william_carter1

Just to clarify -- the last two sentences of the 1st paragraph are reversed. It should read: "So how do I get "uncompensated" TTL flash? Just turn the exposure compensation dial to minus 1/3 and shoot? (Since by "normal" flash I mean "I don't care about ambient exposure," it doesn't matter if the ambient light is underexposed by 1/3 of a stop, right?). Or am I wrong, and the procedure I laid out actually cancels everything out and I get both ambient AND flash expsoure with no compensation?"

I know, I know, there are other threads addressing this, but I

haven't seen an answer to this specific question (I've read every

thread containing the words "Rollei" and "Flash"). We all know that

TTL fill-flash is awkward at best on the 6008i. One alternative is

to just use the flash on auto mode. But this doesn't help for macro

shots where TTL is essential. So, I'd like to use the following

procedure, described in other threads: (1) set the exposure

compensation dial on the body to minus 2 and (2) set the ISO dial on

the magazine to overrate the film by 2 stops (with 100 speed film,

set the film speed to 25 and exposure compensation to minus 2). OK,

this now means that the ambient expoure is back exactly where it was

before I chanegd anything, but allows the flash to fire, since the

stupid Rollei computer will only fire the flash if you have the exp.

comp. dial turned to a negative value. But here's my question: what

now is my FLASH exposure? Have I just dialed in a minus 2 fill flash

exposure (as well as a minus 2 ambient exposure (which is corrected

by up-rating the film ISO))? In other words, will the TTL meter cut

off the flash when the subject receives the proper exposure minus 2?

And if that's true, how do I get NORMAL TTL flash, not fill? I have

to set the exposure comp to some negative value to get the flash to

fire, right? So how do I get "uncompensated" TTL flash? Or am I

wrong, and the procedure I laid out actually cancels everything out

and I get both ambient AND flash expsoure with no compensation? Just

turn the exposure compensation dial to minus 1/3 and shoot? (Since

by "normal" flash I mean "I don't care about ambient exposure," it

doesn't matter if the ambient light is underexposed by 1/3 of a stop,

right?)

 

Thanks for your help and forebearance in answering this question

again -- I'm looking to sell my Contax 645 system and need to know

how to use this crazy flash on the Rollei since I'll be investing

more heavily in the system.

Thanks VERY much for your response. Upon reviewing the prints I was talking about, it does appear that the ones I was concerned with were taken with the Rollei (Schneiders) in bright, direct sunlight. Now I'll run some tests and try to determine how much the meter overexposes in those conditions....

I'm very interested to hear if you ever found out how to cut the 180mm hood to avoid vignetting with the 90mm. Thanks.

Allow me to resuscitate this old thread. I'm wondering if anyone else has something to say on this subject. I am considering selling my Contax 645 and focusing exclusively on working with my Rollei 6008i. My primary hesitation now concerns the difference in contrast in B&W with Schneiders for the Rollei as opposed to Zeiss for the Contax 645 (I know you can also get Zeiss lenses for the Rollei, but I have all Schneiders now (50mm 2.8, 80mm 2.8 and 150mm f4) and am considering switching to some other Schneiders (specifically, getting the 40mm f3.5 instead of the 50mm 2.8 and the 90mm Macro instead of the 80mm 2.8). Besides, isn't one of the main attractions of the Rollei system the ability to use Schneider lenses?). Anyway: in my very unscientific observations, it looks to me like the Schneiders on the Rollei are 1/2 to 1 stop higher contrast than the Zeiss lenses on the Contax 645. Is this possible? Has anyone else noticed this? Don't get me wrong: the B&Ws I've done with the Rollei/Schneider combination have displayed excellent sharpness, but appear to be of significantly higher contrast and therefore lack some of the "creamy" tonal gradation of the Zeiss lenses.

 

Technical data: no, the shots were not of the same subjects, but the scenes were not of significantly greater contrast. And it's possible that the meter in my Rollei is off -- I haven't tested it scientifically. If it's over-exposing significantly, that could of course result in higher contrast and a shorter tonal range. The Zeiss lenses have Contax or Heliopan UV filters on them -- no UV filters on the Schneiders. Both sets of film I'm talking about here went thru the indetical process: shot on Delta 100 (rated at 80); developed in X-Tol 1:3 for 14 min. (10% reduction in developing time); printed on Ilford MGIV; enlarged on Omega D2 with Aristo coldlight head and 80mm Componon-S lens. No enlarging filter. This combination seems to produce negs that are almost perfect (no dodging/burning or adjustment of printing contrast) using the Contax 645 but appear almost a paper grade higher for negs from the Rollei/Schneider. Anyone else have this experience? Am I just reacting to the different "signatures" of the lenses? (and if that's true, I probably should either (1) keep the Contax or (2) get "new" Zeiss lenses for the Rollei?) Your thoughts are greatly appreciated!

I'm considering getting the SCA adapter to use my 54-MZ3 on my 6008i

(I'm currently using the flash on the Contax 645). I understand that

there are some quirks (an understatement) with fill-flash with the

6008i. Rather than re-hashing that, I have a more specific

question. The 54 MZ-3 flash allows you to control the amount of

flash output using the dial on the right side of the flash itself

(not the SCA adapter or the comp. switch on the body). Let's say

that I'm shooting in daylight in aperature priority mode (shutter

speed dial set to "A") and want a bit of fill flash for the shadows.

It seems to me that I can bypass the 6008i's fill-flash quirks by

using the following procedure: (1) leave the SCA adapter set to ISO

100; (2) leave the exposure compensation dial on the camera set to

zero; (3) set the FLASH to -1 2/3; (4) shoot. Because I'm in

aperature priority mode, the ambient exposure is correct and because

the flash is regulated TTL, it should cut off when the subject

receives the "correct" flash exposure (but minus 1 2/3!), as

determined thru the lens. Am I missing something here? I wonder

because (1) in the discussions of the problems with using the 6008i

for TTL fill flash, no one talks about just setting the appropriate

compensation on the flash itself in the way I described (is that

because other Metz flashes don't let you do this?) and (2) I've read

in other threads here that when using the SCA adapter + flash in any

auto mode on the 6008i (which would include aperature priority, my

preferred method), the flash will not fire unless the exposure

compensation dial on the camera is set to some negative value.

 

I realize that this is more cumbersome than being able to set the

compensation using the dial on the camera, but if it works, I'll go

with it... Thanks for your help!

I posted a question regarding whether Rollei had plans to introduce

an AF 6008 on this board a few months back. Recently, I posed this

question to Rollei. Thought I'd post the reponse (I almost hate to

do this since the poor guy from Rollei who emailed me will certainly

get a deluge of questions!). Here's my question and Rollei's

response (and apologies to all if I'm just behind the curve and

everyone already knows about this):

 

"I'm curious if Rollei has any plans to introduce a new 6008 body

that is either (1) autofocus or (2) has a focus confirmation

indicator in the viewfinder (preferable since it would let existing

Rollei customers like myself keep our old lenses and just buy an new

body with focus confirmation)? Thanks.

 

Dear Mr.Carter,

 

We´ll produce a 6008 with autofocus end of this year. You can use all

lenses,

but to use also the autofocus function

there will be new lenses.

 

Best regards

 

Stefan Scholz

Service manager"

 

I have no other info than what he said in the email, but if anyone

can add some info that'd be great.

Has anyone ordered the 3008A cord yet? If so, I'd appreciate knowing where you ordered it from. I don't seem to be able to convince my local camera store that it exists....

Central Camera carries the 3802 (http://www.central-camera.com/flash/metz/3002_modules.htm) -- that's where I ordered mine from. Also looking forward to leads on ordering the 3008A cord.

 

The plot thickens, however. If you go to the mecablitz website (see http://www.metz.de/1_metz_2000/m_pages_english/4_mecablitz/m_mb_produkte/m_fs__54_MZ-3.html) and look at the features of the 54MZ-3 flash, you'll see that it says this flash is capable of "wireless TTL flash operation" when used in conjunction with the SCA 3802 adapter, which is the adapter the Contax 645 uses. Which leads me to the following question: why, as I stated in my initial post, does bogen/metz say that it was not possible before the upcoming intoduction of the 30008A cord to use this flash off-camera and maintain TTL? Am I missing something?

I was shopping for a metz flash (54MZ-3) + SCA adapter(s) + off-

camera cord(s) that would let me retain full functionality for use

with a Contax 645 and Leica R8 (for background, I just have an old

Vivitar flash that I've bene using with both). I called Metz to make

sure I was looking at the right SCA adapter/cord, etc. They informed

me of the following: (1) The SCA 3502 is the proper adapter for use

with the combination of the Leica R8 and the 54MZ-3 (I've seen some

other threads saying the SCA 3501 should be used -- according to

Metz, for this combination, you need the 3502); (2) currently, there

is no cord that will let you retain full functionality off-camera

with the COntax 645 but (3) early next week (Tues., according to the

Rep) Metz will begin shipping a new off-camera cord that will allow

the flash to retain full functionality with the Contax 645 AND the

Leica R8. I called several large camera stores (including Tamarkin,

B&H and Keh) concerning this new cord and they alla cted like I'm

crazy. So my questions are these: (a) is # 2 above correct (until

now, there was no way to use a Metz flash off-camera with the Contax

and retain full functionality)? and (b) has anyone else heard of this

new cord Metz told me about? And if so, why don't dealers know

anything about it?

You probably all know this already, but just FYI: I spoke to Mtez

today to see what the proper SCA adapters and off-camera cords were

for my Leica R8 (and COntax 645). The guy said the only "proper"

cord is on the verge of being released (she said next Tuesday): the

SCA 3008A off-camera cord. This allows full off-camera flash

functionality with both of the cameras mentioned above.

One more link for you re: TTL flash contortions with the Rollei

6008i: http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Village/3762/Rollei/

 

<p>

 

(This is the Rollei FAQ -- scroll through and you'll get to a link

discussing TTL).

Thanks. (And excuse other grammatical errors above). No system, of

course, should make your lenses wet! :-)

First, some quick background: I own both a contax 645 and a Rollei

6008i (see this thread for dicussion on whether it make sense to own

both: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001BPE).

FWIW, I love both cameras and have not been able to make myself sell

either one (yet).

 

<p>

 

For some general comments on the Contax 645, see these threads (and

run a search on photo.net to get more threads):

 

<p>

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000fdC

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000x6v

 

<p>

 

While not answering which system you should buy (it's a matter

of "feel" as much as anything else, since both the Rollei and the

Contax are optically and mechanically excellent), I'll just give my

general impressions of both systems. (1) the level of optical quality

of these two systems is about the same (which is to say excellent),

with the exception that I have noticed slightly better color fidelty

with the 50mm 2.8 Schneider wide-angle on my Rollei than with the

45mm f2.8 on the contax (I mean it when I say slight -- noticeable

only in certain situations and upon side by side comparison); (2) the

Rollei has all metering options integrated into the body, thus

allowing more flexibility with the waist-level finder (the contax

only offers spot metering with the waist-level, which is, of course,

more than most MF cameras); (3) the Rollei (with the handgrip) is

more ergonomic than the contax (although once you add the battery

pack/handrgip to the contax, it comes close)(and has the added

benefit of alloiwng you to use AA's and lithiums)); (4) the Rollei

system is currently MUCH fuller than the contax system, at least in

terms of lenses, but this may change (the contax is for now a 6 or 7

lens system); (5) viewfinder seems subjectively brighter; (6) the

rollei, of course offers leaf shutter lenses. On the Contax side of

the equation (1) it has autofocus )and in-focus confirmation when

using manual focus); (2) as many others have noted elsewhere, the 120

mm macro lens (not AF, but still has focus confirmation) is the best

lens I've ever used for any camera -- period; (3) it's much quieter

than the rollei, even using the rollei in "silent" mode (which could

be a factor if you're doing weddings or wildlife -- I recently shot a

cousin's wedding using both and ended up using only the COntax inside

(but both outside) because of the noise); (4) needed accessories for

the Rollei usually cost twice as much (I paid $100 for a used rubber

lens hood for the 50mm 2.8 for the rollei -- a new metal hood for

contax lenses costs about half that); (5) all the contax lenses (for

this camera) use the same filter size; (6) I actually find manual

focusing with the contax to be smoother than with my rollei lenses

(better "dampening" I believe is the technical term); (7) viewfinder

display makes more sense than the Rollei's; (8) TTL flash actually

works in a logical fashion on the contax (Rollei's sysetm requires

massive gyrations to use fill-flash); (9) the contax allows pre-flash

metering through the lens with any flash system (including studio

strobes) (the Rollei does as well, at least in theory, but you have

to buy a special flash metering accesory for your back to do it).

 

<p>

 

(I have also used a Hassy 501cm on occassion, but not as extensively

as these two systems, so no real opinion on Hassy.)

See the following links on this board for more info:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001Eul

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001CrT

 

The "silent" mode is MUCH quiter than normal mode, but definitely not silent -- as said above, just "less obtrusive." For any situation where noise could be a problem, the quiet mode really helps. I can't remember which function on the Master Control Unit (MCU) activates it, but I think it's the one that says "film advance" or something similar. As noted in one of the above links, the MCU is pretty expensive if you buy it in the US, and probably not all that useful, with a few exceptions (those exceptions jsutified the $300 I paid for it buying from the UK, but wouldn't justify spending nearly $1000, which is what it costs in the US). You can turn on the quiet mode using the MCU, then program the self-timer switch to turn it off and on (meaning you don't have to do it thru the MCU each time), but then you can't activate the self-timer function using that switch -- you have to do it thru the MCU (because the self-timer swtich only has 2 positions -- off and on). I personally just leave it on "loud" all the time, then use the MCU to switch it to quiet mode, thus prserving the use of the self-timer switch to activate the self-timer, which I used more often than quiet mode (because I didn't have a cable release until a couple of weeks ago (buy the rollei cable release if you don't already have it, by the way -- it has both a mirror lockup and shutter release buttons -- quiet convenient)). If I were shooting weddings, I'd probably do it the other way though, since leaving it on loud mode isn't acceptable durign the ceremony, but leaving it on quiet outside slows you down because the film advance is considerably slower in quiet mode.

 

Keep in mind as well that if you're using the Rollei on a tripod, keeping the MCU attached in the space where the grip sits isn't a bad idea -- then you can have all your functions at once.

I'm way late in responding, but to answer your question, the "instruction manual" I got was photocopies as well.

Tangentially, Cambridge Camera recently tried to sell me a "gray" 120mm makro lens -- the guy told me (AFTER PLACING MY ORDER) that the lens mount was plastic, not metal, and the metal mount version cost $200 more (I ended up buying it from Delta International for not much more than Cambridge wanted for the plastic mount (of course, it is gray because it has an international warranty, not US, but at least it's the right product)). So, in addition to warranty issues, check to make sure that the gray version is actually the same product as the US.

 

(And, of course, never buy form Cambridge. I haven't tried them in years -- hoped they'd gotten better -- apparently not).

Get the contax (I used to own the mamiya, sold it to buy the contax). SHort version of what I disliked with the mamiya: (1) the lenses do not retain aperature information when you change them -- they automatically revert to maximum aperature when taken off the camera (2) no interchangeable viewfinders (3) "plasticky" feel, particularly of the lenses (4) TTL Flash is a problem -- see Mamiya User's Forum (5) AF is noisy (6) metering is primitive -- the A/S setting is easily fooled. Things I like about the contax: (1) The AF can be operated by a button on the back of the grip, rather than by the shutter release button -- very useful (2) unlike the mamiya, to switch from AF to MF, you just turn the focusing ring -- no need to flip a switch (3) I found that I liek the look of the zeiss lenses better (not that they are necessarily "sharper" -- subjectively, I like the zeiss lenses rendition) (4) the lenses are much better built and operator like "real" lenses (e.g., aperature ring on the lens) (although the body actually feels crappier than the mamiya body (on the other hand, I just got back from a 3 week trip to Ghana and had no probalems with reliability under some pretty rough conditions)) (5) vertical grip w. shutter relase and accessory AF button makes it much easier to use vertically than the mamiya (6) built-in flash meter that works with any flash equipment (7) it just feels like a real camera, not a weird video/digital hybrid like the mamiya.

As a follow-up to the above question: do any of you technical types know whether it would be technologically feasible for Rollei to add an in-focus indicator to the Rollei 6008i via a new master control unit function and/or some sort of computerized plug-in? I'm not sure how in-focus indicators work -- are they in the lens, the camera body, or both? If it's a function of the camera body, it would seem that Rollei could feasibly do this, given that the 6008i is run by an on-board computer system. Just make a little electronic gizmo (or an new MCU with an "AF indicator" function), plug it into the MCU connection, and voila! Instant focus indicator. Am I daydreaming here or is this possible? And who knows who at Rollei we should harass about this if it is possible?

 

Any further info on the AF Rollei rumours is also appreciated.

Are you sure you really need autofocus (you said you are doing mostly landscape)? If not, get the Mamiya 645 Pro--image quality is excellent and it costs a lot less than the Contax 645 AF (which would be my other recommendation). In fact, someone has a Mamiya 645 Pro system (multiple backs and lenses) for sale on photo.net right now for about $2500, I believe. I used one fairly extensively a couple of years ago, and never had any complaints about image quaility. Do NOT get the Mamiya 645 AF (see my rants (and others') elsewhere on this forum). Or, if you really are doing mostly landscape, why not get an RB or RZ 6x7 and get the larger negative, since you'll be on a tripod most of the time?

 

Regarding image quality of Contax v. Pentax, I cannot speak personally since I've never used the Pentax, but I do know that certain Zeiss lenses for the Contax test as performing better than equivalent Hasselblad or Rollei Zeiss lenses. And the Contax lenses are generally a stop faster (e.g., the 80mm is 2.0, not 2.8).

Oh, in response to your question regarding backward compatability of mamiya: all older mamiya lenses can be used on the mamiya 645AF, but only in "stop-down" mode (in other words, you have to manually stop down the lens before shooting). The aperature information also is not communicated to the camera, so you don't see it in the display. All older 645 mamiya lenses will operate on all 645 cameras other than the 645 AF (so you could put a lens made for the 645 1000s in the 1970s on a 645 Pro TL). Older accessories (backs, viewfinders, etc) are not compatable with the 645 AF. However, you can use certain 645 Super accessories (the backs and certain viewfinders and grips) on the 645 Pro, Pro TL and 645E (in date of release, the cameras are: 645 1000; 645 Super; 645 Pro; 645 Pro TL; 645 AF; 645E (an economy model that doesn't have interchangeable backs)). All accessories are compatible between the Pro and the Pro TL.

 

One other point if you get the mamiya 645AF: the lenses do not "retain" aperature information when you take them off the camera body. The aperature is electronically controlled and that information disappears when you take the lens off. When you put the lens back on, it reverts to its maximum aperature. Many, many times I would switch lenses, then put the first lens back on, and discover that I was shooting wide open rather than at the previously set aperature. Not a big deal if you're using an auto metering mode outdoors (although your depth of field won't be what you thought it was), but a disaster in manual mode or in the studio! This of course is not a problem with the contax, since you set the aperature using a traditional aperature dial on the lens, which stays the same unless you physically bump it.

Here's my two cents on the Great Camera Debate. For perspective, I have at one time or another owned the following medium format cameras: Kiev (Hasselblad copy); Mamiya 645 1000s; Hasselblad 500C, Mamiya 645 Pro; Mamiya 645 AF; Contax 645 AF; and Rollei 6008 intergral. I currently own the Contax and the Rollei. If you've narrowed your choices to a hasselblad v. the mamiya 645 AF, get the hasselblad. The 645 AF has had MAJOR problems since its release. I sold it after about 3 months (you can find comparisons and complaints about the 645AF on the User's Forum on Mamiya's web page--my complaints about the camera are too long to list here).

 

However--I really like mamiya's 645 Pro (don't get the Pro TL unless you need TTL flash). I used one fairly extensively a few years ago. The image quality was great and the camera was a joy to use, unlike the mamiya 645AF. I bet you could put together a complete used 645 Pro system (body, 2 backs, prism, grip/power winder, 45mm, 80mm and 150mm lenses) for well under $3000. And Mamiya's customer service is the best in the business.

 

If you want a 645AF camera, get the Contax. You get the same (and in many cases better) Zeiss lenses that you get for Hasselblad, but with AF and with very sophisticated metering (such as retaining spot metering with the waist-level finder) (which reminds me, the prism is not removable on the Mamiya 645AF). But you may not even need AF. None of the current 645AFs' autofocus speed is at all impressive (more like the speed of an early canon AF) (so why do I have a contax 645AF? Because I don't do sports photography and it focuses faster than I can, which is good enough for me). If you really need blazingly fast AF speed, get a 35mm.

 

Also, don't forget the decision about square v. rectangular format. If you decide that you like the square format, don't forget about Rollei (I won't get into the Hasselblad v. Rollei debate, other than to say that the image quality, using comparable lenses, is roughly the same, (which is to say outstanding)). Rollei has the most sophisticated metering of any medium format camera, including all metering options built in to the camera body, meaning that, unlike the others, you retain all your metering when using the waist level finder. Rollei also offers some very interesting Schneider lenses. Of course, I don't think Rollei offers a student discount (I could be wrong) and Rollei lenses are insanely expensive.

 

Finally, as you have no doubt figured out from the first sentence, I was not a very smart consumer. As someone else has mentioned, it costs a LOT more money to buy and re-sell medium format cameras until you find what you want. Try to get the best system you can afford now and you'll save yourself money (and headaches) later.

Be clear on one thing - the AF on the contax is not exactly blazing fast. Don't expect Nikon F5 (or even f4) AF speed. That said, the Contax focuses a lot faster than I can manually. Anyway, I think it's a great camera!

 

(If you go to mamiya's website (then to the 645 AF user's forum), you'll see a lot of comparisons between the Contax and Mamiya AFs (including a long one by me)).

The only features I've used (I've only had the MCU for about a month) are the slowed down "quiet" film advance, the second curtain flash sync, the reduced center weighting, and varying the self-timer length. Be aware that the instruction manual is almost completely useless - there are several functions I still don't understand (such as the "quick release" mode). Also be aware that you can get it much cheaper in the UK than the US - check out Robert White and Dale Photographic.

Dr. Chow, your answer was 100% correct. I should brush up on my German! :-) I'll keep you posted on the nature of the instruction book when I actually receive it. Thanks for your help.