geoff_r1

<p>I love rodinal, and with FP4 it is my favourite combo. It's very subjective, and certainly not for those aiming for grainless images. I suspect this is what a lot of the negative feedback related to, it's not for everyone. </p>

To be honest I'm stunned they were still in production! I knew they could be purchased new, but assumed they came

from past production batches. I love my 501cm and the other V cameras I have owned since digital brought them into

my price range. Plenty to go around, there are loads of good cameras and lenses available used.

<p>Blanco Negro are good, they sell a lot of Foma stuff. </p>

I buy mine from vanbar, in brisbane

you could try photo continental in Mt

gravatt. They carry a small range of

chemicals. I really like rodinal, and am

now using adonal which I am very

happy with the results. I have also

used r09 and it was fine. I suspect it

may be slightly more dilute, but it

worked just as well.

<p>Have you double checked which lens this 635 has? Most had the Yashikor, but some had the Yashinon. The 635 I have has the Yashinon. </p>

<p>From my first home processed C41 batch. As I've always been a B&W guy, I'm excited about trying more colour. <br>

<p><a title="Harry's Cafe de Wheels, Tempe by Geoff A Roberts, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7224/7293332124_91d9f0897d_z.jpg" alt="Harry's Cafe de Wheels, Tempe" width="640" height="610" /></a></p>

<p>I've started taking pics around the house. Rolleiflex 2.8e.

<p><a title="Apartment, Randwick by Geoff A Roberts, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8015/7105205353_9f1d2b596c_z.jpg" alt="Apartment, Randwick" width="618" height="640" /></a></p>

<p>Night club in Fremantle, Western Australia. Leica M8 with 50mm summilux pre asph. </p>

<p>

<p><a title="Fremantle, Western Australia by Geoff A Roberts, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7240/6880307160_f8981cfe3a_z.jpg" alt="Fremantle, Western Australia" width="640" height="431" /></a></p>

<p>In my experience, it's a mixed bag. I've used a Zorki 3m with 50mm Sonnar copy, and it's a good camera, especially for the cost, around $100. Solid build, nice to use, reliable, good lens, and it looks cool! </p>

<p>I've also used an earlier Zorki, I think it was a 1m, which could have been nice it I could work out how to load it without the film being chewed up. </p>

<p>A Fed 5, which I think was made in the 1980's, was truly awful to use, but actually produced good images. I was suprised only because it felt like it was falling apart, but I guess this dosn't matter in the end if the result works. </p>

<p>I also have a Pentacon 6, which is nice when it works, but mostly I end up with unuseabe image due to the frames overlapping. </p>

<p>Some cable releases have a lock so you don't have to hold them. Either with a lock or your finger, the cable release will need to be holding the shuitter button down. </p>

<p>Porsche 911. Rolleiflex 2.8E, 80mm Zeiss. <br>

<p><a title="Porsche 911, Sydney by Geoff A Roberts, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7050/6784541270_6ed106869e_z.jpg" alt="Porsche 911, Sydney" width="600" height="640" /></a></p>

<p>I've since put another roll of Foma through, and had no problem. The two rolls which spooled straight through to the end where loaded while I was walking. It works fine when I stop and load carefully....I suspect maybe I touched the roller bar, didn't load them straight, or some other silly mistake! </p>

<p>Now that I think about it, all rolls until now were FP4, which has a much smoother, more flexible paper than Fomapan does. </p>

<p>Thanks Leigh, I didn't know what the bar did, now it makes more sense. All three rolls were Fomapan 100, which has quite a heavy backing paper. </p>

<p>I recently bought a Rolleiflex 2.8E, and the first few rolls went through perfectly. The frame spacing was a little uneven, but no real issue. This is the model for 120 and 220 film. </p>

<p>Today I’ve had two rolls spool right through to the end rather than stopping at the first frame, and one roll which went through as normal. I put the film beneath the bar at the bottom, is there anything else I need to be aware of? Hopefully this is my error, and not an issue with the camera. </p>

<p>There are Leica bodies and lenses available for those on a budget. The Leicaflex bodies are in my opinion, the best in the R range, and they are generally pretty affordable. They're very well made, and very simple. The viewfinder is outstanding, and they can be used with the 1 and 2 cam lenses, which tend to be cheaper. </p>

<p>Likewise, my favourite M bodies are the M3, M4 (first version), and M2, which can be bought for less than an M6 and the more modern cameras. They are better made and great to use. The chrome lenses tend to be cheaper, or look out for less popular versions of lenses such as the 1970s 2/50 and 2/35, which are better than their reputation suggests. </p>

<p>There is no need to buy a mega dollar MP. It's really an M6 with a pretty face. The one I owned had a few issues, which I have never experienced with any of the two M6s or two M3s I have owned. </p>

<p>

<p><a title="Marrickville, Sydney by Geoff A Roberts, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7210/6859764075_6307029b21_z.jpg" alt="Marrickville, Sydney" width="640" height="421" /></a></p>

<p>In case you decide on a 501cm, I have one for sale with 80mm lens. I currently have two, and don't use the second one. </p>

<p>The classic 500cm was made for many years, and is by far the most popular model. I've had one, and it was great. I now use the newer 501cm, which is essentially the same, but with a few upgrades, including a mirror which does not vignette with longer lenses, and a lovely screen, which can also be put in the older cameras very easily. </p>

<p>The 503 models have flash functionality. The ELM's have motor winders, and the 200/2000 series have focal plane shutters which can be used with faster versions of the Zeiss lenses. </p>

<p>Nothing, but paper is cheaper and faster to process than film. All you need to find is black blobs. </p>

<p>Thanks for the link. It seems there were many differences over time as improvements were made, as well as ammendments necessary to suit different camera bodies. I imagine all will give a different image, and that has been my experience with the C, CB, and CFE 80mm planars I have owned. </p>

 

<p>How much does the Zeiss Planar vary from one camera to the next? Say, 80mm for 6x6 to keep constant. I have owned both the CB and CFE versions for Hasselblad, and found them to be very different lenses. Both excellent, but produced different results. The CB has one less element. I am currently buying a Rolleiflex 2.8E, and I imagine this planar will be very different again. At least I hope so, don't want two cameras the same! </p>

<ol>

<li>Any other advice for someone who has never shot medium format or a TLR?</li>

</ol>

<p>If you have never used a waist level finder before, the reverse image may make the first few rolls a bit of a challenge. I certainly had a bit of a headache after my first roll in a TLR! The light meter on this camera probably is not very accurate, if it works at all. <br>

After a while you won't even notice it. This is a great camera, and will produce wonderful images hand held. Pretty straight forward after a little bit of use. </p>

 

<p>

<p><a title="Shoppers, Eastlakes by Geoff A Roberts, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7149/6694724869_c4191bdbf0_z.jpg" alt="Shoppers, Eastlakes" width="640" height="418" /></a></p>

<p><a title="Coogee Beach, Sydney by Geoff A Roberts, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7003/6694875229_aa4d8bb8dc_z.jpg" alt="Coogee Beach, Sydney" width="640" height="422" /></a></p>

<p>