rajmohan.

<p>Three from the park shot on Yashica-Mat /Lomo 100 color film (I don't think I've posted these here before, but if I have, my apologies):<br> 1. Reading<br> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/258/19744991666_55ee5b0149_c.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>2. Resting<br> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/536/19554524688_e690e33126_c.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>3. Working<br> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/314/19788938372_d63f06e089_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Nice warm scene, Barry - I can only look at it with envy from my cold, wet city.<br /> This is from a walk around town on a more pleasant day (Leicaflex SL / Elmarit-R 90mm f2.8 / Tri-X):<br /> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5718/21513566800_95ee15f8ac_b.jpg"%20width="800"%20height="502"" alt="" width="800" height="502" /></p>

<p>Gus - thank you very much for this suggestion. I'll give it a try.</p>

<p>Hello everyone,<br> I've been having some issues with a Contarex (Bullseye/Cyclops) with which I hope you can help.<br> The first body I bought had an interchangeable film back, and the first 2 rolls showed a marked light leak affecting every frame. So I returned it and exchanged it for a body with a non-interchangeable back. Everything looked good and worked well until about frame 20 (on a 36 exp roll). From that point, the film advance seemed to slip/catch on some frames, but not on others, rather ruining the exposures from the last 40% of the roll. I've tried the film advance without film in the camera and it's smooth; the interior is clean and the sprockets are intact. The only explanation I can think of is that the sprocket holes in the film are intermittently slipping off the sprocket teeth in the camera. Has anyone else experienced this issue? Is there a solution short of returning the body or going back to the interchangeable backs (in the hope that another one might not have the light leaks seen with the first one)?<br> Many thanks for your help,<br> Raj</p>

<p>Hello everyone,<br> My contributions come from a walk around the city couple of weeks ago with my Leicaflex SL and 90mm Elmarit-R, loaded with Tri-X. I've been playing a lot of cameras lately, but there's just something reassuring and solid when I put this camera to my eye.</p> <p>1. Imprisoned<br> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/616/21638881732_ef644d2ef6_b.jpg"%20width="517"%20height="800"" alt="" /></p> <p>2. Tete-a-tete<br> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5699/21054923863_fd36c794ac_b.jpg"%20width="800"%20height="503"" alt="" /></p> <p>3. Contrasts<br> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5718/21513566800_95ee15f8ac_b.jpg"%20width="800"%20height="502"" alt="" /></p>

<p>Hello everyone,<br> I hope you don't mind a question along a related theme: I have the opportunity to purchase Retina IIIc with a complete set of 50/35/80 lenses, case and accessory finder in good condition. I have a IIa, and really like it. The reason the IIIc set appeals to me is that the lenses are all Rodenstock Heligons rather than the more common Schneider Xenons. However, having read some reviews about the difficulty of use of the IIIc with the different lenses (no RF coupling, necessitating focusing with the RF, and transferring the distance to the lens focusing scale), I'm in two minds.<br> Do any of you have experience with using lenses other than the standard on the IIIc (or other Retina folders)? Is it a pain that likely trumps my lust for the Heligon lenses? <br> Thanks in advance for your help!</p>

<p>The problem with the lens in this case was that the seller reported heavy coating marks on the front and rear elements; though the former didn't worry me, the latter were much more concerning for their potential impact on image quality. And not being able to examine it prior to purchase (it was an online listing) made the whole thing seem a little too risky for a $200 price tag.<br> Definitely worth considering experiments along the lines you suggest with cheap lenses.</p>

<p>Thank you for the suggestions, Glen.<br> I've decided not to proceed with the purchase, as I don't want to risk experimenting with my limited skills on a very beautiful and well-made lens. I'd rather pay more for a lens without these issues, and leave this one for someone with the skill and desire to revive it to its former glory.<br> My thanks to everyone who offered comments and suggestions!</p>

<p>I'd value an hour with a photographer who made an iconic photograph far more than a lifetime with the tool(s) he/she used to make that photograph. <br> But to each her/his own - I respect the collectors' points of view as well.</p>

<p>Great - based on Rick's endorsement (and now learning of Tony's investment in the Ambi Silette), I took the plunge on a camera with an almost complete set of lenses (35, 50 and 90) - bought from separate dealers. Looking forward to the experience!</p>

<p>Hi Rick<br> Thank you for the information on the Silette vs Diax. I was debating about which one to get, and your description of a better viewfinder has helped me make up my mind! If and when I get one, I'll post some pictures. <br> Thanks again,<br />Raj</p>

<p>Hi Tony, the Contaflex TLR will likely remain a dream. But my dad always told me that if were to dream, then dream big! In the meantime, I'll console myself with a couple of (much cheaper) Contaflex SLRs.</p>

<p>Rick and others - do you have an opinion on the Diax IIb versus the Agfa Ambi Silette? Both interchangeable RFs from the chrome era, and both of which look amazing. Is there a big difference in the quality/user friendliness of the bodies and/or lenses? Thanks!</p>

<p>Yann - no worries; I will try to do this in future.<br> Robert - thank you for your kind comment. :)</p>

<p>Hi Rick,<br> Superb images with great tones, as always! And the camera is such a beauty that I want one - you've added fuel to the G.A.S. flame :)</p>

<p>Hi Brett<br> Thank you for your comments on this and the other thread.<br> I don't have a case for the Contarex, so it usually comes 'naked', but the black tape is something I will definitely try. I also have the dark slide stored on the outside of the back for the reason you mention.<br> I did consider other potential sources of light leak, including the little meter window on the top plate, and perhaps even the light meter window itself (I'm not sure if either of these communicates with the film chamber, but they could be potential culprits.</p>

<p>Thank you, Tony! I'm now lusting after a Zeiss Ikon Contaflex TLR - a most beautiful (and expensive) camera!!<br> (By the way, I've had some (mis)adventures with the Contarex that I enumerated in your Contarex thread, if you have a chance to read my novella there!)</p>

<p>What a great collection of images from everyone (and produced using such a diverse range of cameras!) - thank you for sharing! I'm truly inspired to go out shooting this weekend!!<br> Allen - I had only heard of the Weltini in my research on folders, and this is the first image I've seen from one - fantastic!<br> Brad - thank you. I had no idea how good the Kiev/Jupiter combo would be. I bought it off a chap downtown for $100, thinking that it would be decent but no better (I wanted to practice shooting with a Contax clone in preparation for the return of my Contax from its overhaul). From the very first shot, I could feel the smoothness of the camera and lens, which had evidently been well cared for. And when I scanned the negatives, I was stunned - this was my first roll through this camera, it was cheap color film, meant to be just a test; but I have a few from it that I consider keepers. Best bargain (along with my Mamiya Six folder) I've scored. By the way, I'm not moving - I only meant that the provenance of the gear producing the images up to my original post was Japan, and it was moving to Ukraine with my Kiev images! :)</p>

<p>Thank you for your comments, <strong>Michael</strong>. Your 124 images are great! Lots of 3D pop in the bikes and tree roots. I look forward to seeing more of your urban/street images.<br> It's fantastic that you do your own processing. I'd like to learn (as a first step); but practicing it in our tiny apartment could be a bridge too far at present. I already draw disapproving looks due to the space requirements (aka clutter) of my cameras/lenses/negatives/scanner! </p>

<p>Thanks, Yann - I'm very happy with my Rollei. I'm getting hooked on the bigger negatives from my MF cameras - 35mm negatives just don't seem to have the depth and tonal range. Now the only problem to choose which camera comes with me when I head out! :)</p>

<p>Thank you, <strong>Chuck</strong>, <strong>Rick</strong> and <strong>Mike</strong>! I feel very lucky to be able to use this lovely machine.<br> <strong>Rick</strong> - this is the Xenar; I've read that this is somewhat inferior to the Planar and Xenotar lenses, especially wider than f8, but many of the shots from the first roll are at f5.6, and some are at f4 or f3.5; I'm quite happy with its performance at the wider apertures (perhaps if I had a Planar/Xenotar-equipped Rollei, I might notice the difference, but ignorance is bliss!).<br> I shot this entire roll on 2 blocks in about 20 minutes one afternoon, because I wanted to submit it to the lab before closing time.</p>

<p>Many thanks, Wouter.</p>

<p>Thank you, John! :)</p>

<p>I bought a Rolleiflex in excellent condition from a lady whose uncle had previously owned it. The viewfinder was a little dim (which I understand to be common in this model) and was a little dirty. Nevertheless, I slipped a roll into it, just to see what it could do straight out of the box. I must say, the camera handled very nicely, with smooth action. The only hiccup was setting the shutter to 1/500s, but I've since read that this should be done before cocking the shutter - I'll have to try this next time and make sure that it works okay. For a camera that has been lying around (albeit in a good clean environment), I was very pleased with its performance.<br> Here are a few examples from the first roll (TMax 100):</p> <p>1. Van<br> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/666/20890912914_fe80374239_b.jpg"%20width="693"%20height="700"" alt="" /></p> <p>2. Bicycles<br> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5677/21502552122_fbbc3a7985_b.jpg"%20width="693"%20height="700"" alt="" /></p> <p>3. On the phone<br> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/662/21325843548_4519b40cd4_b.jpg"%20width="690"%20height="700"" alt="" /></p> <p>4. Up close and wide open<br> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5828/20890911704_82b9a8d749_b.jpg"%20width="700"%20height="601"" alt="" /></p> <p>5. Curves<br> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5825/21522344531_052f885f8e_b.jpg"%20width="690"%20height="700"" alt="" /></p> <p>6. Slow shutter test (1/15 sec)<br> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/749/20890911624_89611702da_b.jpg"%20width="693"%20height="700"" alt="" /></p>

<p>Thank you, John - another good suggestion I'll try.</p>