nolan woodbury

Roger said: "Mf is over kill for an 8x10. Shoot with a finer grain film, use good technique and save your money for some nice 35mm prime lenses"

 

I disagree, and I'm not the only one. Its more than grain and sharpness; its tonality, depth, and contrast. I routinely turn in 120 slides with 135 dupes and the publisher almost always chooses the 120 slides. When pressed as to why, he always answers "because they look more life-like, and the colors are richer"

 

There is more to medium format than just a larger negitive, same with large format...

Edward,

 

Its obvious that you have your mind made up about this, and I won't try to change that. I do however, have a few points I'd like you to consider;

 

When pressed, I'd have to say I consider myself more of a Minolta TLR "fan" then any other marque, but of the 40 or so TLR's in my "user/collection" the Rolleiflex's have -far and away- been the most consistent in regards to optical performance, which is to say "there is substance to the claims of excellence" Of the 6 Rollei TLR's I have (both pre, and post war) be it a Xenar, Opton Tessar or Jena Tessar equipped example, all have proven to be excellent and consistent shooters in their own right. Sharp, contrasty, reliable and durable. Some are minty originals, others, hacked up and abused losers that nobody else wanted. None of the other brands of TLR's that I have experienced or tried can claim this. I must conclude then, there is more to Rolleiflex than just the name.

 

I'm sorry to hear of the problems with your Automat X, but -good gosh! It's a 50 year old camera! Surely you cannot hold Rollei responsible for those needed repairs! On the subject of repairs, have you checked the prices of Hasselblad or Nikon lenses lately? The over-$200 repair to your Rollei (which should work fine after Mr. Fleenor is finished with it) is chump-change in the world of MF photography. Example: My best Rollei TLR -a MX with a Jena Tessar- came to me from eBay with a broken aperture blade. Do I blame Rollei? No, I blame the dolt who forced the f-stop selector when the aperture blades were dirty or with the workings dry. Once repaired (more than $200, I promise you) the camera was returned to service and performs in splendid fashion. It's a tribute to the solid and....dare I say "timeless" design of the Rollei TLR that a seriously damaged 50 year old camera can be still be repaired and returned to professional duty. I've run hundreds of rolls through it since.

 

Lastly; You may prefer the optics and operation of some other brand of TLR Edward, and I'll respect and understand that always. Just be careful when you word your opinion as "fact" There are simply too many success stories and breathtaking Rolleiflex images to deny this camera, its makers and fitters, and especially those who have used them so successfully all these many years.

Edward,

 

Its disappointing to read of your observations of the Rolleiflex TLR you own. May I inquire as to which model it is?

 

Properly serviced and set-up, your Rollei should outperform any Canon lens not just in terms of overall sharpness, but depth and contrast as well. Sure, there are some "Lemons" out there (or abused or improperly serviced/repaired units) but its rare to hear such comments. I have not extensively used many pre-war Rollei TLR's, but have several that I've shot and gained impressive results. However, a unit without a flash port is of little use to me. Depending on your screen resolution, you may see the Rollei TLR quality in these photographs:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/106750

http://www.photo.net/photo/106883&size=lg

 

Both camera's used (X & MX model Automats) are Tessar-equipped from the very early 50's. Find another, or send your unit to one of the many fine repairmen listed in the archives of the MFD for a full service and CLA.

I think the Autocord may be the best choice here, as it has one or two distinct advantages; The swing-type focusing lever under the taking lens can be operated by either hand, its even possible to operate the camera with only one hand: Focus, shoot, and advance. The Rokkor lens also stands the chance to be (at the very least) equal to the Rollei glass, and when you combine that with the ease of use, affordability and durability, it's a pretty clear cut choice. Another consideration would be a Ricoh Diacord, which features perhaps the best focusing system -the dual lever Duo Lever- ever mounted to a TLR. You stand a good chance to pick-up the Ricoh cheaper than any of the other's you mentioned as well, and it's a good camera optically.

I can sympathize with your problem Joseph; I have over many user/working TLR's in my collection as well, and the cost of getting every one of them CLA'd (at once) would be staggering. Since I only use six or seven of them on a regular basis, I haven't seen the need to have *all* of them serviced, nor do all of them need it. I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm just a bit bothered at the use of the term "a bit expensive" I love my TLR's, and use them professionally on a regular basis. My users long ago paid for themselves (and probably a good bit of the stock as well) and I must give credit to my serviceman! Without him, I'd be in deep doo-doo. The thought of him doing the work any cheaper is pretty hard to take, as its probably under-priced as it is. I need my serviceman, I depend on my serviceman, and I want him to make a good living. I figure it this way; If a camera is a shelf-rat I'll never use, why CLA it? If its something I can use to make money with, the cost of the service will come from the profits. Both win.

 

On, by the way Joseph...if you really love your TLR's, avoid the low bidder! "You get what you pay for" is especially true in this business.

One of my Autocord's had a broken focus lever (actually, the lever was still attached to the helix, the knurled knob had snapped off) and I sent it to Mark Hama, who actually bought a parts-Autocord to fix my camera. My best suggestion is to contact either Mark or Paul Ebel, and if they dont have parts (although I seem to recall them saying they did) they have the expertise to make something up from aluminum. I've seen it done on several Autocord's, and it worked great. Cost? Reasonable for the quality, and the quality is excellent. The archives have this information in repeated fashion, but here it is again:

 

Paul Ebel

W230 Terrace Street Box 86

Spring Valley, Wisconsin 54767

(715) 778-4372

 

Mark Hama LTD

2675 Earl Drive

Marietta, Georgia 30062

(770) 565-1498

(770) 977-5078 (fax)

It all depends Doug. On the work that I do, if I'm asked to submit slides that will be used for the magazine cover I'm certainly going to use medium format, but many photo-journalists do -in fact- use 35mm exclusively. I see (as you mentioned) many pro's using Mamiya RB's and RZ's quite successfully, and I'd say the Mamiya shooters out number the Hassey shooters 5-to-1. For 35mm, Nikon is the weapon of choice. I use Minolta 35mm (with Rokkor or Minolta lenses) and have in the past used Pentax or even Exakta 35mm! Not much difference could be seen, if any. Nikon, Hasselblad and Mamiya are popular because they are supported by the camera chains and that is important to publishers who like to rent, say, a 1000mm lens instead of buying it. I freelance, so I'm free to use any sort of weird gear I want to...its always a hoot to see other "pro's" do a double take at my Autocord or Kalloflex set-up, and wonder what I've been smoking. Another factor is cost; many magazines will discourage use of MF/LF because of the cost of film and developing The bottom line is; results. You can get equal or sometimes better results with vintage gear or manual gear if your careful, and not restricted by a higher-up. Right now I'm in the process of getting my 4x5 view camera into the "picture" after realizing there is no such thing as "good enough". You should always try to improve and get better.

Not a question, so excuse the use of this forum for this post, but

seeing as how many of us here are into this sort of thing, it seems

the best place to put it.

 

My friend Michael Levy has written a book published by Amherst Media

(PO Box 586 Buffalo, NY) called "Selecting and Using Classic Cameras"

ISBN # 1-58428-054-9. $17.95 in the USA, $26.95 in Canada. It's a

softcover book with 188 pages.

 

If your anything like me, you've surly noticed a gaping hole in the

library or at the local booksellers for books actually dealing with

buying and using classic and collectibles, as opposed to different

text's that list these items. Michael's approach is different, and

its an awesome read! All sizes and formats are covered, from old

folders to rangefinders, TLR's (in which I'm honored to be mentioned)

to 35mm SLR's, view cameras and much more. Tips on finding, buying,

using and everything in between. A real treat for those of us

starving for this kind of information. Amherst has a werbsite too:

 

www.AmherstMedia.com

First of all, great response by Christoph-Erdmann Pfeiler. Not much one can add to that but a brief over-view of the different models.

 

The post-war Automat models are what you should look for in an "affordable" Rollei TLR Shannon, although its been my experience that no matter what I do -or what I buy- it always seems to cost a minium of $500 to get a really decent shooter...whether its a minty, just been serviced unit or a fixer-upper. When talking Rollei, you can just about count on that as a base figure. Trust me.

 

That said, look for the models with the factory flash (X) sync port, starting with the Automat X up through the MX-EVS models of the mid 50's. Without electronic flash, your Rollei will be severely limited. If you move up to the later 3.5E or F models, you'll pay more...but not necessarily get more. Insist on a choice unit.

 

If you desire something a bit more affordable, then look for a Minolta Autocord, easily the equal to any Rollei TLR, or a YashicaMat. The Kalloflex is a good camera too, built like a tank.

 

Good luck!

Sahrul,

 

It's a 3.5 Rolleiflex MX-EVS type 2, manufactured in or around 1955-56.

 

It's a wonderful camera, capable of outstanding images if it is in proper working order. I'm assuming you not in the USA, but I can still give advice on service personal if you email me directly. No, your Rollei isn't metered so you can (or should) invest in a quality handheld meter, or use a 35mm camera whose meter you know and trust. I have several meters and I still check exposure this way, from time to time. Invest also in a Bay 1 lens hood, a shutter release cable, and a sturdy tripod. Although this camera is nearly 50 years old, its still well supported. It is NEVER a mistake to invest in a vintage Rollei shooter! Get it serviced, load it with film and let it inspire you. You'll be glad you did-

James,

 

A BIG difference? I doubt it.

 

Besides the improved TTL metering (and a better meter itself) and what is likely to be an improved screen (assuming you still have the original in your 3.5F) I'm thinking the only optical difference would be improved image quality wide open, due to the 2.8GX's faster lens. A good argument could be to save yourself many hundreds (thousands?) and get your 3.5F fully serviced and CLA'd. If the lens is clear, its one of the better ones out there...including the new tack.

 

Another argument could be made for reliability; the new camera is, well....*new* and that is definitely worth something. Some vintage Rollei's are better than others, and I suppose the same holds true for the new models. I could part with any of my old Automat's; except one. The special one. If your 3.5F is a similar kind of shooter, it makes no sense to replace it with something else. You run the risk of spending large amounts of money and going backwards. If your really serious about improved image quality, why not make the jump to large format? You can get a very decent used 4x5 for half the cost of a 2.8GX. Oh, by the way James; I doubt your 3.5F is from 1955. According to my resourse material, the first 3.5F (Type 1) was introduced in February of 1959...right about the time I was introduced.

Last summer, I gave a friend of mine (who is a very successful author and professional photographer using 35mm) a nice Yashica A that I'd won very cheaply with a lucky bid on eBay. With case and caps, it was a complete system that cost under $60.00 (but like I said, I was lucky). Since then, my friend has played around with it and is impressed with its ability to produce exceptional images. Now, he's told me he's looking for a Hasselblad or Rollei TLR/SLR. Rest assured, the Yashica A is very "decent" although no TTL metering! Your friends daughter can use her Nikon for that, or find a nice hand held. This is a very simple, sturdy camera with lovely optics that is simply magical with skin and earth tones. Trust me, she'd love it and after seeing the images, would probably keep it forever.

Tim, I recently purchased via eBay bid a Yashicaflex with the 80mm f3.5 Heliotar. I did a small amount of research on this before I got it and discovered it wasn't nearly as rare as I thought it was. However, I do believe that it was the first production Yashica TLR, produced around 1956 according to Mike at Pacific Rim Camera, a true vintage camera expert. Yashicaflex's differed from the later 'Mats, and used levers for f-stop and shutter speed controls instead of the Rollei-like wheels near the lens cluster. Is the Heliotar a early version of the Yashikor? Most likely.

 

The Yashica B is a true mystery camera, even to those lucky enough to have one. It seems to be a true mix of the humble "A" and the "C" model that came after it. Most agree that it was never offered in the USA, but consider that Yashica first offered the A/C/D models in 1957-58, and it stands to reason the "B" was probably hatched right around then too. It is really difficult nailing down a definitive time line with Yashica -or any other Japanese camera maker- from this period, because either they didn't keep detailed records of this stuff, or they never released it to the public. My friend David Foy (who has a Yashica B) has been working on this for years. The coreya/yashica/tlrhist page is the best I've seen actually, with real information provided by Yashica themselves.

Roger, perhaps your under the impression that because some long time Rolleiflex TLR users don't desire a 2.8GX, that they somehow dislike the camera or think its inferior to previous Rollei's. Speaking for myself, I regularly make pictures with 2 different early 50's Automat's, and -frankly- don't need anything else from a TLR that these units can't deliver. Of course, I try my hardest to stay between f5.6-f16, and in these focal length's a 2.8 offers no advantage. I did search for a TLR that uses 220 film, and now have two of those as well (Yashica 124-Autocord CdS-III) purchased at (I'm sure) a small percentage of what a GX would cost. Even used.

 

That said, I'd love a GX for myself! If it happens, I'll gladly use and enjoy it, for I'm sure it's a wonderful unit. Rollei ownership is almost a brotherhood, and I've never bought into the "keeping up with the Jones'" way of thinking. If I never buy another Rolleiflex TLR, I'll still have camera's that will always be better than I am. I've never met a Rollei TLR I didn't like.

Jason, its been my finding that qualified camera repairmen are those with the tools, experience and a working knowledge of camera basic's. What I'm trying to say, is most TLR's are basically the same inside with regards to the quality of components installed, and detailed lay-out differences. I've used Harry Fleenor to overhaul a sick SL35M Rollei, and purchased another camera (a "X" model Automat) that he had recently rebuilt. Both camera's work perfectly (in the SL/M's case, as good as possible. What a piece of crap) but his prices are "Rollei inspired" which is to say, higher than any other repair firm I've used. Paul Ebel in Wisconsin isn't "known" as a Rollei specialist, but I'm convinced that he is as good -if not better- than any MF or LF camera (and lens) repairman currently offering these services. He's repaired/serviced Rollei's, Minolta Autocord's, Yashica's and even a battered Kalloflex for me. He has a parts inventory for all of these brands as well. His prices are fair, he's friendly and easy to talk with and truly loves vintage equipment. He's my man. Harry is friendly and knowledgeable too, with vast experience and training with Rolleiflex cameras. Who to choose? I'd go with Paul Ebel...but I'd send my Rollei to Harry in a heartbeat if I needed to. It's a win-win situation.

 

Once again, I've never used Ross Yerkes, but several "MF Digest" members that I truly respect have, and rave about the guy. Based on that I'd trust him with any TLR repair service. I have a couple of TLR's here that could use a good looking over...I may just send him one to open the lines of communication. He sounds super.

 

I haven't even mentioned Mark Hama in Georgia...

A good place to sell Rollei equipment is on the "RUG" (Rollei User Group)e-mail list, hosted by Marc James Small:

 

msmall@roanoke.infi.net

 

Email Marc for subscribing information. It a good list, and I enjoy it. Friday is the only day allowed to post "for sale" items, which I think is a great idea.

 

It was "in vogue" for awhile to hate eBay, but its not going away any time soon. The real advantage is seeing a .jpg of the item listed, which you can't do with a normal ad...unless you have a picture of the item stored on your hard drive that you can send to interested parties. Without a doubt, the better the presentation the more you'll get for your item. Rollei's seem to do very well on eBay.

With wedding season coming up, this is a good discussion to get into!

 

I've now shot lot's of weddings, and carefully listen to the advice of those who have done more. I think the worst thing that can happen is a photographer shoots a few successful weddings, then gets over-confident and starts getting sloppy and careless. These rules I always try to remember: Be Confident, Be Careful, Be Prepared.

 

I never choose a wedding as a time to be cute or try experimenting! I take my trusted shooter's (Minolta Autocord, Pentax K1000/Minolta SRT) and their backup's (Yashica A/D, Rolleiflex MX for outside portraits because the screen is too dim for indoors) and carefully load each camera with film after checking to make sure the shutters are firing and everything is working correctly. With 4 or 5 TLR's and 2 or 3 35mm SLR's, I know I'll get through. This might be overkill, but I've never blown a wedding yet! I make sure both flashes (Sunpak 522 & 555) have fresh batteries and spare PC cords, and take plenty of film. I check the tripod's, check my gear cases...check everything! I use 35mm for motion shots (bride coming down the isle, dancing) and the TLR's for the portraits, but back everything up with 35mm. Something has to turn out. I normally use Fuji Reala and Kodak Porta 160VC in both 120 and 135.

 

After going over the ceremony with the bride and groom (or wedding planner) I study the church and reception area, take meter readings and jot down notes for later. I also list what the bride wants in the way of photos beforehand, and keep those notes in my pocket too. If I don't like where the wedding cake is, I'll insist it be moved, I also insist on a pleasing location to take the portraits after the ceremony. I might be a royal pain in the ass, but they won't remember that; they will only remember how nice the photo's look as the years go by.

 

Flirt with the bride! Get her to "glow" and laugh, it really makes a difference. Make sure you get across the message that this is a special day, and your honored to be there. I talk with my customers a lot during the shoot, and I've remained friends with many of them.

 

Let's review: Use only the camera's and equipment your most comfortable with and check it once, twice, or more. Study and make notes on where you'll be and what the couple wants, be pushy if you have to be, but remain calm and put on a happy face. Enjoy yourself (or look like you are, even if your working your butt off) and set your talent free...you wouldn't be there if you didn't enjoy photography in the first place.

 

Bad things still happen sometimes. Once, I completely blew the wedding bands/hands close-up's. I must of had the flash head tilted or something, because I had a bad vertical shadow down the middle of the groom's hand. My wife (and wedding shoot partner) took the print and scanned it, fixed it on Photoshop and printed it out on Epson photo paper. She then put the photo on the front of their proof book in a heart shaped cardboard cutout. They never knew! And they loved the way it looked.

 

Good luck in the up-coming wedding season everyone!

Good, useable advice...if this were 1965. Where have you seen *any* user Automat's for $100? Even the pre-flash sync Automat's are fetching more than that. Then again, if I was to run across and Rollei TLR for $100 I'm not sure if I'd want it. Its worth more than that for parts alone.

 

The Ricoh? Sure, why not. Its a good camera, although I haven't had much luck with them. I'm not sure you could find one of those for $100 either...

This has been an interesting discussion.

 

It seems to me what your after is a good, durable, affordable TLR. That means you should try to find a knob-wind Yashica; an A, C, or D model. I have several of each version, and they are as reliable as a rock with decent, sometimes inspiring optics. Email me privately David, perhaps I can help you.

 

I disagree with the advice of finding a newer Yashica 124G. These camera's fell off quality-wise as production neared its end. They were very "plasticly" with nasty screens and noisy winds. The "regular" YashicaMat 124 is a better camera, IMHO. Minolta Autocord's, Rollei Automats, and that 124 will be more expensive, and when you factor in the cost of a CLA that might put you over budget. I've carried a Yashica C in my truck for over 5 years (and I live in Arizona!) with nary a problem, and found it on eBay for $60.00. Its a good bit better than any of the modern TLR's available, with enough quality in the build/optics to foster genuine respect and pride.

Hi everyone,

 

My situation is I travel to many of my photo shoots via motorcycle;

usually with one TLR (Rollei or Minolta) and 1 or 2 35mm SLR bodies,

a couple of lenses (a 55mm and a 135mm tele) a small tripod, and

enough room for hoods, a shutter release cable and film. This set-up

usually gets the needed results, but I often find I need a flash. My

problem: Vibration and road shock has destroyed several small

electronic flashes I've used in the past, plus I've never been happy

with the results I've gotten using a small strobe with the TLR's.

Would a blub-flash system work for me? My thinking is the simple

construction of the bulb-flash unit could survive, and I think with

careful packing the bulbs would remain intact as well. Which flash

body/bracket would you recommend? What effect does bulb flash have on

chrome film, and what techniques are used for outside fill flash? Any

tips, hints, or suggestions?

Congrats on the purchase of the MX Paul; Their great camera's and a wonderful compliment to your Autocord.

 

MFD list member Murray Twelves bought a MX on eBay with a brighter than stock screen fitted by the PO. He sent me the camera a few months ago for a look, and compared to the stock screen's in my Automat's there was no comparison. Now, get this: He sent Paul Ebel a couple of his Autocord's (I believe) for Maxwell screen's and related there was quite an improvment over the bright screen in his MX. That should tell you just how good the Maxwell screen is. I'm sold.

 

I don't have a Rolleifix attachment, but wish I did. When I use my larger Bogen tripod's, I screw the quick release to the bottom of the camera, but I wish I had a better way with the Tilt-All I usually carry. The 'Fix may be the answer.

 

There are several different leather cases for Rollei's I've discovered; the case for the non-sync Automat's is smaller than one for the MX-MX-EVS models, and that case is smaller than the unit for the E's and F's...not to mention the 2.8's. You just about have to buy a case from someone who know exactly what it fits. Ask me how I know...

 

Finally, Bay-1 caps are easy to find. I too bought into the stock of *new* Autocord caps that was on eBay recently, and those should work fine (Autocord caps were offered in plastic AND aluminum, btw). My favorite Bay-1 cap is a mirrored Ricoh unit that is a copy of the Rolleiflex cap, it fits my Rollei MX better than the one that came on it! Searching eBay should turn up more lens caps than you'll ever need.

Jeffery, I have 5 (going on 6) Autocords of various vintage as well, and have not encountered this situation. To my way of thinking, this would be intolerable trying to remember to over-expose with one certain camera, and not having to deal with the problem with the rest of them. Have you visually inspected/compared the f-stop openings on the Autocord with the problem (with another Autocord that you know is correct) to be certain it isn't a shutter speed issue? At any rate, the camera needs to be adjusted again...may I suggest Paul Ebel in Wisconsin?

David, I find your findings and comments both fascinating and informative. I have been trying (as time and finances allow) to collect all four "popular" Rollei lens types in search of the "best" for a few years now. I have tried all you mentioned except the Xenotar and profess to many of the same conclusions; The sharpest, most pleasing of the bunch I have is a early 50's MX model with a Jena-Tessar. Totally rebuilt, serviced and CLA's by Paul Ebel in Wisconsin. I will admit to not having tried any of the 2.8 models on a consistant basis, but I'm sure I'll get to that someday soon. As all of my TLR's share Bay I accessories, the 3.5's are most attractive and desired. Simply put; Its hard to imagine better sharpness or a more plesasing image coming from any other lens or camera combo in MF...although I enjoy searching out different camera's and lenses when I'm not working. I also have a Minolta Autocord that performs in similiar fashion, leaving me the challange of improving *my* technique and abilities, without worrying about finding a better lens or camera.

A minimal amount of internet surfing turned this up:

 

http://www.camera-service.ch/

 

I've never used this person for service, but there is a provision on the web page to write and ask questions. Good luck.

Something like the 2.8E2 might suit you well Michael. Although it isn't 220 capable, it does have a removable hood and a self timer, and most (I assume) came without a meter. Should be had for a lot less than a 2.8F, while still gving the same image quality. A pal sent me a contact sheet taken with a 2.8E2/Schneider and I was blown away by the quality. He promissed me first dibs when it becomes available!