Casino Tmx -2

Nicely done -- an interesting architectural piece.

'Looks like the rollei delivers to me. I keep hearing 'Springsteen's "Sandy" as I look. Sky, tower, roof & water seem to deliver serious tones.

DWT - appreciate your comment! This is one of the most unique, attractive in its way artifacts on the Jersey Shore in my opinion. The architects designed also Grand Central Station in Manhattan.
HiHo - I do not like how the Rolleicord did. i am disappointed with the focus or optics or i don't know. Plus, i think there is just a personality clash i seem to have. Can't get cozy and comfortable with it though i have tried. I am probably going to retire it and until i can go to something like the Hassy or similar, will not go to 6x6. I would rather use my 4x5. My only color and my only MF camera will probably be a fuji 6x9 with fixed lens. Lots of good examples and discussion here in apug on same are making that rangefinder very attractive to me. Saving my shekels to get one. I had lots of fun lately with my 35mm after 12 years abandonment, so i am not in a hurry for a middle format between roll and sheet.

Great picture. I see what you mean, it isn't pin sharp but is that the scan or the negative?

Pretty sure the scan with resizing for apug did not help, but even the full scanned image was noticeably soft. I have not studied on light box, but the 4 inch print looks soft too. I have had 8x10 prints made of other films from this camera, and they all have been soft. Don't know if it is focus off or what it is - but i have never been happy with this Rolleicord. I use f11 as much as possible, so i would think it should come out better than it seem to do for me. I took two rolls of film to help me decide if i should send the camera out for CLA or set aside. I think putting the funds towards something else that is certain to deliver may be the best approach at this point. So, this project has been a success for what i was meaning to accomplish. I had hoped to keep the 'cord in service - plenty of examples here in apug with other TLR's sharp as a tack. Most recently @TheFlyingCamera come to mind - i have been studying his gallery images from the 'flex 2.8 showing admirable results.

If your lab is doing all the scanning, it COULD be their scanner that's at issue. Have you seen other work scanned by them from a different camera that was sharper? This also looks over-processed (on the digital end).

TLRs are not for everyone, and neither are rangefinders. I had the opposite reaction you've had to the comparison - I had the opportunity to borrow one of those Fuji 6x9 rangefinders to take with me to Paris a couple years ago. I took it for a test drive and between the rangefinder mechanics and the Fuji design quirks, I did not gel with it. I satisfied myself with just the Rollei with the normal lens and was extremely happy with my results. Before you commit to the Fuji rangefinder, try to borrow one for a long weekend or two and burn some serious film. These things are not something you can decide on in the span of a day, generally. It took me a long time to realize how much I liked my Rollei: I bought it because I had most of a 100-roll box of FP4+ sitting in my basement not getting used, and I didn't want to go back in to a Hasselblad system again. At the time I bought the Rollei, it needed servicing and was acting a bit wonky, and that was part of why I wasn't gelling with it. So it sat on the shelf for maybe two years. Then I looked at it one day and said, "if I'm going to keep it around, I should use it. I'll get it serviced". I took it in and had a complete overhaul done. Well... let me tell you. That sparked a total revolution in my thinking and after a half-dozen rolls through it, I was in love.

Hah, that is funny. I have had my 'cord for 10 years and no more than 6 rolls of film exposed i disliked the results so much. Your advice to figure it out before making a major investment is well taken - thanks for that. My rope on dock was from the same lab, same scanner of a 35mm negative (Zeiss *T 50mm) and nice, sharp, so not suspecting the lab (The Little Film Lab). I don't think casino was post-processed to any material degree. I just looked closely at the lens of the 'cord and there is a fungus or something on the rear group looks a bit like snowflakes, or more morbidly a astrocytomae. My first decision to make is whether it is worth the cost of overhaul. I am not a fan of wlf (even at my height), need to replace the gg (split level is not very clear), do the shutter cla and now the lens. If it were a 'flex, would probably be worth it. Prob not this article.