etienne_w

I like square format therefore mine has to be square. Besides, being a glasses wearer, I prefer waist level viewfinder. I have two cameras which fit the bill: Rolleiflex and Hasselblad. I take the Rollei when I want to travel light and for more casual shooting. If the purpose of the trip is photography I take the Hassy with a couple lenses and backs for color and B&W. I would typically use a Velvia, Provia 400X and a 400 ISO black & white in 3 backs. This quickly becomes heavy, though, no gear for hiking ;-) When I go on business trip I take a small Fuji X100s digital. To develop on the "why" question. The Rolleiflex is a love affair I guess. Sturdy, relatively light, a joy to use and it takes incredible pictures. I went to Hasselblad as a complement (not replacement!) when I wanted a bit more flexibility, in particular with different lenses. The price of Wide and Tele Rolleis on the used market, let alone new, quickly convinced me that (unless being a millionnaire) it was not the way to go. Got a complete Hassy kit with several lenses, backs and accessories for way less money than a Rollei Wide on the used market. I love it - you can do things with an SLR that are more difficult with a TLR. However, were I to sell all my cameras, the Rollie will be the last to go. Bottom line, choose a camera which appeals to you and feels good in YOUR hands. My 2 cents, Etienne

<p>Thanks for the info :-)</p>

<p>Les, that is a 7-hour shot, wow!!! How come it is not completely overexposed?? <br> One could think that after a certain point, the film will simply not take any more light...</p>

<p>Yes I also believe that this price is on the expensive side. For info, I found a CLA'd Rolleiflex 2.8E Planar for €550 a few months ago. Its condition was not mint by any means, rather battered I would say, but in perfect optical and mechanical condition. Results are just outstanding.</p> <p>If money is an issue and you want the "real McCoy" look for a Rolleiflex 3.5E or 2.8E , they hit the sweet spot between price, features and quality in my opinion.</p> <p>For less money you might want to look into Rolleicords and other TLR's such as Yashicamats 124 or 124G.</p> <p>If you can afford more go for an F or even GX or FX. FYI there are currently a few Rolleiflexes 2.8GX on the German auction site for around €1600, this seems a good price to me. (Others might want to confirm or infirm). With a GX/FX you get a very precise, working meter, multi-coating and no infamous automatic film loading mechanism (=one thing more which can easily break or come out of adjustment). Some GX have a Seiko shutter and are to be avoided. Synchro-compur and Copal shutters are equally good (I have both). FX are more recently built and therefore more expensive than GX, but -cosmetics aside- otherwise identical.</p> <p>Good luck and keep us posted about your findings!<br> Cheers<br> Etienne</p><div></div>

Wow. Terrific shots. My take on long exposures with film was to do a (rather extreme) bracketing. For the Velvia fans out there (I am one too), the "newer" (introduced 10 years ago or so) RVP50 is said to correct most of the reciprocity issues of the original RVP. Although to be honest, I cannot really tell, I have no experience with RVP50, I am still shooting my remaining stock of original RVP I filled my freezer with when I was regularly flying to Japan for work in 2005-2007. Etienne

<p>Thanks, good to know.<br> Les, I am aware of the RVP to RVP50 emulsion change you mention, although this one happened many years ago, perhaps 10 years or so. Reason was that some chemicals used in the production process have been banned if I am correctly informed. When I posted 2 days ago I was worried that the packaging change might hide yet another emulsion change. Glad it is not the case.<br> Etienne</p>

<p>Hello,<br> I am looking into ordering some Velvia 50 for my next vacation. Amazon.com mentions "Green/Blue/White" and "Green/White/Purple" versions. What are those?<br> Fuji recently redesigned their packaging therefore my assumption is that the green/blue/white or green/white/purple monikers refers to the type of packaging, although I am not sure. What do you think? Are you guys aware of a change in the emulsion on top of the change in packaging?<br> I have no experience with the "newer packaging" films, as I have been using older rolls stored in my freezer up to now. I will try a roll or two and keep you posted with my findings. (Might take a few months until my next vacation in a sunny country, though). <br> Thanks!<br> Etienne</p>

<p>Coming back to the film question - hasn't 220 been discontinued for ages already?</p>

<p>If you plan to use several backs in the field and exchange them often, it is advisable to spend a little more for the version with the dark slide holder. Fiddling with the dark slides can rapidly become a pain in the neck and the holders really help.<br /> Besides, chances are that light seals might still be in good condition on backs with slide holders, as they have been manufactured more recently.<br /> Hope this helps,<br /> Etienne</p>

<p>An update on this -<br> I found plastic food boxes at the local supermarket for a few euros each. The size fits a back and a bit of foam, it's therefore a very good and rugged protection for the backs. And it does not break the bank.<br> Thanks for your help :-)<br> Etienne</p>

<p>Hello everyone,</p> <p>I just acquired a couple extra film backs for my Hasselblad - had only 1 so far which was permanently attached to the camera. When I'm out shooting, I generally carry the camera around my neck and have a handbag (I guess satchel is the correct English word) with loose equipment such as light meter, a box with film rolls, etc. Note that my handbag is not a "dedicated" photo bag with specific slots for specific equipment, those kind of bags tend to be a bit too large and clunky for my taste.</p> <p>So far I packed my Hassy backs in ziplog bags to prevent dust from entering the backs and put them "as is" directly into my bag. In your experience, how risky is this? I am mostly concerned about the dark slide inadvertently slipping out thus exposing the film. Am I completely nuts and unconscious doing this? How do you guys carry your Hassy backs?</p> <p>Thanks & Happy shooting,<br> Etienne</p>

Well, good luck :-) I'm told one thing to look for is the light seals between backs and body. (they are located on the backs). The good news is, Hasselblads are quite common and servicemen are plenty should a problem arise. Enjoy your new camera :-)

PS. Looked at your Flickr link from your last post, Amazing portraits. Alyzza in particular is very cute. Cheers, Etienne

Hi Rifqi, congrats on your purchase! Where did you get it from? I've been looking for 500CM opportunities in the past months and it seems to me that 900 USD is a good price, especially if the camera is in good condition. I've recently seen two Hassys which caught my eye, one in like new condition with 80mm and back for 1500 USD and a black one in good mechanichal but bad cosmetic condition with lens, back and hood for 1200 EUR. Although they are both from reputable stores these prices seem a bit excessive to me. And looking for a Hasselblad, I found this cheap Rollei 2.8E hence I'm set for a moment I guess. Please let us know what you think about the Hasselblad. Especially if it is "love at first sight" as you expect. Having never shot a Hasselblad and wanting to buy one myself I am looking for such information! Concerning vibration issues mentioned in another post, indeed the large mirror can create camera shake at lower speeds. However, the camera features a mirror lock-up function which you can use for pre-release. And with interchangeable backs you can always carry one back loaded with high-speed film to avoid lower shutter speeds. Good luck and happy shooting! Etienne

<p>Back in the 50's - 60's, Rolleicords were the entry-level models of the Rollei line, the Rolleiflexes being the top-of-the-range models.<br> Rolleicords have 4-elements Tessar or Xenar f/3.5 lenses whereas 'Flexes have 5-element Planars or Xenotar in either 2.8 or 3.5 versions.<br> 'Cords are generally lighter and a bit smaller than Flexes and lack features such as automatic film winding with shutter cocking, automatic loading, etc.<br> If you search for Rolleicord and Rolleiflex on the net you will find many sites listing all models. There is also an excellent book by John Philips called "The Classic Rollei" with loads of info about all Flexes, Cords and what not.<br> Hope this helps,<br> Etienne</p>

<p>Another one. If you are into flash photography, the 2.8GX/FX support TTL flash.<br> Good luck!<br> Etienne</p>

<p>Hello Rifqi,<br> What about a Rolleiflex 2.8?<br> The lens is every bit as good as a Hasselblad 80mm 2.8 (or so they say... I never shot with Hassy, as a matter of fact I'm longing after one myself). The Rollie is much lighter than both the Hassy and C330, though.<br> * The 2.8F is often considered "the best", although prices can be quite high, above $1000 in good condition.<br> * My suggestion would be to look for a 2.8E, they are cheaper than the 2.8F's. Compared to the 2.8F, you lose the removable hood and coupled meter. Chances are that the meter will not work anyway. For this reason, you might want to look for a model without meter, it will be less expensive than a metered version. For your info, no sooner than last month I found an unmetered 2.8E Planar in bad cosmetic condition but perfect mechanical condition (the camera just came out of CLA) for just €550. It is a joy to use. <br> * If you can stretch the money, look for a 2.8GX or even FX: they have multi-coating and a working built-in meter. Build quality is said to be lower than 2.8E/F. This is rubbish. I own both the above-mentioned E and an FX and can confirm that build quality of all those models is equally good.<br> * There are older 2.8 models also. Lots of info around the net. Avoid the 2.8A but 2.8B/C/D should be good too.<br> * You might want to look into Rolleiflexes 3.5, generally less expensive than 2.8 models. The lens is said to be sharper. I cannot comment on that one, as I only have had 2.8 models. Accessories such as filters, Rolleinar close up lenses etc. for 3.5 (Bay I or II?) are definitely less expensive than for 2.8 (Bay III).<br> * Zeiss Planar vs Schneider Xenotar is a recurring question on internet forums. Both are excellent. Planars might command higher prices due to the Zeiss name, though. <br> Hope this helps!<br> Whatever you do, be sure to budget a CLA.<br> A side note, a Mamiya 6 or 7 rangefinder could match your description quite well too. I never had one (or even seen one in a shop, for that matter), hence I will let more qualified forum members comment on those.<br> Happy shooting!<br> Etienne</p>