DHW Fototechnik in insolvency

Xmas · Dec 1, 2014

But to summarise the film curl problem.

Only quaint cameras are subject, some TLR are ok, some SLR are ok, some roll film backs are ok.

select carefully...

Curl is film, time and temperature dependent as well as film path and tension.

The effect in a photo is dependent on focal length and aperture, eg the glass plate was standard for tele Rolli.

If you got a glass plate for your Rolli use it.

I only use the c330 outdoors, the RB67 stays indoors, it is not abnormal that ambient is below 10C, I have carried blad backs off camera in inner pocket between shots and fired one, wound two, but simpler using the c330. The c330 standards lens may only be a Helier class (five element - thin triplet) but it is ok wide open on a tripod with slow film and predictable.

For the doubting Thomas's AP (weekly UK magazine) did their standard resolution test of an initial tele Rolli and they detected a difference between with and without the glass plate - tripod slow film ambient London C.

benjiboy · Dec 1, 2014

I think trying to sell new film TLR's for those kind of prices however good the camera in a digit age when there are so many used Rolleiflexes on the market when even digital compact and SLR camera sales are taking a nose dive because most people use their i phones I'm frankly not surprised there must only be a very small niche market for these cameras.

Pioneer · Dec 1, 2014

After reading through this thread I went online and checked the price of a new Rolleiflex 2.8FX. After seeing the price on one I decided to wait for the next sale...and sell a few things first...and save some money.

Seriously though, I am somewhat afraid that the gold trim and brown alligator covering may not quite be as stealthy as I would want for my next Vivian Maier photo tour through downtown Chicago.

For the time being I'll have to be happy with my little Rolleiflex K4B.

PittP · Dec 1, 2014

Interesting discussion! Sal's observations are supported by a Zeiss research I read a couple of years back: 120 film and strongly bent film paths were worst with "poor" results even when rapidly shooting frames - the other (top) end was a straight path, 220 film and a suction back, and again swiftly snapping one frame after the other... surprise: Contax then had such ceramic suction back plates.

Pioneer · Dec 1, 2014

PittP said:
Interesting discussion! Sal's observations are supported by a Zeiss research I read a couple of years back: 120 film and strongly bent film paths were worst with "poor" results even when rapidly shooting frames - the other (top) end was a straight path, 220 film and a suction back, and again swiftly snapping one frame after the other... surprise: Contax then had such ceramic suction back plates.

All I have to say about this is that, with enough magnification, anything can be proven.

But it is very hard to argue with the results achieved in the real world by an awful lot of TLR photographers across the decades.

But, if you are really dissatisfied with the sharpness of your photographs due to film curl in your medium format camera, I would be willing for you to send it along to me.

Xmas · Dec 1, 2014

Pioneer said:
All I have to say about this is that, with enough magnification, anything can be proven.

But it is very hard to argue with the results achieved in the real world by an awful lot of TLR photographers across the decades.

But, if you are really dissatisfied with the sharpness of your photographs due to film curl in your medium format camera, I would be willing for you to send it along to me.

later /3.5 Rollis had the option for and most Teles came with glass plates.
But any difference needs large aperture, tripod and slow film to be detectable.
If you are shooting for monster hoardings etc.
It is a lot simpler using a Mamiya TLR or Minolta Autocord and they are cheaper.
To far to send my C330 anyway.

Vaughn · Dec 1, 2014

I have a Calumet roll film holder for 4x5 cameras. Handy because they slip in like a 4x5 film holder. But the design requires an 180 degree turn in the opposite direction of the film's normal curl. Delay too long before moving on to the next image resulted in the film rolling up so loosely that I had to unload the holder in a changing bag and re-tighten the film on the spool.

But I like the Rolleiflex and Cords. Nice beasts...

benjiboy · Dec 1, 2014

The bottom line is that like many other photographic industry companies in recent years they have failed to anticipate market trends, and thought they werel invulnerable to the digital revolution.

AgX · Dec 1, 2014

Well, they got the hybrid Hy6 MF-SLR and the small X-act view camera for digital backs.

How would you as Rollei/DHW CEO had countered the digital revolution?

blockend · Dec 4, 2014

Film camera as fetish item is a difficult trick to pull off in the current market. Only Leica manage to do it, and they have digital cameras as a cash cow. A digital medium format Rolleiflex would certainly be attractive, and could have potentially saved the film version for well-heeled purchasers, but film alone? Nah, there are still too many used ones around.

Lomo are able to sell Lubitels for £289 (mine cost £12 back in the day), and Dianas in funky colourways for £150 (they used to be for sale alongside water pistol cameras and fart powder for a pound or two), so never try and predict the camera buying public, but almost $9000 for a film TLR - case a mere $430 - is not a long term business model I would suggest.

baachitraka · Dec 4, 2014

I do not know why they can't diversify a bit in their product line. Like A...C, where A=Pro, C=Consumer and B=some where intermediate who shoot less than 500 rolls in a year.

Xmas · Dec 4, 2014

blockend said:
Film camera as fetish item is a difficult trick to pull off in the current market. Only Leica manage to do it, and they have digital cameras as a cash cow. A digital medium format Rolleiflex would certainly be attractive, and could have potentially saved the film version for well-heeled purchasers, but film alone? Nah, there are still too many used ones around.

Lomo are able to sell Lubitels for £289 (mine cost £12 back in the day), and Dianas in funky colourways for £150 (they used to be for sale alongside water pistol cameras and fart powder for a pound or two), so never try and predict the camera buying public, but almost $9000 for a film TLR - case a mere $430 - is not a long term business model I would suggest.

My Lubitel was 10.0 GBP cause the shop had lost the box and instructions.

When you speak to a Lomo person they do feel hard done by.

Xmas · Dec 4, 2014

baachitraka said:
I do not know why they can't diversify a bit in their product line. Like A...C, where A=Pro, C=Consumer and B=some where intermediate who shoot less than 500 rolls in a year.

The Rollicords were expensive new (not humble) the flex eyewatering.

blockend · Dec 4, 2014

Xmas said:
When you speak to a Lomo person they do feel hard done by.

Really? I thought spending a week's wage on a toy must be part of the buzz. Otherwise they'd be using box cameras for a fiver, or a nice old 3-element German folder for twenty quid.
And they'd have enough left over for some big glasses, a pair of Converse and a de-caff.

Rollei on the other hand imagined there were enough dentists who wanted bragging rights at the golf club to buy one.

film_man · Dec 5, 2014

blockend said:
Really? I thought spending a week's wage on a toy must be part of the buzz. Otherwise they'd be using box cameras for a fiver, or a nice old 3-element German folder for twenty quid.
And they'd have enough left over for some big glasses, a pair of Converse and a de-caff.

Rollei on the other hand imagined there were enough dentists who wanted bragging rights at the golf club to buy one.

Unfortunately for Rollei those dentists are now all buying Sonyblads with a carbon fibre grip and a vomit repellent paint.

AgX · Mar 13, 2015

DHW going to be liquidated

The process of insolvency finally led to liquidation. In April the plant will be auctioned.

The intellectual property and the stock with majority of parts (spares) will be sold seperately.

See post #46 too for information on attempts to stay in business.

Slixtiesix · Jul 29, 2015

From the ashes: German photo news site Photoscala reports that the production of Rollei TLRs (and probably Hy6 as well) will start again soon.

http://photoscala.de/Artikel/Rolleiflex-Kameras-Es-geht-weiter-–-wieder-einmal-und-irgendwie

In short: company now calls itself DW Photo GmbH (Ltd.). Differences on the use of the "Rolleiflex"-trademark still have to be settled because it was sold years ago to RCP (the one which has been producing cheapish digital cameras and other stuff under the label for years). Probably the new company won't be allowed to use the Rolleiflex-name at all ...

AgX · Jul 29, 2015

They are starting with "long time employees" at "the old location"

I missed that auction of the old factory compartimented stuff, but starting at the old place in empty premises does not make much sense. Thus I wonder what more than specific tools they got out of it.
The new company was formed 3 weeks after that auction.

A continuation with same people also not necessarily is the best idea. The former CEO is the new CEO again.
Maybe the new owner has a different view on things.

Anyway, "Rollei" is the company with the longest history of demises and restarts within the german photo industry.

We shall see...

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Jul 29, 2015

very good news indeed , who will manufacture the lenses ? zeiss , schneider , it would be very expensive to order lens from them , do they still manufacture same rolleiflexes from 50 years or hasselblad like modular system ? I dont know.

Xmas · Jul 29, 2015

The trendy rich Lomo crowd may keep them afloat as the 2nd hand market for perfect TLR is very good.

But that is a very poor business case.

I've seen brand new Lubitels in the street and the new owners did confess they had not got a bargain.

Especially when I indicated that my Canon P and 35mm /2.5 was the same shop price.

AgX · Jul 29, 2015

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
very good news indeed , who will manufacture the lenses ? zeiss , schneider , it would be very expensive to order lens from them , do they still manufacture same rolleiflexes from 50 years or hasselblad like modular system ? I dont know.

Please read post #46.
It lists up what they were doing lately. BUT this company and most likely the factory has vanished.

The new company is stated to start again with the TLRs and likely the Hy6.
But not the Rollei 35 and the projectors.

Maybe the new company assets are only a stock of parts.

Xmas · Jul 29, 2015

AgX said:
Please read post #46.
It lists up what they were doing lately. BUT this company and most likely the factory has vanished.

The new company is stated to start again with the TLRs and likely the Hy6.
But not the Rollei 35 and the projectors.

Maybe the new company assets are only a stock of parts.

There is nothing wrong in converting the parts to end products.
Apart from more difficult maintenance.
They would have got them at fire sale ...

AgX · Jul 29, 2015

I guess some of you wondered too why even after liquidation of the company the ad for Rollei/DHW was still on here at Apug and their website still online too. Of course one may have thought that the fees were already paid and in liquidating hassle nobody cared to stop them.

But maybe there was a concept behind it.

Ken Nadvornick · Jul 29, 2015

Geez. More twists and turns to this story than a bowl of spaghetti.

Ken

film_man · Jul 29, 2015

Good luck to them but unless they think of something radical I just don't see how they can make money by trying to sell TLRs for 3000 euro when there are lost of used ones available for a fraction of that.

DHW Fototechnik in insolvency

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency