A TLR choice

For what it's worth...

I'll toss my vote in for the Rolleicord V / Rolleiflex from the 1950s.

I have one of each, love using them both. I don't see the difference in optics between the two, but I slightly prefer to use the 'flex due to the lack of the shutter and aperture being linked, and because the crank film advance feels faster and better than the 'cords knob advance. Oh, also the shutter release on the 'flex just feels much better than on the 'cord.

But my 'cord has a bright screen divided by thirds, while my 'flex just has the standard (rather dim) Rollei screen. That single change almost negates all the "better handling" features of the 'flex - but not quite.

Not sure this is an issue for you, but I travel a lot by motorcycle. I have no hard data, but I suspect the old over-built Rollei TLRs take that in stride better than many newer cameras. Just a hunch, mind you.

kb244 said:

Nothing eh? I'd say a good Mamiya C3 or C330 TLR with the good lens like the 80mm f/2.8 (the lens are interchangeable) and such would come close if not least surpass...

But thats my opinion of the matter.

Click to expand...

Well, Karl, at least you and I can agree, here in this forum, that NOTHING beats film. We might differ on our tools, but in the end we share the common bond of silver gelatin.

Sanders.

SL66 is nice camera and its lenses are great, but is very large and heavy. SL66E and SL66SE are with exposure meter that is accurate and convenient. The bellows can tilt as well, though limited. You can use standard lens reversed for close-up.

It is mechanically much more complicated than Hasselblad, and is prone to trouble. I had one, but it costed me much money when I had to get it repaired. Once the mechanism was jammed after I changed film back and the other time the plastic rack gear was broken.

Focal plane shutter works with big noise and shock.

It's not cheap. With the price of SL66 I think you can purchase top line Rolleiflex TLR such as 3.5F or 2.8F.

Thank you guys, that really helps to putmy considerations in a proper order..
Hasselblad/Rollei SLR options now failed, we left with:
1. TLR Planar/Xenotar (presumably Rolleiflex)
2. Cheaper TLR with Tessar/Xenar or similar (Rolleiflex/cord, Yashica Mat 124 or Minolta Autocord)
3. Pentax 645N
4. Rangefinder (Bronica RF645, no larger needed)

Have never used rangefinders so far, not sure how it is convenient for say, environmental portraiture (where 6x6 TLR excells), but small, light and high quality.
What about comparative analysis of TLR vs. rangefinder when simplicity yet robustness is desired ?

> Once the mechanism was jammed after I changed film back

Rule #1: Whatever you do, cock the shutter first

AFAIK this rule more or less applies to all MF-cameras with interchangeable backs and shutters in lenses.

As any other mechanical device a SL66 can break, especially when abused. I can't see why it should be more prone to demage than let's say a RB67, which features a bellows too.

I agree on your attitude towards Rolleiflex TLR though.

Ulrich

kb244 said:

Nothing eh? I'd say a good Mamiya C3 or C330 TLR with the good lens like the 80mm f/2.8 (the lens are interchangeable) and such would come close if not least surpass.

Click to expand...

I second Karl's opinion. I find the Mamiya C series the most usable TLRs with their interchangeable lenses ranging from 55 to 250mm and close focusing capability with built-in bellows. And there is some great glass available for it!

I acknowledge a Rolleiflex is a masterpiece of German technology, but you can find better cameras with sharper lenses today. And while I love my Koniflex with its 5 glass Heliar-type lens which takes superb portraits, I must admit that I don't use it a lot because I find it rather clumsy. Fixed lens TLRs are well suited to certains tasks, but they are rather limited cameras by today standards.

Cheers,

I agree that Mamiya C cameras are very versatile, but they are also very heavy - I got rid of mine because I coulnd't find a 55 mm lens (I bought 2 examples) to match the performance of the other system lenses (the 55 seemed to need quite a lot of stopping down to get the edges sharp and also seemed prone to flare).

The Tessars/Xenars on 1950s/1960s Rolleis in my view perform well even by modern standards, with good contrast and good central sharpness even at full aperture. Of course they need stopping down a couple of stops to bring the edges and corners fully in. The major advantage of these cameras is of course their size and weight. I always found Rolleis far superior in build quality to Yaschicas and Minoltas, although the lenses on these were not at all bad.

In the present day, when Rolleiflexes and Rolleicords seem to sell for not very different prices, there's not much to say in favor of Rolleicords - the buiild quality and lenses is OK, the shutter release (combined with the cocking lever) is awful - if I have to use one of these, I forget about the body release and use a short cable release. A Rolleicord shutter release button was available as an optional extra but does not help much.

Regards,

David

David H. Bebbington said:

In the present day, when Rolleiflexes and Rolleicords seem to sell for not very different prices, there's not much to say in favor of Rolleicords - the buiild quality and lenses is OK, the shutter release (combined with the cocking lever) is awful - if I have to use one of these, I forget about the body release and use a short cable release. A Rolleicord shutter release button was available as an optional extra but does not help much.

Click to expand...

I both agree and disagree on a couple of points. Yes, the combined cocking lever and shutter release is not very good and if I am using it on a tripod I would also use a cable release. Hand held, you can get used to it. You have to make sure your hand is not obscuring the taking lens which you obviously can't see when you're looking through the viewing lens!

I prefer having separate winding and cocking rather than a combined winder as it is something less to go wrong. This may be a minor point and is just my opinion. In real life it may not be a problem.

I don't actually have any experience of a Rolleiflex wind on/cocking mechanism going wrong but I did try to repair a friend's Yashicamat which would not cock when winding but I could not get it to work. This has probably prejudiced my opinions of The Rolleiflex cocking method. Possibly unfairly.

Steve.

Steve Smith said:

I don't actually have any experience of a Rolleiflex wind on/cocking mechanism going wrong but I did try to repair a friend's Yashicamat which would not cock when winding but I could not get it to work. This has probably prejudiced my opinions of The Rolleiflex cocking method. Possibly unfairly.

Steve.

Click to expand...

I think this is rather confirmation of what I said about the relative build quality of Roillei on the one hand and Yashica/Minolta on the other! I have experienced a Rolleiflex winding mechanism failing to lock and turning a roll of 120 into a 2- or 3-exposure film, but this was just due to dried-out grease. The biggest problem with any old TLR is ageing of the viewing mirror and focusing screen, which can make focusing very hard.

Regards,

David

I've run tens of thousands of rolls of film through a variety of Rolleiflexes over the years, and have never once had a problem with the film wind/cocking mechanism. Things like that just never happen to Rolleiflexes.

If you want small and light, you should consider a folding camera. Check out www.certo6.com for a thorough discussion of the options. The site owner, Jurgen Krekel, also reconditions and sells the cameras at very low prices. I carry around a Super Baldax 6x6 when I'm traveling light. the optics aren't up to Rolleiflex standards but they make pleasing images in their own right.

Sanders.

David H. Bebbington said:

I think this is rather confirmation of what I said about the relative build quality of Roillei on the one hand and Yashica/Minolta on the other!

Click to expand...

Yes, you're quite correct. When I wrote that I both agreed and disagreed with you it was 98% agreement and 2% disagreement!

The bit I didn't quite agree with was this bit:

'In the present day, when Rolleiflexes and Rolleicords seem to sell for not very different prices, there's not much to say in favor of Rolleicords'

For me personally, I don't see any advantage of the self cocking film advance lever over the simpler separate wind on and cocking of the Rolleicord. Rather, I see it as something extra to go wrong.

I will admit though that a Rolleiflex type shutter release would be preferable and although you get use to it, I would prefer the aperture and shutter controls not to have the constant EV linkage.

As I said, This is only my opinion and other peoples ways of working are equally valid.

Steve.