nolan woodbury

In 1937 Rolleiflex updated the "Automatic 6x6" into the camera that closely resembles all Rollei TLR's that came after it. It wasn't until Rolleiflex released the "Rolleiflex Automat II (better known as the "X") in late 1949 that a standard flash sync port, located on the lower left hand corner of the lens board, was added. After that, all Rollei TLR's came standard with a PC flash sync, starting with the Automat MX. I actually have an Automat Rolleiflex (Type II) with a mechanical flash-trip attachment added to the lens board near the shutter release port...I have no idea how it once worked as I don't have the remainder of the flash unit to compare, though I'm positive it was for a bulb flash. Rolleicords? The first model to have standard flash sync was the 1950 Rolleicord III (Type 1) and like the 'Flex's, all models released afterward were like-fitted. That Rolleicord III was a pretty neat camera; seperate PC/shutter release ports, plus a choice of either the Zeiss Triotar or the Schenider Xenar. This information came from the "Collectors Guide To Rollei Cameras" by Arthur Evans. ISBN # 0-931838-06-1

Your going from one spectrum (ultra modern whiz-bang 35mm) to the other (full manual TLR) but that's great. I'm sure you'll enjoy yourself getting into photography "basics".

 

In reality Brendan, you can pick almost any working Rollei from the 1937 Automat on up. I know one fellow who shoots with a Rollei "Old Standard" from the early 30's and produces great photographs with it. With old TLR's, the glass (especially the taking lens) is everything. Repeat: The taking lens is 98% of the battle; if its good, chances are the other parts of the camera can be repaired or saved. Rollei's especially, where great production numbers produced more parts and parts cameras. If you start low you can find a nice Rolleiflex MX (sync) with either a Tessar or Xenar (both are great) or a newer Rollei T with a removable top for fitting an eye-level prism. The 3.5E/F and 2.8 series are great camera's that won't come cheap, but you get what you pay for. You'll need a good meter (your Canon would work great for this) a shutter release cable, a lens hood and tripod. That should get you started. Check the MFD archives for more information on different Rollei's, and other great TLR's like the Minolta Autocord, YashicaMat, Mamiya C2/3 ect. Good luck!

Although the Graflex appears to be a tidy, well made camera its limited in comparison to either the Rolleicord, or the Rolleiflex. No Bay mounts for attachments or filters and a red window instead of a counter, among other things. I've never owned a Rolleicord, but do have 'Flex's with both the Xenar and Tessar. The very best of my bunch has a Tessar but its close, as all of them are excellent. If you were adding to a collection or just experimenting, I'd say try the Graflex and let us know how it does, but if your looking for your first serious MF shooter -or your first TLR- the Rolleiflex is the clear choice. It is (most certainly) optically superior, very well made, and is backed by several excellent technicians that I personally know of, and there are many more. Buy the Rolleiflex.

Thom, here is a site with info on the Ricohflex:

 

http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/ricoh6a.html

 

I try not to be too critical of any camera, but I've got a couple of these and I never use them. Although they seem to be constructed fairly well they lack good user "feel"...although the image quality seems to be acceptable, but not magical. My advice is to search out any used Yashica TLR if your looking for a bargin medium format camera; even the lowest priced "A" model is a much nicer camera to use, hold and own. Next on the price scale would be the higher letter series Yashica's (C,D, even a 12 or 635) and then the higher priced (but sharper optically) 'Mat's, Minolta Autocord's, Rolleicord's and 'Flex's. If it were me (and I realize its not, but I'm an old hand at this bargin camera stuff) try to bypass the "iffy" shooters and go for a quality used TLR first. For around $250 you can find great TLR's that will astound you with the quality of their images, and thus you'll be more inclined to pick up others and try them out. The best I've found? Minolta Autocord, Rolleiflex Automat (X, MX, MX-EVS) YashicaMat and Kalloflex. Buy the Ricohflex and turn it into a shelf-rat. That's how mine serve their time.

Your problem is very common Pete. Any lube gets thicker as temps drop, but your Yashica should work perfectly in any temperature you can stand to take pictures in. There is no "simple" fix except to carefully pack it in a box, then pack *that* box in another one and send it to either Mark Hama or Paul Ebel. You can easily find their contact info in the MFD Digest archives, or email me directly. As for the shutter cable question, I also use a SRT Minolta (great, aren't they?) and all my cables work in every camera I have...you should take your Yashica to any well stocked camera store and try a few out; if none of them work, you have more problems. One more thing: The cable doesn't have to screw-in all the way to work correctly, two or three turns (with some threads still exposed) is normal. Talk to Mark, or Paul and get your Yashica working correctly.

All too common of a problem Perry, but there are a couple of ways around it.

 

Erik, I use a couple of Sunpak units for portable flash; a 555 and a 521 with the thyristor bounce flash attachment and the Sunpak L-bracket. This bracket is groved, so the nut (and camera) can be slid away from the handle of the flash. I'd rather have a higher quality Metz, but the Sunpak has proven to be pretty reliable and durable. I still carry both, just to be sure. You can find a slew of em' on eBay, or search the B&H catalog.

I'd like to think just about every format of camera has certain advantages, but I got into TLR's because I could get the big negitive without having to pay the premium price for a modern SLR system, and because since I travel by motorcycle on many of my shoots, its pretty easy to pack one or two TLR's along with a 35mm SLR and a couple of lenses. Afterwards, I learned the format has some distinct advantages in terms of basic photographic principals; fixed lens notwithstanding.

 

For me, TLR's are perfect for the photography I love; vintage motorcycles. Its a low pressure environment that lets me compose and pose my subjects at my leisure (usually) so what's important to me is image quality. I've managed to compile enough vintage TLR's to make a pretty good comparison between the most popular fixed lens camera's available (Rollei, Minolta, Yashica, Ricoh, even the Kalloflex) and I certainly confess to having my favorites. I don't have one single Rolleiflex that doesn't produce outstanding images- Xenar, Tessar... all are inspiring in their quality. Even the old pre-sync Automats are super and the quality of the Rollei chassis is enjoyable to handle. The Minolta's are simply awesome in their ability to draw the subjects from the frame with sharpness and incredible contrast. What seems to be important now is reliability and ease of use during the shoot. The simple pull knob on the Autocord is great for quick film changes, and loading is a snap because I can keep the camera on the tripod. The Kalloflex is an interesting piece; odd in many different ways but totally overbuilt and rugged. The Kowa lens is superb but its little things; like the placment of the left side shutter release button (no vignetting from the shutter release cable) that has me using it more and more. The dark screen's on the Automat's keep me from using them at indoor weddings and such, but the aftermarket has solved that problem nicely. My conclusion? I like them all, but some better than others. When pushed, I'd have to say I'm a "Autocordfan"

 

Nice to see David's name in this forum as he's a real source of information regarding vintage camera's, especially TLR's. He's also the only guy I know with a model B Yashica! Hey man, how about spreadin' the wealth? :-)

No need to make or modify anything Jonathan, an adapter is readily available and is known as a Nikon adapter or cable release. Like this one on eBay:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=497514525

 

I don't even unscrew the nut on the front of the cable release button, as there are usually enough threads exposed to carefully screw the adapter on. Buy this one, or visit any well stocked camera store.

Mark, info for your Yashica 12 can be found here:

 

http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/yashica12.html

 

And here:

 

http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/yashica24.html

 

Basically, the Yashica 12 was a brother double with the Yashica 24; The 12 takes 120 film, and the 24 both 220, and 120 as well although some report problems getting 120 film to work in the 24. I've never owned one of these Yashica models, so I'm going by second hand knowledge. Here is the rundown on the Yashica 12, cut and pasted from the "rmonagha" site:

 

***

120 film (12 exposures) 80mm YASHINON f2.8 viewing lens 80mm YASHINON f3.5 taking lens standard Bayonet 1 mount (Bay 1) accessories* COPAL-SV shutter, speeds of 1 second to 1/500 second plus B single motion rapid film advance and shutter cocking self-timer flash synch CdS meter (battery powered) accessories: lens cap, strap, hard leather case * standard to Rolleicord, Rolleiflex, Yashica Mat, and similar TLRs.

***

 

With the 80mm Yashinon 4-element Tessar-type lens, you should expect superb image quality and grainless enlargments even past 16x20. The only catch *could* be battery replacment- I hate batteries, and that is why I removed them from the YashicaMat 124 I own, and use a hand held meter. The CdS metering in this camera could be very accurate. Simply put, its a fine camera that will allow you to capably explore your photographic vision in medium format.

I've been thinking about this question since it was posted. I have a Kalloflex TLR that suffered a similar problem (although not as dramatic) and the cause was a mis-alignment between the taking lens and the finder. I suspect that is the case with Christina's Yashica.

 

Todd, your suggestion about the ground glass was solid, but the Yashica A's finder is fastened to the lens board via fine threads, and (at least on mine) there is no set/adjustment screw on the assembly. The finder is in its correct position screwed (and possibly shimmed, on some units) so the threads bottom out and the barrel is tight against the ground hub on the lens board. I would suggest checking this alignment but do so carefully; these are very fine and easy to cross-thread.

 

Again, Todd is correct in stating that the Yashica A is affordable to replace. $75.00 isn't a bad deal, but I've gotten good ones on eBay (before things got crazy) for even less.

I like Jeff Drew's answer; put some film through it and see what you think! But seeing as this is one of my very favorite cameras, I'd enjoy a chance to comment.

 

Advantages: Affordable way to get into 6x6 medium format. Very easy and enjoyable to operate. The Yashikor triplet doesn't offer Tessar-like corner to corner sharpness, but does a wonderful job on candid portraits and landscapes. A "warm" lens that gives a very forgiving/flattering smoothness to skin-tones. All Yashica TLR have a PC port as well, so you can use an electronic flash...rare for a budget camera of this vintage. Very rugged and reliable; the shutter cocks manually and you advance the film via a red window. Not a camera to use if your in a big hurry unless your well practiced. Parts are plentiful and cheap.

 

Dis-advantages: A budget-like offering of f-stops and shutter speeds. Very dark finding lens and focusing screen. No bay mounts for attaching hoods, filters, or close-up lenses (although Yashica offered attachments, I believe they are rare and difficult to source) And I think any TLR without a drilled and tapped shutter button is a hassle.

 

All things considered, the Yashica A is a camera for the photographer looking to get back to his/her roots with a minimum of frills and gadgets. If you enjoy photography, you'll probably enjoy the Yashica A. I'll include this link to a picture I took with one of my Yashica A's; Shot in the high Arizona desert January 1st. 1999 using Fuji Reala 120 print film. 1/100th @ f8. Not bad for a 40 year old cheapie.

 

http://www.motoguzzi.be/pictures/nw_9_99/NW_99_9.jpg

I'll go with Don and Brian here and suggest a old Yashica TLR.

 

I've been carring a beater Yashica C in my pick-up for nearly 5 years now and careful as I try to be, it still ends up rolling around under the seat now and again. Never a problem with it, but if the Yashica TLR has one weakness, its the wind/film advance/shutter cocking mechanism. The "letter series" (A, C, D) don't have that feature, so their more reliable, but not as sharp. I've always fancied building a nice sheet aluminum or even a plywood TLR case for really tough duty, and it wouldn't be that hard.

 

Yeah, the Autocord's are tough...as is the Kalloflex. Trouble is, I'm too protective of them to risk any kind of damage! Minolta isn't offering the 'Cord anymore you know...

I'm a bit confused about your question Marc, as I'm unsure if your refering to inside the film chamber, or inside the viewfinder.

 

In either case, I would not worry about paint loss or wear. I would discourage any attempt at brush painting or spraying any part of your Autocord's interior unless your a seasoned pro...especially if its a good working shooter. Many old TLR's have this type of wear, just accept it as part of its character. I can understand restoring the exterior finish of this handsome camera; the leatherette, glossy black paint and many other invaluble supplies can be found here:

 

http://www.fargo-ent.com/index.html

 

Fargo also has an excellent mail order catalog as well. I recommend it to anyone with vintage cameras or collectables.

Todd, this is really a tough one! Usually in that situtation I'd use 35mm. with a 55 and 135mm lenses and 200 asa film, but I don't work for a studio and I shoot what I want. If I need to capture low light scenes on 6x6, I'd try to move the subjects (assuming you talking the bride and groom here, or some variation) to an area of the floor where the light is better and ask the subjects to slow down and "pose" or just have somebody turn the lights up! I'm a "PITA" when shooting a wedding or function, but my clients are usually very happy with the prints and quickly forget how demanding I was during the ceremony or reception. Especially after the years pass and all they have to remember the event is the photo's, video, and memories themselves. That said, practice is very good advice, as is getting rid of as much stray or distracting light in the viewfinder as possible. Hey, if I can do it with an old Automat with the original screen (otherwise know as the "black hole") you can do it with the C330. Of course, my back up plan is to always shoots loads of frames and bracket. Something has to turn out!

John,

 

According to Authur Evans in his book "Collectors Guide To Rollei Cameras", the specs for the Rolleiflex T (Type 3) show a 220 film counter. Now, I don't know why Rollei would fit a counter for 1-24 frames if the camera would not accept 220 film, but anything is possible I suppose. The text did mention Honeywell never imported the camera to the USA. Has anyone ever seen one of these models?

Steve, you need to contact the good folks at Pacific Rim Camera:

 

http://www.pacificrimcamera.com/catalog/bz11.htm

 

Just surf back to the main page for ordering information. These are good guys, and they will help you out.

Although I've never delt with them personally, I have read many times in this forum buyers praising KEH for both sales and service. I would assume you could buy with confidence. By the way; some later Rollei T's offered the choice of using both 120/220, and I simply love the side-facing PC and shutter ports. A quality 3.5T for under $400 isn't a bad deal.

Edward, this is one of those times when you really can't go wrong; either by choosing the MX-EVS, a Rollei T, or a Yashica 124G...unless the camera you purchase has problems or needs serviced. The MX-EVS model is nearly 50 years old, and while they are wonderful shooters, expect to pay something extra if the unit hasn't been serviced in the last two decades or so. The "T" is rumored to have an "improved" version of the Tessar lens and while that is great, its the more modern chassis with removable hood that makes this camera a really attractive proposition. Still, a heavily used T -while being a newer camera- is no less likely to need less work than anything else. Who is offering these camera's is actually more important than the differences between them. Personally, at this point I'm more inclined to purchase Rolleiflex models over the others (except Minolta Autocord's) because of their value and parts availablity. If the glass is clean, the back is tight, the shutter is reasonably accurate, and the wind is operating correctly they will both shoot fantastic images, on most any available 120 film. Who would have thunk it!? A potential MF buyer bypassing the more "expensive" Yashica for a Rolleiflex!! Surely, the end of the age is near...

Here's my experience with comparing Roger, for what its worth.

 

I shoot with several MF TLR's; Rollei, Minolta, Yashica, Ricoh, even Kalloflex. My best shooter (out of 40 or so use-able TLR's) is a late 50's Minolta Autocord, unmetered. A comparable camera is a Rollei Automat Model X, and MX, both with Tessar lenses. About two years ago, I rented a Hassy 500CM with the standard 80mm Planar, and shot it next to my Autocord, pointed at a vintage Ducati single in warm, late afternoon light. The images from both camera's were very good, shot between f5.6 to f11. The best images came from the Autocord, shot at f11, the best images at f5.6 came from the Hassy. I determained in low light, the Hassy worked better, but the Minolta produced the best overall images. The Hassy with the A12 back and lens was $1200. I bought the Minolta for $105. Both camera's are comparable with the 2.8 Planar, although friends with 2.8's claim the Xenotar is sharper yet. Film flatness? Way overblown. Anyone who leaves a roll of film in a camera for 2 weeks can't be very concerned about image quality.

Ditto for Paul Ebel.

 

A lifesaver for those inflicted with vintagecameraitis...

 

Paul Ebel Lens Service

W230 Terrace St. Box 86

Spring Valley, Wisconsin 54767

(715) 778-4372

Not sure what you mean by a "new" Tiltall, but I've been using one for years, and have been very happy with it. I also have several other nice tripods available (like a Bogen 3040 with a 3047 tilt/swivel head, mostly for LF use) but the Tiltall strikes a nice compromise between the super heavy six tube Bogen, and lighter, cheezier units. Although the camera's I use on my Tiltall are smaller than your Koni 6x7 (mostly Minolta and Rollei TLR's) I have several other photo-friends who use the Tiltall with their modern SLR's (like the Mamiya RZ67) with great success. The threaded collars are a bit harder to tighten down than a wing-nut style tensioner or cam locks (OTOH, they won't break on you either) but even at full extension it remains steady...even in wind. For weddings and such, the set-up is fast and the tilt/swing head is a gem. Mine was pretty used/abused when I bought it, but after years of my own brand of torture it remains tight and trouble free. The sign of a great tripod? Its the one thats scratched, chipped and used looking. My Tiltall fits that description perfectly.

I can answer one part of this question better than the other half...as my experience with the Mamiya is limited; the C330F I owned briefly was so beat, I gave it to a friend with much more free time to devote to it than I had to offer.

 

Personally, if this is your first MF camera, I'd suggest the Rollei. Which one? Well, the "newer" models (3.5 E, F, Rollei T and 2.8's E2 and F's as well) offer removable hoods and newer glass, both Xenotar and Planar lenses, and the "T" a modern version of the wonderful Tessar. You'll spend for the honor of owning one of these gems, but the memory of the high cost will dissapear when you get your slides or proofs back.

 

Older models, like the X, MX, and MX-EVS are what I use and can be had for less, but often require repairs or other service to get them ready for serious duty. These units come with either Tessar, Jena Tessar, or Xenar lenses and all are excellent, providing the glass is clean with no fungus, damage, or seperation. With these models, expect to pay around $250 or less, and factor in another $200 for service, more with a bright screen installed. Funny, it seems no matter what you buy that magical figure of $500 is just about what you have into a machine that is bought ready to go, or the total cost of a camera after repairs and service. Ask me how I know?

 

Finally, the Rollei is much smaller and easier to carry than the big Mamiya, and I find my shooting chores are met very well with a simple 75mm or 80mm lens. The good news? No matter what unit you choose, you'll have a great camera, capable of superior images. Good luck!

As my vocation is shooting vintage and special interest motorcycles, I choose both. My TLR's (Minolta, Rollei) all have 75 or 80mm fixed lenses and serve my needs well, either shooting straight on, or at an angle where I need to stop down to adjust DOF. My 35mm equipment is used mostly for detail work with either 28 or 50mm lenses. I'd hate to choose, but since the majority of my portrait work is done with TLR's I guess they would be preferred. I think "nuts and bolts" in terms of photography; and view 35mm as not only a different format but back-up gear to my MF camera's as well.

To heck with the naysayers Khki! If you have a chance to purchase and shoot through one of these beauties, do it! Sure, its a sizable investment (and I'd have it throughly checked out before plonking out the greenbacks) but its a Tele Rollei man! Visions of that camera, and the Super Wide keep me awake at night. Image quality? You have to ask?

I understand your situation Anthony. I'm a person usually ready, willing and (sometimes) able to spend far more on a junk TLR than its worth, just because I gain an emotional attachment to it. Just the word "Kalloflex" makes my eye twitch and causes my hand to reach for the checkbook...

 

Still, Mark Hama is a very reasonable and trustworthy camera tech. His quotes are usually somewhat below the other repairmen I've used, so my conclusion is that you must have one sick Yashica there. If you have say, $350 invested in the camera after the repairs, consider that is a fraction of what a newer SLR system would cost...although you could buy a nice Rollei, Minolta or Mamiya TLR for that, and maybe get some change. Problem: You have a junker, or parts Yashica... what do you do with that? I say bite the bullet, have Mark fix it and enjoy many trouble free years of shooting. If you want to get another estimate, try here:

 

Paul Ebel Lens Service

W230 Terrace Street. Box 86

Spring Valley, WI. 54767

(715) 778-4372