jim_thompson6

Hello,

Because I was never sure if it was okay to develop the film with the tape still attached, I simply use scissors to cut it off (and a portion of the film. It isn't difficult, and since you need to trim the corners anyway, it doesn't really represent any extra work.

I hope this helps,

jim

Bernhard,

I have consistently received excellent E6 processing from the professional lab ("Freistil") here in Halle/S. E-mail: www.freistil-8.de

Jim

Dear all,

I just bought a Rolleiflex 3.5 E2 with a Xenotar lense for what I feel was an

excellent price. Despite a rough outer appearance, the lense is clean, the

shutter works perfectly, it came with what believe is the factory 12/24 switch,

and the first two sets of negatives show that lense is focusing correctly.

Now for the question: Have you ever seen the modification like the one in the

attached photos before? It would appear to be a bracket for a strap, in order to

help stabilize the camera during shooting. It is very solidly attached and looks

to have been professionally installed. There are no marking on the bracket, but

it appears to have been designed for TLRs.

Anyway, I thank you in advance for your comments.

Jim

P.S. Regarding the 12/24 switch: Am I correct to assume that if shooting 220

film that the switch should be in the "24" position, then switched to the "12?"

And if shooting 120 film, that I should just leave it in the "12" position?<div></div>

Alex,

Well, the motorcycle trip has been cancelled. So, I should have some time on either the 17th or 18th. Let me know if you would like to meet in Jena.

Jim

Alex,

There is a chance that I could meet you either in Jena, Leipzig, or Halle between the 17th and the 20th of May. I have a motorcycle trip planned for that time, but if it's going to rain most of the time, then we will probably cancel the trip. I will know more either tomorrow or Monday.

Jim

Dan,

I would say that your estimates for both the Rolleiflex A 2.8 Tessar and B 2.8 Biometar are low, especially the Biometar. Given there rarity, I would say $275-700 for the 2.8 A and starting at $1500 for the 2.8 B.

Good work, and thanks for creating the list.

Jim

He could also have been asking his mother:)

jim

Barry,

I think you should try pushing Sensia one stop - then you have the speed you are looking for. I routinely push Sensia to 200 (sometimes even 400) without any problems. Actually, the film is surprisely good pushed two stops.

Good luck,

Jim

I think there is a conflation of issues here. First, it isn't about whether to take a picture or not, but one of respect. In this case, respect for individuals and their situations. Of course it is necessary to take/make images for purposes of documentation, news, politics, and even art. However, I believe Jensen is concerned with the motives behind the work of certain (in this case) photographers. Are they travelling to New Orleans to cover the misery, destruction, and ruin (perhaps even triumph) because they are compelled by event and its aftermath or in order to "get their foot in the door?" Certainly, the same argument could be made with respect to news agencies, government, etc., but that does not mean that the issue then becomes pointless, and therefore can be ignored. On the contrary, it is an issue without definite lines, and thus requires our constant attention. Perhaps the ethical and/or moral dimension of media could be phrased as follows: Why am I here (at this particular event)?... and what is it that I wish to convey with my work? Am I here for profit?...Self-glorification?...to help? I grant that this formulation is overly simplistic, but it might serve to bring one closer to the issues raised by Brooks Jensen, rather than simply pushing it to the side.

Just some thoughts.

Jim

One can certainly shoot slide film without a meter - I do it 90% of the time. However, with the exception of perhaps EV 15 conditions, it might indeed be best to practice with a light meter first. Over time, you will be able to judge the light correctly most of the time. And when in doubt, bracket. Assuming that it isn't sunny weather, take your lightmeter, (D)SLR, P&S, etc. along with you. Then take readings in various lighting conditions (this will take more than a day or two). Try to estimate the lighting situation, and then consult the meter. It would also help if you read the article "Ultimate Exposure Computer" at fredparker.com He gives several helpful tips for judging the lighting conditions. Last, but not least, practice and have fun. Slides larger than 35mm are something to behold!

Good luck,

Jim

I am currently in the eastern part of Germany, thus the repair person you mentioned would not be feasible. As for a Rollei specialist in Germany, I am reluctant to spend that much at this time (afterall, I still have to feed the other Rolleis).

Clarification regarding the shutter question: Is a #00 shutter the same size regardless of format. For example, could I find a similar compur (B,T, 1-300) on a 35mm folder, e.g. welta welti? I wouldn't mind keeping the Rollei orignial, but that would mean getting another compur just to part it out. In addition, this 4x4 has been around the block. It requires a new hood (including the mounting screws), viewing screen, and the lensboard appears ever so slightly uneven. However, if anyone has such a shutter (or other parts mentioned above), are willing to part with it, and you live somewhere in Europe, perhaps we can work something out.

Hello all,

Not long ago, I posted a question regarding the thickness of the viewing screen

on a first generation Baby Rolleiflex. As a temporary solution, I am using a

scuffed piece of plastic from a CD cover. Anyway, I tried fixing the shutter

myself, but all attempts failed. Thus, I sent the shutter off to have it

repaired by a professional. Unfortunately, he said that the shutter cannot be

fixed (which has nothing to do with my attempt). I have basically two options:

1. buy another compur shutter, or 2. replace the shutter with something better

(and which I already have).

I was thinking that if I need to replace the shutter, why not upgrade to a

Compur-rapid or Syncho-compur. They appear to have similar dimensions, and the

3.5/6cm. lens does thread into the Compur-rapid shutter on my Rolleiflex X.

Has anyone ever tried to exchange a Compur for a Compur-rapid? Would the lens

elements have the proper spacing? I would just try it out, but the Rolleiflex

X works just fine apart from having an Agfa Solinar lens (See earlier threads),

thus I would want to use it for parts. What about a Prontor from an Isolette

II, 3.5/75mm?

If this swap isn't feasible, what other cameras have the same size Compur as

the Baby Rollei?

Thanks for any advice or information you can provide.

Jim Thompson

Hello to all,

I just received my newly won 4x4 Rolleiflex - I am still trying to get over how

tiny it is. Anyway, it came without the etched viewing screen, and I wanted to

know if anyone happens to know its thickness so I can create a replacement. A

second, and unrelated question, is the size of the Compur B,T,1-300 shutter.

It looks pretty close to the Compur-Rapid on my Rolleiflex X. If the shutter

cannot be repaired (although I had it working for about 1 minute last night),

would a Compur-rapid fit in its place (and fit the 3.5/60mm Tessar)? If not,

are there any other readily available cameras that have the same Compur

shutter? The camera definitely needs a little TLC, but that also makes the

whole thing more interesting. Lastly, if anyone in and around Germany happens

to have a non-functional first version of the 4x4, and would not mind parting

with it, I would be interested in purchasing it for a reasonable price.

Thanks in advance,

Jim

Okay, now I know why you were asking about the best way to protect the camera - that thing looks brand new! I can hardly believe that your father used it so much. Still, it is a camera to be used. Good luck keeping it unmarked and have fun.

Ciao,

Jim

Due to the post stating that the Rolleiflex might indeed be a model A 2.8 Tessar, I decided to take a closer look at mine. Although I have the Type 1 with Compur-Rapid B-1/400 shutter, I am fairly certain that this is a MX 3.5. First off, the bottom lens is too small. Secondly, the shutter housing on my model extends almost to the very edge of the lensboard -- on the Rollei pictured this is not the case. Lastly, other than straight on, the "Compur-Rapid" between the lenses is very hard to see -- again, on the camera pictured the shutter marking is relatively easy to see from an different angle.

What does this all mean - nothing!! You just purchased (again, assuming everything works) a wonderful camera. The fact that it isn't a rare version does not detract from this fact in any way. Enjoy!

Ciao,

Jim

It looks like a Rolleiflex 3.5 MX (ca. 1951-53). Assuming everything is working, you will most likely be quite impressed with the technical quality of your pictures. As to price, well, if it is in working order, then you did just fine. However, if it needs a CLA, then you paid a little too much. I have bought several Rolleicords/flexs over the past couple of years, and can honestly say that with one minor exception all of them worked just fine (especially those with a Compur-Rapid shutter). When you get the camera just check all of the shutter speeds, aperture, and the distance between the lensboard and the aluminum "bellows". Then, take her for a test spin. While I predominately shoot B&W, I prefer slide film for the initial test (plus medium and large format slides are simply amazing to look at).

Just go out and have fun!!

Ciao,

Jim

I think I must be missing something here. Although the suggestions involving "over developing" would help, would it not be better and easier to simply expose for the birds under the roof, rather than the outside conditions? To clarify, the photo (assuming it has neither been altered digitally, nor dodged/burned) appears to be properly exposed for the light falling on the pillar, and not the birds. If this is the case, why not simply give it another stop of exposure (regardless of the ASA you choose)?

Ciao,

Jim

Not necessarily aimed at Bill, but mentioning the gas prices in the States is a sure-fire way to make much of the world collectively groan.

Ciao,

Jim

First of all, no one ever said that the exposure guide on the back of the Rollei (or any camera for that matter) directly corresponded to the Sunny 16 "rule". As Kelly pointed out, it was (and still is) thought that a slight overexposure (with B&W film) was better than underexposure, hence the creation of the "playing it safe" guide for non-experts.

Having said that, I do not use the chart on my Rolleis. I routinely shoot slide film without a meter (using Sunny 16), and rarely mess-up the exposure. Depending on where I am in the world, and at what time, I sometimes use Sunny 11 and Sunny 22 (the latter very rarely). Basically, it comes down to experience, which strangely enough is how the exposure chart came to be.

Ciao,

Jim

Regarding the film speed question, most likely the author had ASA 400 film. He says that he was at the beach, where the EV is usually 1, if not 2, stops above the sunny 16 rule - beaches and snow are simply brighter in such conditions. This would, then, still be consistent with the so-called rule.

However, I must agree with several other comments about using 400 speed film outside on a sunny day. Unless one is looking to freeze extremely high-speed action (which would seem to preclude the Hassy), then ASA 100 or even 50 would be more appropriate.

ciao,

jim

Ciao,

Jim

Well, I freed up the front two cells last night, and adjusted the focus at infinity as well. I will take some pictures today, develop the film either tonight or tomorrow, and post here Monday or Tuesday.

Ciao,

Jim

Patric,

Thank you for the information. Out of curiosity does your source mention anything about the Isorette, i.e. was the Apotar/Compur combination the "best" prior to the Isolette or was there also a Solinar version offered?

Thanks again,

Jim