arne_norris3

<p>Thanks for the response, Ferdi. Yes, my 90 version does look very well made.</p>

<p>So for now I have a GX era 90 degree finder that is like new and seems very nice quality. There seems to be no distortion. And it's much lighter weight than the old-round style 90 degree. As these newer style finders are difficult to find I guess I'll keep this for now until a 45 degree comes along, then compare to see which fits my needs better.</p>

<p>Thanks for everyone's feedback and advice.</p>

<p>Colin,</p>

<p>Good point about the slight difference in angles of view. Yes, I had been thinking of the 50mm vs. the 55mm similar to comparing 28mm and 32mm on a 135 camera. Certainly not a huge jump, but still some of the image samples I've found on Flickr seem to show quite a difference in the look between the 55mm Distagon and the FW's 50mm Super Angulon. Part of the look might be due to the differences in contrast and so forth. The Distagon is a 50 year old design after all. Still there's something about the Distagon I really like. The Distagon seems gentler, less stark. I suppose it's personal, very subjective, and not at all rational, given the rarity and high cost of a Rolleiwide.</p>

<p>There are of course other 6x6 cameras with a 55mm possible, like the Voigtlander 667W and Mamiya C330 with a 55mm. These are all very good cameras, but a Rolleiflex has all of the qualities I'm looking for—compact, low vibration, quite—and with through a lens focusing. </p>

<p>I have a Mamiya 6 with a 50mm right now. It's a great camera and the lens quality is tops. But I want to go back to the Rollei so I can focus through a lens instead of the rangefinder. That's why I'm researching the Rolleiwide and FW before selling my Mamiya and finding a Rollei.</p>

<p>Mark, Thanks for the input. I guess the 45 and 90 degree finder both have uses. I've used on of the older Rollei 90 finders and found it OK to use.</p>

<p>But The newer style 90 finder I'm considering buying seems like it has great optics: bright, very even and clear. I assume the newer 45 would be similar in quality. I'm thinking you may be right about the 45 being more comfortable, although I see uses for a 90 degree as well.</p>

<p>My primary way to use a Rollei TLR is with the waist level finder anyway. A prism is just for when I need to react faster or follow a moving scene.</p>

<p>I'm trying to get feedback from people that have used both the Wide Angle Rolleiflex (Rolleiwide) and the newer FW cameras.</p>

<p>I'm wondering what if any differences there are between the 55mm Distagon and the 50mm Super Angulon/W-Apogon. I'm sure both are wonderful lenses. I would think the 50mm, being a more modern production, with multicoating might be technically advanced. But the image examples I've seen online from the 55mm Distagon can be spectacular.</p>

<p>My main question is how much difference there are in their angles of view in practical use. So far I have thought the 55mm would obviously have an angle of view that is notably less than the 50mm, and a bit more natural perspective for a wide angle lens. (Similar to how a 35mm lens looks a bit more natural than a 28mm on a35mm camera.)</p>

<p>But I've also seen one review comparing these lenses that suggested they had practically identical angles of view, and were perhaps closer in actual focal length then the lens labeling. (I do know that most lenses are usually not exactly what is written on the lens, but rounded off. In other words a lens labeled 50mm might actually measure to be a 52mm, and a 53mm could be rounded off to a 55mm.)</p>

<p>This sounds all rather geeky, but I'm interested in finding the one with the most natural perspective for my work. And if the FW will work it will make my life a lot easier than trying to find a Rolleiwide, having it serviced and so forth.</p>

<p>One last thing of note, which I wasn't expecting:</p>

<p>The GX era 90 degree finder I have in front of me seems to have a base and cover plates made out of high quality plastic rather than metal. Not unusual for this ea of finders (thinking of the plastic Leica M viewfinders from the same era) but still unexpected. It does make for a much lighter weight, and probably will be much less top heavy.</p>

<p>Anyone with a 45 degree prism finder made during the GX era able to comment on the construction?</p>

<p>Well, I now have a 90 degree finder in front of me, the model that seems to have been made when the GX was in production. I'm not sure about the 45 degree version yet as I don't have one to compare.<br /> <br /> I don't have a camera, but using the finder much like a loop in a variety of ways, the 90 is very clear, bright and I don't notice any distortion. Much better than the older, early 90 degree finder I used in the past on my 2.8F. So for now not sure which to go with.<br /> I guess just try both the 45 and 90 and see what works best if I ever find a Rolleiwide. (I need to sell my Mamiya 6 outfit first.)<br /> The finder is much lighter weight than the older 90 degree. Not sure how it compares to the similar GX vintage 45 degree finder.<br /> <br /> I'm thinking that the thread I found with the comment about the newer 90 degree finder having a different construction must have been referring to another model used in a non-TLR Rollei. This 90 degree seems to have a prism system, but with much less glass then the older model, and a different looking and size of glass prism in it than the 45 degree finder.<br /> <br /> Thanks for all of the advice and comments! If anyone sees this thread who has used both the 90 and 45 GX vintage prism finder and can comment on their experience, that would be great.</p>

<p>Ferdi and Dennis: Thanks for your help. I think I'll look for the 45 degree prism!</p>

<p>Ferdi: Here's a link to an earlier forum page, which has the reference to the newer 90 degree prism (for the 6000 series I believe) having a the distortion problem.<br>

http://www.photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00I7Vm<br>

The page is from 2006.</p>

<p>The newer design 90 degree prism I'm considering—it doesn't have the big piece of glass on the lower part of the finder nearest the ground glass screen like the old style 90 did. It's also supposed to be much lighter weight, which leads me to believe it might have the distortion problems mentioned in this forum page from 2006.</p>

<p>I sold my 2.8F and 3.5F (and am looking for a Rolleiwide currently) so have no way to try the newer 90 prism out on a camera.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thank you very much for the detailed response, David. Here's what I've found out so far:<br>

B&H Photo has new contemporary 45 degree prism finders listed listed for TLR Rolleiflex cameras. I also have a GX brochure that shows both 45 and 90 degree modern prisms. And I currently have the option to buy a modern 90 degree finder, but not sure if I want to order it. It's true though that these newer style finders weren't sold very much as they were very expensive, and are difficult to find used.<br>

My question is just how good this modern 90 degree finder is optically. I think it is essentially the same finder as the one Rollei made for the 6000 series SLRs, with a different mount.</p>

 

<p>I know that 3 versions of prism viewfinders were made for Rolleiflex TLRs: The older 90 degree with the rounded shape, and two newer versions – a new style 90 degree and a 45 degree.<br>

My question is for any users of the newer models. I'm wondering if the optical quality is the same for the 45 and 90 degree prisms. ( I know people have preference for 45 or 90 degree prisms as far as handling goes.)<br>

I've seen a reference online that the newer 90 degree prism uses a mirror and different optics, whereas the 45 degree is a true glass prism finder. This same reference stated that the newer 90 degree prism had a problem with distortion. All of the references for the 45 degree finder say the optics are great with minimal distortion.<br>

Anyone with experience using the newer 90 degree prism or comparing the newer 45 and 90 degree finders for optical quality?</p>