thomas_diekwisch1

... did you notice that Jim's only question he didn't answer himself was about the late 150mm Xenotar? I am just wondering: how late is late?

I have fallen in love with the Pentax 645 NII. A photographer's camera. A shooter's camera. Everything so nice, convenient, and easy. Superb lenses. A 600mm/5.6. A 150mm/2.8. A range of 67 lenses to adapt. Fast and secure autofocus. And the cheapest one. OK, I know about the digital and the filmback issue, but I decided to get one anyway. And I am happy with it!

The Horseman would be an excellent first choice, e.g. with the 45mm Grandagon. The only problem with the Horseman is that the viewfinder is not that accurate at times and you might cut off tops or bottoms. The lens is outstanding and the camera very convenient to use. Please note that considering the angle of the 45mm lens, the Horseman allows you much greater perspective adjustments than the Fuji, since Fuji's 50mm doesn't allow all the movements and only the 65mm is the first lens with the full set of movements.

 

I have found the Russian 45mm Shift lens for rollfilm SLRs a good alternative if you want to control your image via SLR finder. It is adapted for many brands including Pentacon breach lock.

Thanks, Dale. I just can't believe there isn't more enthusiasm over this camera. Where are all those square enthusiasts? If there is any camera out there that continues this heritage, the Rollei 6008AF is it!

I have found it to be a very good lens. It has served me better than my Rollei-made 5.6/250mm Sonnar. The neat thing about it is its 4.0 opening. Even though slightly less superb at 4.0, this aperture is ideal for focusing and good enough for the occasional shot. This lens doesn't compare to my 4.0/300mm Schneider APO Tele-Xenar though. For a good comparison see http://www.pentaconsix.btinternet.co.uk/240_300mm.htm which also shows that this is a very good lens.

Most recently, I have really enjoyed using a Pentax 645nII with the 150mm/2.8 AF for portraits. Handles like 35mm.

... and then there is of course also the elusive V-finder which is a little bit of everything: fixed, allows for both vertical and horizontal position, as well as rigid normal magnification viewing. It's light as well. If can still find one. Anyway, I guess they are not for your regular application even though I can't see why not.

David, thanks for the post. I have the 45mm and I am pondering whether to get the 35mm or the zoom. I'd love to see your results.

The 2x converter together with the standard lens is fine.

I'd like to positively comment on improvements on treatment of professional photographers in the 911 aftermath. In the first couple of months, the whole thing was completely out of control, with the same people who were doing it prior to 911 but just in altered state of mind doing the inspection. People with guns in reach who shouldn't...

 

Meanwhile, there has been a real improvement in terms of personnel. People actually able to speak English, know what a camera is and how it looks like, etc.. I am sure salaries went up, and we are paying, but I am all for it.

 

I recommend sticking with one airline, and possibly upgrading to frequent flyer status. American has been real good at organizing their security, at least for me. No affiliations...

 

It comes down to mutual respect. You respect that they have to do their tests and calculate some extra time. I recommend complete compliance in terms of everything else - shoes, belts, etc.. In turn, I have received extremely courteous treatment, at least in the recent year.

David,

 

Go for it. No problem. Just mount the tubes between the converter and the lens. The 2x converter also doubles the magnification, everything else being equal. Thus, you'll have more working distance and higher magnification, which is what you want in many cases...

http://www.reichsbank-aktien-shop.de/historische-wertpapiere/Emil-Busch-AG-Optische-Industrie.html

 

You might find this link interesting.

On his Ctrades.com web site Mike also has a link for a really cool Rollei lens catalogue which includes additional info on some of the expected new AF lenses. Check it out: http://www.ctrades.com/catalog.pdf

 

Anyway, Mike, I'll get my AF from you soon!

No.

 

Rollei has its own EL line of lenses. The 50mm EL is actually quite good. It's the old version of the Distagon. They sell for about 2K.

 

Another option are older, non-PQ lenses. These sell for about $500 on ebay. A real bargain are the Mamiya/Tokina made Rolleigons (in your case the Rolleigon 50mm) which are outstanding. The disadvantage of the non-PQ lenses is a slight delay in shutter release function and a sound from the lens aperture prior to exposure. Both are minor though. If you want to safe, you can get the non-PQ versions for a steal. You still have more handling convenience than with many of the competitor 6x6 SLRs.

The Compact MRC is the better and current version. There are only very few performance differences between these lenses, except in optical construction, outer appearance, and weight. Here are the more significant:

 

The HM has f90 as smallest aperture, the Compact MRC has 64. The HM has a grey outside, the Compact MRC a black outside. The HM weights 1270g (2.8lbs) while the Compact MRC weights 916g (2lbs). Coverage, image circle, and exact focal length are pretty much the same. In a nutshell - it's 0.8lb difference in favor of the Compact MRC.

I'd side with Carl on this one.

I have a Mamiya 7II which is very similar to yours and I am very happy with it as well. Lenses, weight, etc.. As you are noting, it's not really a camera for Macro or close-up. Also, Macro becomes increasingly difficult with increased format, e.g. 6x7 is quite cumbersome. Thus I have decided on a Pentax 645 with a 120 Macro. This turned out to be a far better combination that it might seem. The Pentax is great for Macro and fast portrait while the Mamiya does everything else. The only disadvantage I can see are the two bodies, but both are quite light.

The other posters already mentioned that your choice should depend on your application. The SL66 is more versatile, including macro and other lenses etc., the TLR is the perfect camera for street and travel. I am not sure whether the SL66 is overpriced though - if the lens really is f/4 then it is the Distagon with central shutter which allows for studio flash etc.. In this case the price is as adequate as the TLR price, at least if the camera is in good condition.

... talking about communication...

 

There are three version of the Distagon, the first without FLE, the second with FLE, and a third, recent version only available for Hasselblad.

 

The second Zeiss and the Schneider are comparable in terms of quality. There are those who argue the Zeiss is better at certain f-stops and others speaking in favor of the Schneider. I have compared them both and found them to be absolutely equal in terms of overall optical quality. It escapes me though how anybody could choose the Zeiss over the Schneider. The Schneider is so much more convenient - smaller, lighter, faster, and FLE does not an require manual adjustment. It is the #1 choice medium format wide angle, suitable both for landscape and people photography.

 

All medium format wide angle lenses are less suitable for macro, partially because of correction, partially because of other reasons. Also here the Schneider wins out, but only marginally. It focuses slightly closer giving you more flexibility, even with extension ring(s). If you want to go really extreme you possibly could retromount the Schneider by reducing the 77mm filter to a 67mm that you would then adapt to the Bayonet VI of the retro adapter which would probably still be feasible for the Schneider more so than the Zeiss because of front lens diameter and overall dimensions.

I just can't believe that this debate is actually happening. It is my perception that many of the posters have rarely used a medium format camera hand-held. It's too bad that the Rolleis have received this "collecter's" status. To me, both the Wide and the Tele are immensely usable and practical tools. Why? For one, there won't be the SLR mirror slap. I'd bet that in most cases these TLRs will take much sharper pictures than their competitors for the simple reason of the lack of any mirror vibration. O.k., you are supposed to use a tripod, have arms like a robot, use flash or mirror-pre-release. But how many instances are there when you would like to have a nice hand-held medium format shot using a medium wide-angle or telephoto, or do a quick image on a tripod without doing everything to avoid vibration. Yes, 4K is a lot, but I'd bet that many of the readers of the forum would actually safe a lot of money for equipment by buying a Rolleiwide and a Rolleitele for less than 10K and comparing their images to their 20K medium format SLR system.

Reporting to ebay has little effect, even in serious fraud issues, at least IMHO.

Now I remember the name of Mike's shop (I am out of town right now): Ctrades.com. Anyway, the hood is well worth it since the 180 is very sensitive to stray light and it almost takes the Heliopan hood to take advantage of this extraordinary lens.

This is actually a very good question. The original Rollei hood for its $200 tag is heavy, clumsy, and inefficient. It is too short!

 

The Heliopan 95mm hoods are much better. A little cheaper, a little longer, less heavy, and better in terms of results. It gets rid of stray light better since it's narrower. Mike in LA has them.

Thanks Frank. You are right on three accounts: on the site, on the cameras, and on Bob's psychology...

Linhof's web site appears to be down for months already. Anybody

knows anything more about it?