jim_chow

If you're gonna go through the bother of focusing the GG, you may as well use a view camera and crop. I have both the G617 and 4x5 monorail. The advantage of the 6x17 is its compactness, but if you have the GX617 w/ multiple lenses, there goes all the compactness out the window, and the cost of all those lenses could have bought a full 4x5 system.

I'm using the B22 plate on both my 6008i's and Fuji 617. They

also fit hassy bodies, too.

I've shot on a number of occasions down to 3 F w/o problems.

You can't leave the battery in the body and the camera outside

and expect the battery to last, though. Any battery will die at those

temps almost immediately. The trick to making the battery last

(I've made one last for a week of shooting) is to keep it in a warm

pocket, focus the camera and setup your composition. I double

check the meter reading w/ a manual pentax spotmeter, also in a

pocket (replaced the battery w/ a lithium since it, too, balked in

cold temps once). Then quickly insert the battery, shoot, pull the

battery and place it back in your pocket. The only time I've seen

Rolleis do really weird things (ones in the stores) is when the

battery was shot. For one, the shutters in the lenses might not

reopen after the shot, you can get error messages other than the

battery message, etc. Luckily, you can recell the batteries at

home nearly indefinitely for cheap.

I think it's economies of scale (lack of mass production, at least

for the German optics plus the super-high cost of highly skilled

German labor), plus the moving parts (shutter/helicoil). OTOH,

German LF lenses are comparatively cheap. LF lenses have no

moving parts other than the shutter, no fancy DOF markings

etched into anodized aluminum, no helicoil (as you focus w/

bellows), no fancy electronic interfaces to computerized camera

bodies. Shutters are usually Japanese made (copal) off the

shelf. So in this sense, LF is much more economical, as the

focusing element (bellows) is inherent in the camera body, so

you only need to buy it once, not for every lens (you just buy the

lens board for each lens).

 

As for focal lengths for portraits, I think 150mm on 6x6 is

excellent. I used to own a 150 PQS sonnar, sold it for a 180/2.8

tele-xenar. The 180 has better bokeh and is sharper, but 150 is a

more useable focal length, IMHO. The 110/2 planar is also

good..depends on if you're portraits are closeups or entire body

shots. I've used the 300/4 apo tele-xenar for portraits before.

I have two 6008i's and use the RRS B25 plate w/ larger, 3/8" (?)

bolt size. Originally, I had the Rollei quick release (no spring) that

fits the body and 300/4 lens mount. The problem was when

using the 300, especially w/ the 1.4x tc, the mounting point is at

the wrong spot..center of mass is below the tc. So the weight of

the camera body would cause it to sag and slightly change the

framing. The fix I use right now is to use the RRS macro slider

mounted to the ballhead, then the lens mounted to the slider. I

then slide the slider forward until the entire lens/tc/body are

centered over the ballhead. The best would be to have a custom

mount made for the tc. Since then, I've acquired a Fuji 617 (also

uses a B25 plate, which is also the plate used on hassy bodies)

and Toyo 4x5 monorail, which also has a RRS plate. So the real

advantage of the RRS system is the universality over multiple

camera systems w/ the same mount. When I used the 6008i w/

lenses up to the 180/2.8, the Rollei mount worked fine. The only

trick w/ the RRS is, you should visually verify that the plate is in

the track. I know one guy who thought his plate was tight when in

reality, only one side of the track was in the ballhead mount.

Upon slinging the tripod/camera over his shoulder, the camera

fells off, shattering on the concrete.

Yes, the extra weight is worth it. Bring whatever will give you the

best quality shots, especially if it's a tough to reach place. I've

packed a 4x5 monorail for a 30+mile packing trip in Olympic NP

before. It weighed a ton, but for shots of fields of flowers, the tilt

came in handy, and the large film area gave me more cropping

options. Now if you have a llama or mule (some places rent

them!), bring an 8x10! I shot a few sheets of 8x10 velvia in Zion

NP and it made my 4x5 velvia chromes look tiny!

I'll comment on this based on being a user of multiple formats

(6x6, 6x17, 4x5 w/ sheet film and 6x7 back). I'd say MF is terrible

for wildlife. It's forte is portraiture and landscape. I have a 300/4

w/ 1.4x tc for 6x6 and that's far insufficient for wildlife. I once did

get a nice shot of a mule deer at Olympic NP while backpacking

w/ a 180/2.8 on 6x6, but it was only about 20 ft away from me. :-)

In most cases, you need something looonng, like the massive

1000/8 tele-tessar. For landscape in its purest form (wide

landscapes), I prefer 4x5...much larger film area than MF plus

movements. Panorama is also good, but (at least w/ my Fuji), I

don't have ground glass, so focusing becomes guesswork, so I

mainly use it for cases when focus is at infinity.

 

For "nature" photography, which is really portraiture, 6x4.5/6x6/

6x7/6x8 are great. 6x9 is a little oddball....not wide enough for

landscapes, yet too wide for portraits.

I've backpacked w/ my 6008i. Depending on the trip, I've done

trips w/ the 6008i w/ 2 lenses and 6x17 panorama, 6008i w/ 3

lenses, and 4x5 w/ 3 lenses. The 6008i w/ 3 lenses (40, 90, 180)

weighs a ton, though. Nowdays, I mostly use the 6008i for

portraiture and travel photography or unscouted or unserious

landscape shots. For serious landscape shots and scouted

shots, I use the Toyo VX125 monorail. Also, the 6x17 is

sometimes pretty essential when square just won't do. If money

were no object for backpacking photography, I'd consider a

Ebony 4x5 titanium field camera. Better yet, get a lama. Then you

can pack a 8x10, and they are permitted on NP stock trails

(which is most of them).

I seem to recall there being some optically degrading phenomenon occuring w/ an even number of aperture blades (this from a photo buddy of mine, who has a doctorate in physics).

Derek, I may have been thinking about the 3.5F over the 2.8F or whatever...too many models to keep tract of (I think the 3.5 has the tessar while the 2.8 uses the planar). I presume the meter is one of those older types like in my SL35?

 

I got my 6008 systems when I was living overseas...never bought any Rollei stuff in the US. I did manage to successfully re-cell my own Nicads, though, so the battery availability thing is a non-issue for me. :-)

I guess one last thing to mention is, get whatever is the most versatile. Since I've owned my Rollei, the type of photography I do with it has changed from landscape to more portraits (I use the 4x5 and pan for landscape). So I'm glad I have TTL flash capability w/ interchangeable lenses (why I think a TLR is limited).

I believe the new Rollei TLR's (2.8 GX or something like that) are made w/ the Rolleicord chassis. Back when Rollei went defunct, the original 2.8F machines were lost/destroyed. The 2.8F is the classic TLR...more heft, but no metering. IIRC, the 2.8GX has some kind of metering plus TTL flash. I almost bought one, but got a second 6008i kit since I got a good deal on it.

 

As for lenses, I think the Schneiders have a more Leica-like bokeh than the Zeiss. OTOH, the 110/2 planar for the Rollei seems to have a similar bokeh to the schneider 180/2.8 tele-xenar, but why would one use the 110/2 when you can use the 90/4 makro-symmar, which is sharper, lighter, and has macro capability? I also like the pistol grip on the 6008i (makes the heft feel a little more manageable). If you go w/ the hassy, I'd probably go w/ the 503CW for the TTL flash (very handy) and gliding mirror (so the field of view for tele lenses doesn't get cropped...you want to see as much of the frame as possible, right?:-) ). The 2000 series is way overpriced for what you get, plus I don't like those cloth focal plane shutters (yeah, I know you can use leaf-shuttered lenses in them, but you lose the TTL metering...the entire purpose for getting it!). I also like the built-in winder on the Rollei. Sometimes, one doesn't have much time to get off a bracketed series, and there's no time to install an external winder.

I'd go w/ the 6003 since it has the ligher-weight filmback that does not permit changing midroll. This can be an advantage if you're hiking (less weight). My back up is a second 6008i body (got it new for a great price at the time). The bonus is you get a second interchangeable filmback which normally costs $500+ new. Depending on the subject, I like to switch between neg film and transparency film. The 6003 has the brighter focusing screen and virtually the same features (spot, multi-meter) like the 6008i.

When I was shopping for a 4x5, I considered the Sinar F2/P2, Linhof Technikardan S45, Arca Swiss, and Toyo VX125. I was only able to play w/ demo models (no field testing except the Toyo VX and the big 8x10). Intent was multipurpose...mostly landscape, some backpacking, some architecture.

 

Sinar: P2 stood out to me as superior to the F2, but it's beast...scratch that. It would probably be my first choice as a studio camera, though. Love the fully geared movements on the P2. Bellows on the Sinars were stiff.

 

Linhof: main complaints were it was tricky to fold up (sometimes I got it just right, other times, it took numerous attempts), no geared rise, and the stability w/ long lenses left much to be considered. Yes, they do sell that macro plate/bar, but it's just another piece of equipment one has to buy (and probably $$$) and lug around.

 

Arca: didn't feel as precise/solid as the Linhof, bellows were very stiff. Otherwise, nice camera.

 

Toyo: I like how it collapsed flat, bellows are so supple, I was able to use a 47XL (mounted on the demo model) and easily achieve full rise w/o using a bag bellows. No other camera I looked at could do that. Like the geared rise/shift/focus. Now that it's been 5 yrs since I've bought it, I still love using it. I only wish the tilts were geared. For backpacking, I think it's still a tad bulky (the Ebony titanium would be better), but I love using a monorail for architecture...very convenient. Stock focusing screen is also very bright. Lens limited is 300mm for non-tele. I'd urge you to try one out. I replaced the stock tripod mounting screw w/ a larger 3/8" screw, then mounted a RRS plate to it. I'm also using Linhof boards on all my lenses (front standard has a Toyo-Linhof adapter plate). I got mine as a kit (camera w/ adapter plate, toyo loupe). I have the Toyo case, too (uses the foam packing from the box the camera comes in), but find the Lightware case I got is superior in all aspects except weight.

It's not just that the Rollei quick release adapter has a small footprint, but the center of mass for the 300mm + tc is so far off, all the weight places the stress on one end of the connector, so the effective footprint is even smaller than the physical size. The RRS plate I'm using now helps alleviate that problem (I think it's plate 74n...can't be sure, though.).

Another possibility is to have a collar device made that fits over the outside of a teleconverter/lens. That device would then attach to a quick release plate. This way, you can locate the collar at the center of mass. However, if you use the 300mm w/ tc and have the collar around the tc, the lens will be unsupported (not that it's a problem since the mounts are very strong)...definitely not as bulletproof as my previous suggestion, which is more or less based on the Arca Swiss monorail. You could have a collar made for each lens that requires it.

I used to use the quick coupler w/ my 6008. For lenses up to 180mm, it works fine. But after I got the 300/4 apo, despite it having a built-in compatible coupler, there was too much flex. I traced much of the flex down to the coupler, that the weight wasn't distributed evenly along the entire surface and the contact area was simply too small. Also, there was flex in the tripod column (gitzo 1228 carbon). The last source of flex is because the location of the coupling on the 300mm isn't centered along the center of mass of the body/lens combo, ESPECIALLY when you're using a teleconverter. The center of mass is about where the tc is. The optimum way to solve the problem is to have a custom mount machined to slide on rails like the RRS/arca swiss view camera type rails. My way around the problem was to (1) use a RRS plate on the lens...ditch the coupler, (2) use a larger tripod w/ no center column (gitzo 340 and 410), and (3) use the RRS macro focusing slider mounted on the ballhead such that the center of mass is located over the head. Of course, the point of connecting (on the 300mm lens) will not be over the head, so when you tighten down the ballhead, you'll still see the frame change a little when you release your hand that's supporting the body due to its weight. OTOH, it's nearly not as much as before, so I've been able to live with it. It seems that something like the RRS focusing slider only with a longer rail and custom device on the back end that connects to the RRS plate under the body would allow one to to focus, then tighten the rear connector (rail to plate under camera body) to form a single, rigid unit. The drawback, however, is you cannot pan/focus since the helicoil causes the lens length to change, so you'd have to keep the rear rail connector loose. Hope this makes sense.

I've tested the 55mm pcs, and although the built quality is very impressive (it should be for $7K!), I coudn't get sufficient rise for architecture shots. For landscape, the tilt is sufficient. Considering the price, I got a new Toyo VX125 w/ Schneider 90XL and 150XL lenses for about the same price as the 55pcs, and it has a LOT more capability for radical movements. For any kind of architecture, I couldn't imagine using anything but a monorail. I even use it for backpacking/landscape w/ normal and short teles in situations one would normally resort to a wide angle in MF for the required near-far DOF, resulting in unnaturally small background features.

I prefer the waist level finder...plenty bright, compact, weighs close to nothing, and best of all, costs you nothing!

I have a gitzo 1228 carbon, 340 aluminum, 410 aluminum. The 340 is my first choice since it's sturdy enough for 4x5, yet light enough to carry away from the car. The 410 is rock solid, but heavy, while the 1228 is only suitable for medium format if there's any kind of breeze. I use that for backpacking trips. The 340 will also fit diagonally in a large suitcase, 410 won't. I use the Linhof profil 3 ballhead...very solid, but heavy. The lighter, lower-cost (ie, non-carbon) alternative is the Linhof 2 head on the 340 legs. I know one guy who shoots 35mm w/ short to medium tele lenses off a 5-series carbon legset...way overkill.

I shot some pro baseball games w/ my Rollei 6008i and XC skiing at the '98 Nagano Olympics while living in Japan. Use fast film, and long lenses. The key is to get a good seating position. To no surprise, I got my best shots from the seats behind the dugout. :-) If you arrive early during practice, you can get close. I mostly used the schneider 300/4 apo tele-xenar wide open, sometimes w/ a 1.4x tc...and this was marginal. Ideally, you need like a 800mm f4 lens!:-) If you're up in the stands, forget it...players are as tiny as ants. This is one of those jobs for a 35mm slr w/ 400/2.8 or 600/4 lens. I also shot during the welcoming for Ichiro at SAFECO field (Seattle) back in '01 from the media pool area (above the dugout) w/ the Rollei and 300/4+1.4x tc (so 420/5.6)...it was marginal. Even first base was too far.

The PQS motors draw more current than PQ motors, which, I think, is the reason for the little red sticker ('fur 6008' or something like that :-) )...so you don't put it in a 6006 and blow the electronics/fuse. The EL lenses are supposedly made from some kind of nylon/composite rather than anodized aluminum. Also, I noticed some of the newer PQ/PQS lenses have black (anodized aluminum?) bayonet mounts vs. the older chromed brass bayonet mounts.

I used the coupling for about 1 yr for up to 180mm lenses. It worked well for those lenses. However, after I got the schneider 300/4 (built-in coupler adapter mount), I found the mount between the lens and Rollei coupler flexed way too much. I could stick my finger at the juncture w/ one hand supporting the camera body, then remove that hand and feel the flex in my finger. It was really a combination of the tripod head mounting (gitzo 1228 carbon) and the lens' coupling adapter. When the 300/4 is mounted, the mount isn't close to the center of mass of the lens/body unit, even more so when you have a 1.4x tc mounted. So when you frame your shot and lock the tripod head, then remove your hand that's supporting the bottom of the body, the framing changes a lot! I found that too annoying. So, first thing was to get a tripod w/ no center column...gitzo 410 w/ Linhof profil 3 head. Still, same problem. Next, I replaced the coupler w/ the RRS plates w/ 3/8" bolts. On the 300/4, I use a RRS (I think B74n or something like that). So when I have the body w/ 300/4 only, I directly couple the lens to the RRS adapter on the ballhead. When I have the 1.4x w/ 300/4, I use the RRS macro slider, then mount the 300/4 to that. What this does it get the center of mass of the body/lens/tc unit above the ballhead. The connection point is not at this ideal point, but since the mass is above the head (you can adjust the slider to make it so), the hand that supports the body when framing the shot and adjusting the ballhead really doesn't have to support much weight. So when you've got the shot framed and ballhead locked and release the hand that supports the body, the framing really doesn't change.

 

There are a couple of more elegant solutions to this problem. One, get a custom, CNC-machined aluminum collar made for the teleconverter. This will put the center of mass pretty darn close to the top of the head, but doesn't support the 300/4. Two, have a custom mount made that's kind of like a Arca Swiss monorail rail, but with a RRS clamp on both ends. Then you use something like the macro slider between the lens and one end of the rail, and have a collar on the teleconverter connect to the other RRS clamp (need some shims to get the heights correct). It needs to slide up front since the 300/4 doesn't focus internally like a Nikon 200mm tele lens; instead the entire lens move on the helicoil. Since both of these are kind of complicated, I just live with my macro slider solution...so far, it's worked for 5 yrs.

Funny you mention the hassy and the Grand Palace. When I was

there last December, at the entrance opposite the main

entrance, there is a poster with an image of a camera that looks

like a hassy and the remarks that the camera is forbidden (can't

remember it it was a red "X" or not). I brought my Rollei 6008i w/

a few lenses and gitzo 1228 tripod and didn't have any problems,

but I was with my wife and one of my in-laws from Japan, so I

was taking shots of them and shots they requested. I guess a

guard saw the three of us together and figured we were typical

photo-happy Japanese tourists and didn't bother to approach us.

And yes, I had the full phototrekker AW pack in the Grand Palace.

If you're by yourself, maybe you'll draw more attention. :-)

Paul, my only additional comment is when you load the film, gently apply some pressure to the film spool on the left side to ensure that the take-up spool is taking up the film as tightly as possible. Also, advance the film-advance lever slowly and consistently to ensure it rolls tightly. The first test roll I ever shot in the 617, I cranked on the film advance too quickly (like someone cranking away on the film advance of an old 35mm slr), and the result was loosely wound film. After changing my film advancing habits, I've never encountered a loosely wound spool of film.