ed_hoey

I just purchased a Rolleiflex 2.8GX Edition (1929-1989) and am extremely happy with my purchase. I was a little apprehensive because of the reviews knocking this "collectible version" of the GX camera, or the GX camera itself. Having used the earlier Rollei TLRs, I knew the high quality of those, however after many experiences trying to find older ones in decent shape I started to look at the GX (Also, after adding the costs of a CLA and better screen I was looking at $1500 for a user camera). I paid $1975 for this mint 60 Jahre Rollei. REVIEW: Solidly built, meter right on, not plasticy like reported, bright screen, smooth precise focusing, very good finish to metal and aligator leather, all controls smooth, half clicks for f-stops, easy on/off clip system for strap, place to put film box end on back to remind what's in the camera, easy to read depth of field numbers (yellow on gray), and focus range numbers Meters and Feet, white and green, viewing sport finder, interchangeable hood and screen, magnifier, bright viewing screen, viewing screen meter LED's. ASA dial is perfect, can't imagine how it will go off setting as reported since it is very positive and clicks in, spool knobs don't stay up - I don't care, I don't see how that matters. Don't know what reviewers are talking about with difficult loading - this is the easiest MF camera to load I've ever used (have used Mamiya 645, Fuji Rangefinders, Hasselblad, Pentax 67, older Rollei TLRs, Rollei 6008). Put the spool in, pull the tab to the other spool, wind the crank to line up the arrows to the marks, close cover!! thats it. Try loading a Hasselblad someday just for fun. How is it not like the 60's and 70's F? The film crank seems not quite as buttery smooth, and I like the dark baffle system in the film chamber of the older Rollei's better than the foam of this model, but thats it. This is a much better camera to actually use to shoot pictures with than any Rollei I've ever used, except the Rollie 6008 SRC Prof. model which is awesome too. The only thing wrong is that this version of the GX is so gosh darn beautiful I've been treating it like a baby afraid to mark it up, I bought it as a user because of the low relative price compared to a new GX, I'll have to get over it unless I find a user regular GX to beat up!! You won't be sorry if you buy any of the GX's if they all operate like this one.

Thanks everyone for all the great info in reply to my question, it's

been very helpful...

On the classic camera I'm told the shutter speed dial should be set to B to prevent the battery from draining. I keep putting it on B even when walking around, and may not use it for an hour or two....well, I don't think that is necessary....I'm thinking that it is only to prevent the battery from draining if the shutter is pressed in the bag or something...QUESTION: if the shutter dial is on any setting other than B is there a low current drain anyway through the electronics even if the shutter isn't pressed half way to activate the meter? I want to cause undue wear on the shutter speed dial from constantly putting to B for nothing....

 

<p>

 

thanks for any info you may have!

One of my favorite photographers used a Leica IIIc, M3's and R's:

Robert Doisneau

Film cameras are not going away anytime soon, or in the future. If

you think about what you need to go digital, an expensive camera, a

printer, a computer to edit the images....we're talking thousands of

dollars...this would cut out the majority of people just shooting

pictures at their 3 yr old's birthday party, with a $30 camera and a

roll of film and an hour at the local CVS. What about the disposable

cameras at the wedding tables? Don't get me wrong, I have a 3 yr old

digital camera I bought to sell items on ebay, and it's perfect for

that and for emailing a quick picture of something. However, I would

need many thousands of dollars to get the technical quality I can get

from 35mm or 120 roll film, PLUS I just plain like film!!! I want to

hold the pictures in my hand...and then I can enlarge what I

want...it also rubs me the wrong way for some reason the digitally

enhanced pictures, I'm a tradionalist I guess, I want to shoot the

picture - and if I captured some magic in that moment - so be it. I

don't want to change, colorize, enhance, add people...whatever after

I've tripped the shutter. Digital has a place and so does film - may

they co-exist forever.

Ed

How good is the original design of the 50 Summilux lens? I've read the history of the lens, and know that they redesigned it after only 2 yrs and why...and made the 1.4 and 2.0 better performing at the expense of medium aperture detail, etc...but what is never mentioned is how good is the lens overall? Also, since it is from the 1950's, does this particular lens glass prone to the yellowing of the earlier 1950's leica lenses? I recently purchased my first Leica M6, and having no lens to go out with my new camera I visited my local camera shop hoping to find a lens...to my good fortune he had a 50 Summilux from 1959. I was disappointed it wasn't the redesign from the mid-1960's, and almost didn't buy it, however it was so beautiful I bought it. It was just traded in by the original owner of the lens, who sold it back to this camera store to get a digital camera (the camera store has been selling Leica's since 1952 at the same location). Anyway, the lens came with the original Leica UVa filter, which has been covering the lens for the past 40 yrs, and the original XIOOM hood (which I found out later is very hard to find). So I layed down my $700. Being an older lens, I shined a flashlight thru the glass to check for yellowing or defects and it is perfectly clear, the focus is butterly smooth, as is the aperture control. The pictures are fabulous taken with the lens, however, I haven't done any "real" testing with chromes and a loupe, etc...and was wondering...I always hear experiences and lens tests, etc for all the other versions of the 50 Summilux, i.e. 60's, 70-90 and the newest one, but not the original 1959-62, does anybody know about the performance of this lens? I wonder how less of a performer it is compared to recent offerings??

I recently purchased my first Leica M6, and having no lens to go out

with my new camera I visited my local camera shop hoping to find a

lens...to my good fortune he had a 50 Summilux from 1959. I was

disappointed it wasn't the redesign from the mid-1960's, and almost

didn't buy it, however it was so beautiful I bought it. It was just

traded in by the original owner of the lens, who sold it back to this

camera store to get a digital camera (the camera store has been

selling Leica's since 1952 at the same location). Anyway, the lens

came with the original Leica UVa filter, which has been covering the

lens for the past 40 yrs, and the original XIOOM hood (which I found

out later is very hard to find). So I layed down my $700. Being an

older lens, I shined a flashlight thru the glass to check for

yellowing or defects and it is perfectly clear, the focus is butterly

smooth, as is the aperture control. The pictures are fabulous taken

with the lens, however, I haven't done any "real" testing with

chromes and a loupe, etc...and was wondering...I always hear

experiences and lens tests, etc for all the other versions of the 50

Summilux, i.e. 60's, 70-90 and the newest one, but not the original

1959-62, does anybody know about the performance of this lens? I

wonder how less of a performer it is compared to recent offerings??

Alex,

 

I just looked at my copy of Ernst Wildi, even though there isn't much on the different cameras available except spec sheets in the back on some of them, and there are only about 16 color photos in the book, it is packed with good info on medium format photography in its 290 pages, trade paper 6x9" book. It costs around $30.

I've have each of these books and have read all of them, so can comment on each. The 2 books by Roger Hicks and Frances Schultz are the same book. Every book I have read by these authors are excellent. However, this book has little information on the medium format, a large part of the book is on Large format photography and processing of film, so I wouldn't choose this particular book in this instance. The book by Lief Eriksenn is excellent, loaded with information on MF cameras and tons of pictures taken with different cameras, including hte Hasselblad, highly recommended and is the first book I bought for MF, and a bargain at $24.95. The Ernst Wildi medium format book is excellent, however not too much information about the different medium format cameras, and not many pictures at all. A good book to add to your collection later, but there are better books to get now. However, the Hasselblad manual by Ernst Wildi is excellent for the Hasselblad owner and is highly recommended, but is expensive at about $60 I think. Another book to consider if you're looking for another MF camera later on is: Medium Format Cameras:User's Guide to Buying and Shooting by Peter B. Williams $19.95 tons of information on all the MF cameras and lenses available...great book.

 

Ed Hoey

I've been offered the choice of new old stock, either a 6008 SRC 1000

or 6003 SRC 1000...I've researched all of the posts, but can't find a

direct comparison for these two older models...I'll be doing alot of

hand held street, and landscape photography, so don't really need the

mid-roll changing back of the 6008. The 6008 will cost me $300 more,

what would I give up if I go for the 6003? The 6003 is gray, which I

like better, but I don't want to give up any important features...i.e.

1. Does this 6008 model take the hand grip, but the 6003 does not?

2. Are the info displays in the finder both the same info?

3. Are the screens equally as bright?

4. Are the winders both 2fps?

5. Are the metering modes the same?

6. Is the insert back really that much lighter than the dark slide

back?

7. If I don't change backs, is it important that one has the ASA on

the body and one on the back?

8. Anything in particular that I would regret not having on the 6003

that I would have got on the 6008 src 1000?

 

I appreciate any info at all relating to these 2 cameras...thanks!!

 

Ed

I would say that this is unacceptable for any new lens from any

manufacturer. On an older lens, especially one purchases at a

discount this would be acceptable and would contribute very little

image degradation of sharpness, but I wouldn't accept it in a new

lens....

 

<p>

 

Ed

Glamour photographer Bill Lemon's newest book "Nude and Beauty

Photography: Techniques and Images in Black and White" contains all

professional photos of women models, artistically done, mostly with

the Pentax 67, I'd say about 90%, the rest are with a 35mm Nikon and

a Hasselblad 500.