Choosing a 6x6 TLR camera. Help!

[Leigh Youdale]

I've got a Yashicamat 124G (almost mint) and a Rolleiflex E2 Planar f2.8. I regard the Yashica as every bit as good as the 3.5 Rollei lenses and the camera is nearly 20 years younger!
Main drawback is lack of interchangeable lenses but it does tend to make you focus on composition! The Yashica doesn't have the facility to change the focussing screens which the Rollei offers.
If you must have interchangeable lenses then go for the Mamiyaflex but only the C33. The earlier models have well-documented problems. But try to hold and handle an example of each. The Mamiya is quite a bit larger and heavier, and more complex. There's quite a bit of stuff on the Mamiya models on the net if you search a bit.

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Sorry, I meant C330 Mamiya, not C33.

 

[JRJacobs]

Just to give an opposing viewpoint, I am not a fan of the Mamiya TLR's. For me, the beauty of a TLR is that it is lightweight and doesn't require a bunch of lenses to carry around (i.e. Rollei, Yashica, etc.). If I want square and want to carry around a bunch of lenses, I would rather do it with a Hasselblad - much lighter and no parrallax. Those Mamiyas are ungodly heavy for a TLR, and add the lenses - not my cup of tea. Now before all the Mamiya users jump on me let me reiterate that this is my personal opinion, but a viewpoint to consider for one looking for a new TLR.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Just to give an opposing viewpoint, I am not a fan of the Mamiya TLR's. For me, the beauty of a TLR is that it is lightweight and doesn't require a bunch of lenses to carry around (i.e. Rollei, Yashica, etc.). If I want square and want to carry around a bunch of lenses, I would rather do it with a Hasselblad - much lighter and no parrallax. Those Mamiyas are ungodly heavy for a TLR, and add the lenses - not my cup of tea. Now before all the Mamiya users jump on me let me reiterate that this is my personal opinion, but a viewpoint to consider for one looking for a new TLR.

What he said. I found that the C330 hand too high a fiddle factor. I had inherited a COMPLETE C330 system and after four months and many rolls of film I dumped it to get the Hasselblad system. I have never regretted the move. I have help up on posting my opinion of the C330 system because the OP does not seem to be able to afford a Hasselblad.

Steve

 

[Doug Webb]

If you get a Rollei or Yashica TLR in good shape and you can tolerate their characteristics and limitations, you will probably be very happy. Just one note, however, the cameras in your price range are old and lots of them have either lots of miles on them, have been poorly treated, or have been stored in unfavorable conditions or have been subjected to all three. In my experience, the best chance of getting a good one has been to buy one that has just been CLA'd by someone with a good reputation, otherwise you can get a camera with lots of problems that are very expensive to repair, or possibly can't be repaired, even though the camera's appearance is okay. I have used a Yashicamat and owned a Yashica D, a Rolleicord, and a Rolleiflex 2.8E, the image quality of all of them was pretty much the same and wouldn't be a deciding factor for me in choosing between them, I also had no prolblems with build quality on any of them.
Good luck
Doug Webb

 

[conorific]

A Mamiya C220 was the first medium-format camera I'd ever owned given to me as a gift by someone I loved. I like its heavy, solid squareness...I can take amazing macros and long exposures with it. You can shoot 120 or 220. Mamiyas also have this amazing "pop" when the image snaps into focus on the screen that I have never seen with another TLR. I wouldn't trade it for the world.

 

[hughck]

What do you want to photograph with it?

Each camera of these cameras,
Rolleiflex (different versions?)
Rolleicord (different versions?)
Yashica D
Yashica Mat 124
YASHICA 635
Mamiya c330/c220,
have their advantages and disadvantages. If you need to change to a difference lens, the Mamiya is the way to go. Just remember that it is big and heavy compared to the Rollie or Yashica. If price is the main thing go with Yashica, or if price is not an issue the best camera of the bunch is the Rolleiflex f3.5 or 2.8, in my opinion. I'm retired after 40 years of being a professional photographer and can tell you I still have my first Rollie f3.5. Over the 40 years I photographed 1000's of wedding and have only had to have the camera repaired twice. Both times the slow shutter spring needed replacement. If you buy a rollie make sure you set it to 1 second and see that it does not stick or take longer than the 1 second.
I had a friend that used Yashica to do weddings and always made fun of me for spending the extra money on the Rollie, because they looked so much alike, and even though the photo from the Rollie always looked better the the Yashica, he felt that his customers could not tell the difference. One day one of his cameras broke and he needed a loan of a back up camera. I gave him one of my spare Rollies. After he shot that wedding, he told me he was wrong about the extra money for the Rollie, everything about the Rollie felt superior to the Yashica. He kept his Yashicas until they broke and were too expensive to fix and then bought Rollies. The Mamiya is a well built camera, but I do not feel the picture quality is as good as the Rollie. Of course many will disagree with that statement.
Bottom Line: Rolleiflex 3.5f, my favorite, or the 2.8f is my choice.

 

[Ian Grant]

Having used Yashica's, Mamiya's and Rolleiflex's and an early Rolleicord I have to say that all turn out excellent image quality, with my Rolleicord lagging behind mainly due to it's age & uncoated Triotar lens.

My Mamiya C3 & C33 were excellent work horses, the lenses were superb, unfortunately they were stolen, I'm now happily using a Yashicamat 124 bought through this forum, I had the shutter serviced and again the results are superb. However I'm certain that the overall build quality etc of my Rolleiflex 3.5E is way better than the Yashica but then it's relative cost new and current second-hand value is considerably higher.

Welcome to APUG BTW

Ian

 

[Anscojohn]

with my Rolleicord lagging behind mainly due to it's age & uncoated Triotar lens.
******
I never heard much good about the Triotar and was told to avoid it. Not one Zeiss's better lenses.

My Mamiya C3 & C33 were excellent work horses, the lenses were superb, unfortunately they were stolen,Ian[/QUOTE]

*****
I owned a C3 with the 105s, bought new, for portraiture. Worked well. always regret having sold it.

One summer, doing kids's home portraits, we were issued two Yashica Ds. At the end of a year, the company trashed them A lot of film went through them in the meantime, not to mentioned being bounced around in the travel box between shoots.

I was also told that the biggest bang for a buck was a Rolly III or later with a Xenar.

I can remember, or know from notes, which MF took which. But I can't say I ever saw a whole lot of difference between cameras. But then, I never really put the prints side by side, either. I have a Pentax 6x7 I just love, but with my increasing arthritis it seems to get heavier every month. I now play with a (snark, snark, hoot, hoot) Kiev 88. But there is a completely overhauled Yash 635 (Yashikor) and a mint Yash 12 (Yashinon) in the closet if I choose to get nostalgic. Come to think of it, I still have a NIB Lubitel 2--it reminded me so much of my Dad's Argoflex I just HAD to have it. One of these days I'll have to break it out and use it.

 

[Ian Grant]

I never heard much good about the Triotar and was told to avoid it. Not one Zeiss's better lenses.

The Triotar was OK when stopped down well

It was an interesting lens, I think I still have it although the camera was written off. The Rolleicord suffered badly, I made a big mistake of storing a number of Vintage cameras in a dry cellar, well it was dry in the winter, but damp due to condensation in the Summer, and all the cameras were a corroded write off.

You are right the Triotar was best avoided, but it made a great portrait lens with a wonderful softness at wider apertures, however it was as sharp as a Tessar once stopped down.

Ian

 

[kavandje]

My first 'learning' TLR was a Yashicamat 124, and I love it dear still.

The Fujinon 80mm is a Tessar-type, and performs *very* well stopped down to f/11 or so. The viewfinder is bright, the lens is sharp, the mechanism is tough as nails.

The Rolleiflex Automat (mine is a 1951 model 4), with a 'real' Tessar, is an excellent performer with excellent glass offering a real vibe which in my opinion the 'better' performing Planars etc. can't quite match. Subjectively: The bokeh is nicer for a start. Also, Bay 1 filters are a dime a dozen...

 

[Ian Grant]

Your Yashica must have been a rare beast to have a Fujinon lens

I guess you meant Yashinon The Yashinon lenses are excellent, the later Tessar type lenses using modern optical glass aren't too far behind the Planars & Xenotars in terms of performance.

Ian

 

[Rollei fan]

A Mamiya C220f with 80mm 55mm and 180mm Super lenses was my first MF camera back in the 80s. I liked it very much, but I sold it to get a Pentax 645 (SLR was better for taking pictures of my kids). I always missed the Mamiya, though, and some years ago I got myself a near mint boxed C220f with 55, 80 and 180mm Super lenses, and a C220 as a backup. Then I got myself a Rolleiflex 3.5F with Planar, too, as I always wanted one (the thrill of german workmanship, you know).

A Mamiya C220F is indeed bigger than Rolleiflex 3.5F and somewhat heavier too, but not as heavy as the C330 versions. It doesn't have parallax correction but I rarely have missed it, neither can I recall ever having ruined a shot due to the lack of it. You must cock the shutter separately with the C220F, but that hasn't bothered me neither. Other differences compared with the C330 versions are probably of minor importance.

The lenses for Mamiya are very good and also small, light and cheap compared with any MF SLR lenses. The sharpest lens of my TLR gear is, however, the 75mm Planar of the Rolleiflex. In fact, it is sharper than the 80mm f2.8 Planar of my Rolleiflex SL66E.

What is my recommendation then? Everything depends what you are going to use the camera for. For travel, landscapes and architecture the Mamiya with wideangle and normal lenses is an excellent choice. If you want a more compact camera get a Rolleiflex from a reputable dealer. The 3.5F and T models are lighter and cheaper than the 2.8F. Whatever you choose, have fun!

 

[espressogeek]

I vote for whatever floats your boat. I have a friend who shoots a Rollei with Tessar that does great work. My Minolta Automat is the cat's meow even at F22 for landscape stuff. Here is an example of the Minolta.http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/onblack.php?id=3277618575

I also have a Mamiya TLR that is in non working order (father's old camera) but I think some of the lenses are serviceable if I can find someone to clean them up. I might have to pick up a body to press them into service. They have a wonderful lens signature that you don't see much. The body is HEAVY and BIG compared to some of the smaller Japanese and German bodies.

It is a shame the little seagulls are so unreliable. I wonder how hard they are to repair. I love the idea of swirly bokeh for candid/abstract stuff.

 

[kavandje]

Your Yashica must have been a rare beast to have a Fujinon lens.

Ian, you are of course entirely correct. A side effect of being too dang far from most of my gear; I normally get off my chair to verify this kind of thing. My bad.

Anyway: I stand by my remarks regarding the performance of the YASHInon lens, and of Tessar-types in general.

Oh, for a 50mm f/2.8 Zeiss Tessar in an M-mount...