TLR?

[steven_hong]

Hello all.

 

I will be entering the field of medium format photography and need

some advice on a camera purchase (I know...another newbie in search

of a guiding light). Actually, my foray into medium format has been

instigated by my 35mm equipment getting stolen! Some background

about where I'm coming from. I've been shooting a rangefinder

seriously for about a year now (before that, I had fooled around with

my dad's canonet, which I fell in love with). My setup was a

voigtlander bessa t with a 50mm hexanon m lens (awesome lens, btw).

Anyways, I used the camera like a madman for a year doing B&W

documentary pictures. I got proficient enough at it that my friends

began asking me to take B&W pictures at their weddings which they

paid for. Pretty cool. And I loved the quiet, simple, nonobtrusive

operation of a rangefinder. Anyways, a couple of weeks ago, after

shooting some engagement pictures for one of my friends, I had it

stolen from my car. Viewfinders, lens, camera, bag, everything!

I've been in a state of depression ever since.

 

I've tried to put a positive spin on things and told myself this

would be a great time to move up to a better system. I feel I've

gotten pretty proficient enough at manual focusing rangefinders and

composing good pictures to make the investment and move up to a

Leica. I budgeted about $1600 to purchase a leica m6 and a 50mm

summicron. Well, the other day, one of my friends, while looking at

some of my contact sheets, suggested I move up to medium format. He

noticed, and I agreed, that most of my pictures, while being "street"

or documentary in nature, were on the more contemplative side. That

is, I don't really click away like a raging crazy man when I shoot. I

tend to hover and really try to compose my shots. And I always

wanted to do more still life color shots as well, so medium format

really began to interest me.

 

Well, I've tried to research the issue by reading threads on this

list, and it has truly been a dizzying experience. I can't seem to

get a handle on the number of options there are out there. I began

to take interest in the Mamiya 6 because of its rangefinder

qualities. However, after reading alot of the threads, I began to

have doubts. F4 as max aperture? I don't know... I remember

shooting indoors in a chapel during the day and having to shoot at

2.8 while pushing 400 film a stop to get the right exposure. I do

like quiet operation though (I still get bugged out at the mirror

slap noise I hear from slrs).

 

Then I read about TLRs. Sounded interesting. Its boxy, but I don't

really care, so long as it takes great pictures. Quiet.

Economical. Fixed lens, which is fine since I normally shoot 50mm

(on 35mm film) anyways. Sounded like a good intro.

 

So I guess my question is, would a TLR fit my bill? Or have I

overlooked other options? Picture quality is of primary importance

to me. I got fantastic pictures from my hexanon and would have

expected no less from a leica summicron. I've heard Rollei TLRS are

great. Could someone recommend a model? Lens speed is important.

As far as price...I figured I was about to fork over about $1100 for

a Mamiya 6, so anything under that would be great. Of course, if I

could get a great TLR for under $500, I would be one very happy man.

And on top of that, I would feel that my equipment getting stolen was

a blessing in disguise!

 

Sorry for the long question...but I wanted to give some perspective

so that I could get appropriate advice.

 

Best regards,

Steve

[cxc]

A Mamiya 6 is a great choice, if you can afford it.

 

I have a Mamiya TLR (the C3), which are plentiful, cheap, and are the only TLR with changeable lenses. They are very low-tech, very heavy, very bulky, very cool. Best performance requires a tripod.

 

Make sure you are ready for The Square before you commit to a TLR.

 

Good luck,

CXC

[douglas_green1]

You should have no problem getting a nice Rolleiflex 2.8C or 2.8D for $500. I'd plan on $600-$800, and include in that budget a CLA from a top-tier Rollei specialist (such as Ross Yerkes, Paul Ebel, or Harry Fleenor) and a Maxwell Brilliant-matte Screen installed.

 

You will be amazed at the quality of the negatives that are produced, and, with the Maxwell Screen, how bright and easy to focus it is.

[richard_cochran]

Regarding aperture, for medium format, you probably don't want

or need a lens as fast as you would on 35mm. DoF is brutally

thin on MF, even at f4. That's somewhat balanced by the

fact that fast films work well on MF, because the grain

isn't as promiment since you're not enlarging so much.

<p>

Most TLRs come with a waist level finder, and they're designed

to work well with one. Their tall narrow shape hangs

from a neck strap in an ergonomically perfect position for

use with a WL finder, for one thing. But if you haven't

used a WL finder, it may take a little getting used to, as it's

reversed right-to-left.

<p>

Even a cheap YashicaMat will blow away the finest 35mm camera

when it comes to making detailed sharp enlargements. If

you want an intro to medium format, it's hard to go far wrong

with a YashicaMat, as they're inexpensive and you can always

sell it if you want to trade up.

<p>

Rolleis are probably the finest choice if you can live with

just one lens per camera. But for interchangable lenses,

consider a Mamiya. OTOH, if you're confident you can live with

just one lens, don't get a Mamiya with a single lens.

There's a bit of complexity and weight (interlocks,

blinds, shutter cocking and releasing linkages) that

goes into making the lenses interchangable, and it's probably

only worthwhile if you'll use the interchangability.

[s._c.]

There is a book by Lief Ericksenn titled Medium Format Photography. This is the book that helped me get started and it has been a repeated source of inspiration as well as reference. If a Mamiya 7 (6x7 rangefinder)is out of the question, then there are Fuji 67 and 69 rangefinders for about 800-1000. The lowest would probably be old Koni Omega 67 rangefinders. TLRs are plentiful on the market and could cost less than these rangefinders. Consider Yashica Mat 124G, Minolta Autocord, Mamiya C series (interchangeable lenses), and of course, Rolleiflex. I still occasionally use my Rollei 3.5e3 (75 planar) for the normal view. In the studio, I primarily use my 150 sonnar on hassy.

[norman_trabulus1]

This is not based on the inherent qualities of 35mm rangefinders vs. TLRs so much as on what your post says about you: Don't leave yourself without a fine 35mm rangefinder, since you like them and do well with them. Then budget yourself $100-175 to test the MF waters with a TLR such as a Minolta Autocord, or Rolleicord with Xenar, to see if you like the format and TLRs. Be patient with the TLR as it may take some time for it to become intuitive in your hands.

[pc1]

if you have a chance to try out a Rolleiflex/Rolleicord, do so,just hold it in your palm,(maybe one of your friends might have one)check it out,open the WLF,wind the lever,forward and back to cock the shutter,and press,listen,see how it feels in your hands.

 

i think you're gonna like it. happy hunting ! pc

[kaiblanke]

Steven,

<p>

I also made the jump from Leica to Rolleiflex. They share some characteristics, but they also have some differences. 1600 $ is a lot of money, it should get you quite a bit of equipment.

<p>

For the TLR: I would try and get a nice Rolleiflex, there is nothing that compares to the original. A 2.8c is a nice buy, also a 2.8d or 2.8e model. The f's are just too expensive, although great cameras. You have to spend around $500-600 for a nice working model. If you can spare half a stop of lens speed, the 3.5 models with Planar and Xenotar lenses are nice also. Be aware that you will most likely not have a built-in light meter, so calculate another 50$ for a used one or a nice small new one. Usually there is no need in getting high-end models, and you do not need flash metering nor spot metering, so you can stay with the basic and cheaper ones.

<p>

That would leave enough money to rebuild your rangefinder gear. The Rollei is very nice, but you get only 12 pictures/roll and is not so handy for taking grab shots, esp. at weddings. While the Summicron is a nice lens, the Hexanon is really comparable. So why not buy a Hexar RF plus Hexanon instead of a M6 ? That would give you autoexposure and autoadvance over the M6. You also could get a nice M4-2 or M2, and use the meter bought for the Rolleiflex.

<p>

Hope this helps -

[d._p.1]

if you're going to buy one (1) camera, it obviously should be something 35mm. As mentioned often on these pages, there's nothing a TLR can do that your bessa t can't, except, with very precise focussing and often a tripod, much sharper end results or bigger enlargements, but conversely any MF camera has serious drawbacks over 35mm. My biggest "challenge" with MF (i have a Mamiya C330) is focus/camera shake. You have to focus so much more precisely because of the shalow DOF, to make things worse i tend to take pictures when the light is almost gone. I've tried different viewfinders (porro, "chimney"), each their own pro's and con's, and am now looking for a better (Maxwell or Beattie) focussing screen (not easy to find here in Holland). Saw a lovely Rolleiflex with crisp clear screen, was temped to buy it (still tempted) but prefer to upgrade the Mamiya because of $$. The lens of the Rolleiflex is said to be sharper, i'm willing to believe that, but i have still to encounter the limits of my Mamiya lenses - they're lovely.

 

In Dutch we have a saying "a change of food makes you eat" and that certainly is true for camera's.

 

good luck!

[the tightwad]

As a point of interest on TLR's. The Mamiya TLR was(& is still) a workhorse camera for wedding photographers.

 

I own ( and dearly love) a Mamiya C330 & C220 finding them to be all the MF camera I'll ever need. Since you like range finders I suspect

that you too will find the Mamiya a very good camera for your shooting

style. As noted they will require you to adjust from a rectangle to a

square in your framing so bear that in mind.

[jim_seaman]

Steven,

 

If you are comfortable with rangefinders, the Koni Omega's are a bargain... They are heavier than the Mamiya 6 and 7's but they will leave your wallet a great deal heavier as well... 6x7 is a lot more like 35mm in proportions than 6x6. I tried 6x6 (a Rollei and a C330) at first and found that in reality I had a hard time composing a good square. Almost all my shots were cropped to about 6x4.5 to fit 5x7's and 8x10's.

 

I guess my one advice would be to buy a *cheap* 6x6 first to make sure you like the square. By cheap I don't mean poor quality. A Yashica 124 comes to mind. If you like the square and don't mind being restricted to one lens, the rollei's are great and can be had in f/2.8 varients. If you want interchangable lenses you are pretty much limited to a Mamiya C series. They are fine cameras but heavier than the rollei's. The waist level finders are a blessing for candid photography. The average person doesn't even realize that you've taken their picture. While using my Mamiya I had one person mistake me for a surveyor... "The property line goes over there..." :)

 

The Koni Omega that I have was: cla'd by Greg Weber, had both the 90mm and 58mm (with finder) lenses, a sunpak flash, a gossen luna pro f light/flash meter, a nice tenba camera bag and lots of little odds and ends - came to $500 off of @bay. I'm happy with it in the field but prefer an slr for studio work so I bought a used Mamiya rb67 for that.

 

Unless you are far wiser than anyone I've met on Photo.net, so far, you will likely not get the perfect (for you) camera on the first try. In general, the weight will be more and the handling will be slower than your 35mm gear. Sounds like this will not be a big impact on you and how you shoot. Have fun!

 

Regards,

 

Jim Seaman

[tim obrien]

A TLR is a nice tool. That said, it's one of my least favorite tools to work with. If I am going to spend the time setting up, I opt for LF or at least a sheet film camera. If I want to just go shooting, documentary style, I prefer eye level, know where everything is, compose, adjust, everything at my fingertips equipment, like my Nikon FM2. I don't propose a Nikon, I suggest you look very carefully at your requirements before abandoning your concept of a Leica Rangefinder. That's a nice camera that can take you far, very far.

 

tim in san jose

[steven_hong]

Thanks all for the responses!

 

I have been thinking about getting back into 35mm with a rangefinder. But as much as I love a 35mm rangefinder, I just don't think is a good idea to invest resources into it at this point. Hence, my foray into medium format, and possibly a TLR. Her is my thinking. In a couple of years, the 35mm film format will be pretty much dead, killed off by digital. I mean, the Canon 1ds already has the capability of rivaling 35mm film resolution (albeit at $6K). Technology will only get better and prices are already plummetting. Medium format, on the other hand, doesn't seem like it will be replaced any time soon. So how can I justify staying in a traditional 35mm film format and investing all this money into it when I know its going to be pretty much a dead end in a couple of years? I'd rather spend the money getting into medium format.

 

The reason I'm leaning toward a tlr is that is seems super light and portable as opposed to other medium format cameras out there (with a fast lens). I would like to do some tripod work, and it seems I could do it with a tlr (is this true?). Most importantly, I could spend some money on it and not feel like its gone to waste if I decide to change systems later. All the threads I've read seem to indicate that most people in medium format has a tlr as a second body to their main body used in professional work.

 

Is my thinking correct? Or have I just missed the boat? Thanks again for all your great advice!

 

Steve

[s._c.]

If you're asking if TLRs can be tripod mounted, then yes. Most should have a mounting socket under the camera. One thing to note is that Rolleiflex backs are L-shaped and are relatively thin. They can be warped and possibly produce light leaks or other problems. If you do buy a Rollei, be sure to get a quick release called Rolleifix. It takes the pressure off the bottom screw mount and is supported at three points instead. I never mount the camera without it. My first medium format camera is a Yashica LM with a yasikor lens and it is still produces great images. Good luck.

[tim obrien]

You could be correct. But with an installed base of many hundred million, I suspect 35mm isn't going anywhere soon.

 

With an installed base of an order of magnitude less millions, MF could disapear in a matter of years. As the pros go digital, and they will, emulsions will dry up and go away. Like the 3x4 sheet film cameras of the late 40's and 50's. I enjoy playing with older cameras and formats but I can assure you, having a choice of one film is not the ideal way to shoot any format. MF could go that way before you blink an eye.

 

My point is, you are changing not only formats, but image shape, shooting habits, conceptulization parameters, etc. It may not turn out to be where you want your photography to go. And that M6 is a nice camera.

 

tim in san jose

[douglas_green1]

Steven,

 

From a purely investment basis, I think that alot of the Leicaphiles are whistling past the graveyard. I absolutely agree that it would be unwise to spend $2000 on a Leica if you would hope to recoup most of your investment down the road. On the other hand, you certainly could get plenty of use out of it over the next several years. Also, complete Konica Hexar RF outfit, for under $900 with one lens, or a Voigtlander Bessa R2 outfit for under $750 with one lens, becomes a much more plausible expenditure.

 

Similarly, buying NEW Medium Format gear could be catastrophic from an investment/depreciation standpoint, but used MF gear is a great bargain right now, as it is fully depreciated. I agree that SOME of the variety in film emulsions will go away in the next decade or two, but CERTAINLY, it won't ALL go away. Kodak and Fuji might get out of the business, but there will certainly be niche players that remain, like Agfa and Ilford, who do not need huge markets to justify their involvement, just a reasonable sized, quality driven customer base. ESPECIALLY if Kodak were to drop out, I would expect that niche companies might license their emulsion recipes and keep the business going. I mean, you can still buy 127 film for gosh sakes, (although only in a couple of emulsions, which happen to be quite good). And the size of the 127 film market is AT LEAST 3 orders of magnitude smaller than the 120 film market, and probably even smaller.

[tim obrien]

Douglas,

 

This is why Agfa is getting out of the sheet film market? Because they don't need a hugh market?

 

You can get 127 film in 100 ASA B&W and a single chrome type. It's frustrating. And it's not going to get any better for 120.

 

tim in san jose

[douglas_green1]

I agree that the supply of 120 film will not get better over time. But it won't get bad enough to be a serious problem in my lifetime (assuming I live another 30-50 years). I'm sure that there will at least be a few high quality color emulsions, and a few high quality B&W emulsions available (at least on fast one, and one fine grain one, in each of color and B&W) for the forseeable future. I wouldn't care less if Kodak went out of the 120 business, and I could survive if Fuji dropped everything except Velvia and one fast film such.

 

Just don't let Ilford bail on 120.

[robert_clark]

I use Leica rangefinders and a Rolleiflex 2.8f, and most of my work is done on the streets. I am still at the stage of getting used to the Rolleiflex, so I cannot say I have mastered it yet, but here are my current observations.

 

The Leicas are smaller and discreter, fairly obviously, and do not seem to attract so much attention. I also find it easier and quicker to get them out and start using them without people noticing.

 

The Rolleiflex has two basic operational modes, which makes it much more flexible and speedier to use than other TLR�s: the standard waist level finder (the slow one), which can take some getting used to when your subject starts moving, and the sports finder with eye-level focusing (the quick one). All other TLR�s have only guess focusing in the sportsfinder mode � a real pain. The very clever arrangement of mirrors, which allows eye-level focusing and natural open framing is excellent and, alone, makes it worth getting one of the later Rolleiflexes.

 

Having said that, the Rolleiflex is still slower to use than the Leica; if you are always in the contemplative mood this may be alright, but for me it would be too restricting. Beware the shallow depth of field with the 80mm, it makes the necessity of critical focusing four times as necessary as a Leica with a 50 and this can really slow you down.

 

The Leica gives you the versatility of different lenses, potentially very low light level working (far better than any digital), lower bulk, and extremely high quality optics (though I am sure the Konica/Hexanon stuff is also very good).

 

The Rolleiflex gives you something extra in the negatives, a difference of quality that is very noticeable at 8x10 or 10x10: finer grain, better, smoother tonality and sharper detail.

 

Both cameras are easy to hand-hold at slow speeds, but the f2.8 of the Rolleiflex is a limit and even that requires great care in focusing.

 

The build of both cameras is superb; they can be serviced to bring them back into fine working condition and that possibility should be available for many years to come. Both can function perfectly without batteries (though small spare batteries are not exactly hard to carry with you) and it may even encourage you to get a good separate meter.

 

The problem with most digital cameras seems, at the moment, to be either, bulk and price with the better ones, or shutter delay with the neat little ones. The viewfinder of the Leica is excellent and has many advantages over the hard-to-see screens of digicams. I am sure these digital issues will be solved, but how soon? If you buy Leica second hand it still seems good value and is, as yet, a more specialized street-shooting tool than any digicam.

[clark_yerrington]

you sound like you'd love using a TLR - you have all the right needs and attitude. from what i've read here none of them are good at wider than F11... any rollei from the '50s or newer (coated lenses), in good working condition would be great.