peter_maxfield

Thanks for all the responses. Went to the respective web sites and then to the old threads

from this forum. I'm informed. Much appreciated.

Hello to all. I am wondering if anyone has seen a camera that is a 'new' take on the old style 4X5 view

camera that was probably popular in the Teens, 20's and 30's--to say the Stieglitz's era. I believe I have

seen a newer version advertised somewhere a few years ago and am wondering if anyone could help

identify this camera. One looks down at the image in the same fashion one would a TLR. (Having only been

under the black cloth a few times to peek I have to admit that while I found the inverted image facinating,

it was also rather daunting regarding composition possiblities.) So, maybe I'm just a big (old) baby but I

rather like the idea of composing at 4X5 like the TLRs do. Sounds kinda cool if the camera itself is worth

the money. No doubt, it has limited (or no) movements but, you know, 'all in good time my litttle pretty.'

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for the great forum.

 

Peter Maxfield

This one is probably a no-brainer to every Rolleiflex user but me but after

reading pertinent threads I'm still not completely certain if I will be able to use

a Heliopan lens hood and basic filters at the same time on my Rollei 2.8C

(Bay III). Just a yea or nay will cover me here. And if anyone would comment

on the sharper image with a lens hood vs. no lens hood I would be curious to

hear an opinion. I've been using my hand, hat etc. to reduce flare and it

seems, subjectively, (as I have nothing to compare it to) to be working fine. I

detect no flaring and the images are perfectly sharp. A sincere thank you to all

respondants.

I would very much appreciate anyone's help answering a question

related to the photograuve process popular at the turn of the

century. Looking recently at Stiegletz's 'Camera Work'(the book) I

noticed that virtually all of the images are 1) photograuve, and 2)

each 'original negative' (given in the book as cm) converts to a

negative size ranging from 7X9 to 12X15 inches. Question: Were all of

those photographers routinely using cameras that large or were the

negatives somehow enlarged and THEN photograuved? And a final

question if anyone would be so kind to indulge it: Do any

photographers still use the photograuve process or has it become

basically a lost art? Many thanks to all respondants.

Thank you so much to all those who have responded to my Rolleifix question. I've got a better idea now of what I need to do: like learn my way around ebay for starters. ( do use a tripod frequently.) In any event, I've received a lot of good advice and this forum is the best. Cheers to all

I have recently purchased a fairly clean Rollei 2.8C, the only problem

being that I'm beginnig to feel like a first class idiot for not

having better researched the cost and availability of accessories.

I've had no luck turning up a Rolleifix, and actually I'm not 100%

sure that with a little care maybe I don't absolutely have to have one

anyway. Am I being really naive here, and if so where in the world are

all those Rolleifixes anyway? I've been looking regularly for a couple

of months. Lastly, is there a cheap alternative to a $50-60 lens cap

for a 2.8C. I'm still in shock. Thanks for all the great threads--I've

gotten quite an education AFTER my buy. Peter Maxfield