoot. Both systems are so numerous, so repairable, that you need not have worries for a long time. </p>

<p>I love to see folks get trouble free, maintainable systems so that they can forget about the equipment (if that's the goal of the person, I always assume it is) and concentrate on the images (again, the assumption that this is the goal applies) while developing enhanced vision. </p>

[desmond_kidman]

<p>Sasho, I told myself recently to look at the portfolio of a poster before writing answers, and I keep forgetting. I just looked at your portfolio, it is obvious you are an artist, not an equipment fanatic, great. All the more reason to get a camera that is not rare and that won't give you difficulty, so that you can concentrate on expressing your vision. I hope you get a nice Hasselblad or RZ. From your varied portfolio it's hard to see which would fit you better, I can't tell if a tripod was used on many of those photos. If you never use a tripod I'd get the Hasselblad. If more than 1/2 those shots are on tripod maybe I'd lean a bit more toward the RZ. Either way, if you are comfortable with the camera your shots will be winners from looking at your porfolio. </p>

[gerber_van_der_graaf]

<p>I'd look for a more modern system and a newer MF camera to reduce the risk of repair costs. Though in general I do not like very much fully electronic cameras, I really can recommend the Rollei 6008 system. Its a great system with beautifull lenses from Zeiss and Schneider. Its handling is easy and logic: only adjusting exposure time (if not in automatic), diaphragm (if not in automatic) and focus (if not in automatic for the 6008 AF). The cameras have an integrated measuring system for integral, spot and multi-spot and has motorized film advance. Thats all it does and you don't need more. Oh yeah, it has TTL flash at all exposure times (thanks to the central shutter in the lenses), in case you're interested in it.<br>

You can get a bit older lenses from the SL66 system (if I am not wrong) and from the 6008 system often for very low prizes (relatively speaking, regarding the prize tags for new) on the used market.<br>

The only drawback is that my bag containing three lenses is getting quite heavy now. But thats the prize you are paying if you want to have such marvelous MF slides and B/W photos.</p>

[kelly_grider]

<p>Hi Sasho,<br>

I would check with Marflex in New Jersey to see if they still work on Rollei SL66s. I used one of these as my main studio camera for a number of years and found the bellows focusing to be very convenient with close up portraiture. The lenses are wonderful. The camera is much larger and heavier than the Hasselblad, but it was much easier for me to focus and that sold me on it. These cameras can be easily damaged if you don't know how to use them so I'd suggest a manual for it if you decide to go this route.<br>

Hope this helps.<br>

Kelly Grider</p>

[sasho1]

<p>Thank You all on yuor time and energy spent :-)</p>

[sasho1]

<p>thank you again, i must say i feel kinda obligation to inform you that I enden up with a mamya C 33 profesional, in a mint A++ condition, with the 80mm 2.8 lenses, seiko shuter, for under 100 euro! HA! actually the camera found me, and i must admit, that im more than happy with it! (so much about my jarn about sekor lenses-above:-P) it is reliable, sharp, and yet soft enough to meet my taste. It is heavy, but not as hassy or 645... so thank you again, i found what I was looking for. <img src="http://members.webs.com/MembersB/editAppPage.jsp?app=photos&pageID=116152297&token=2b71e49c6ce3b07d122049e1af8#photos/photo?photoid=41350696" alt="" /> Here's a sample, first test roll, Kodak Portra VC, 400 ASA, scanned at the lab (some ooold scnaner, i dont even know the brand)... i guess i'll have to start building my darkroom heh...</p><div></div>