Greg_E said:Rollei anything for under $100 used? Not if you want it to work (or I'm looking in the wrong places). The Flexarets look interesting and I may have to pick one up at some time, but that's after the current projects are finished. One of those is a very early Rolleiflex from somewhere around 1929 (I think), hopefully the optics aren't as trashed as the leather.
Greg_E said:Rollei anything for under $100 used? Not if you want it to work (or I'm looking in the wrong places). The Flexarets look interesting and I may have to pick one up at some time, but that's after the current projects are finished. One of those is a very early Rolleiflex from somewhere around 1929 (I think), hopefully the optics aren't as trashed as the leather.
ZorkiKat said:How about the Lubitel pseudo TLR? Not really a TLR since it doesn't really use a reflex finder in the sense that a Rollei or Seagull would. It's probably a step or two or three above the Holga but it can deliver really good results. Doesn't leak (most of the time anyway) like the holga, really focuses great pictures through its real anastigmat lens, and has adjustable apertures and shutter speeds to boot. Costs about US$25.
Or for folders, there's the Moskwa (Moscow) 6x9.
My bias for FSU cameras shows, doesn't it?
DBP said:I would second the Moskva, which I have and use, although I find the ergonomics a bit challenging. Great lens! But I think the Ciroflex is a much better buy than the Lubitel at the same or sometimes lower price. Some models were actually used by professionals in the US before Franke and Heidecke recovered from the war.
DBP said:Given the commonality of design with the Ikonta, I suspect the only difference is quality control. And I probably have been lucky with the two Moskva 5s I have handled (gave one as a graduation gift to a film student). If he is budget constrained, it's probably worth the risk.
Now that my lab has gone half digital, they probably can handle the 6x9. Will have to ask.
Mike Kovacs said:Do you own these two cameras? In terms of build quality the postwar Ikonta vs Moskva is more akin to Leica vs FED than Contax vs Kiev. The Moskva 5 is pretty rough in places. From a repairman's perspective (I've restored various folders), the Ikonta (various flavours) is probably the most overengineered folder. The differences go way past quality control.
Although I don't own a 6x9 Super Ikonta, I do own a 6x6 Super Ikonta and it blows the Soviet stuff away in quality. That's not to say that they cannot be used effectively - a properly operating Moskva 5 is an excellent camera.
Also, the Moskva 5 has very difficult ergonomics for me. The viewfinder is way off to the right side. Being a left-eyed shooter, I cannot steady the camera at all with my face shooting horizontally and its compounded by the left hand shutter release.
DBP said:Why is it that anytime I say something nice about a camera that is a cheaper and perhaps shabbier alternative to something built by Zeiss or Rollei, someone thinks I insulted their mother? I knew Leica people were like this, but does it apply to all German cameras?
DBP said:The viewfinders on old folders can be pretty iffy. Are you sure the little prism that switches from 6x6 to 6x9 is completely in position?
Seems everything back then was roomier. A neighbor used to have a 58 Mercedes. There was enough room under the hood for two suitcases, or maybe small children. And the old Checker cabs sat six in the back seat.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?