Gonna buy a TLR from a local dealer, Which one of three?

TheFlyingCamera said:

Which Rolleiflex are you saying is overhyped? They made Rolleiflex models from the 1920s to the 2000s. Other TLRs are perfectly good cameras, as you've already observed. But there's just something about a Rollei in use that makes it a wonderful camera not just to take photos with, but just as a user experience. They do cost a mint to service, but kept properly serviced they are one of the best picture-taking machines ever devised.

Click to expand...

I just mean that people talk about Rolleis like others talk about Leicas. Yes, they are great cameras, but that doesn't mean you can't get great results with other cameras. It always seems that whenever people ask about TLRs, the recommendation is always to save for a Rollei instead, like none of the others matter. And personally for me, after a decade of shooting with an Autocord (and other TLRs), when I finally got a Rollei I have to admit I was disappointed in it. It's not as user-friendly or as easy to use (this is a very relative term though) compared to the Autocord. But, I'm trying to give it a chance, so I'm shooting with it much more than the Autocord. However, I have an early model Rolleiflex, so I am interested in getting newer/better model in the future when and if I can afford one - I am inspired by you Scott, and would like a similar set-up with two Rolleis (normal and wide) than I could use as a permanent set up.

mooseontheloose said:

I just mean that people talk about Rolleis like others talk about Leicas. Yes, they are great cameras, but that doesn't mean you can't get great results with other cameras. It always seems that whenever people ask about TLRs, the recommendation is always to save for a Rollei instead, like none of the others matter. And personally for me, after a decade of shooting with an Autocord (and other TLRs), when I finally got a Rollei I have to admit I was disappointed in it. It's not as user-friendly or as easy to use (this is a very relative term though) compared to the Autocord. But, I'm trying to give it a chance, so I'm shooting with it much more than the Autocord. However, I have an early model Rolleiflex, so I am interested in getting newer/better model in the future when and if I can afford one - I am inspired by you Scott, and would like a similar set-up with two Rolleis (normal and wide) than I could use as a permanent set up.

Click to expand...

The early (especially the pre-war) Rolleiflexes are not all that ergonomic or sensible. Good cameras for the time period? Certainly. Good cameras for today? Not so much. The sweet spot, IMHO, for a Rolleiflex is a 2.8 or 3.5 E or F. A 3.5 E is probably the best bargain out there for the big name 'flexes. That or one of the MX-EVS models. The Rolleiflex T's have their following as well, and are a lot less expensive than the E/F variations. I know they can inspire a Leica-esque cult following, but they're a tool, like any other camera. They're great at some things, meh at others, and really bad for yet more things. I wouldn't shoot golf with mine, nor would I use it for microphotography of insects. People and places, though? BINGO.

The challenge with your dream setup is the Wide. Regardless of vintage or modern, the RolleiWide models are really pricey. I found a deal on my Tele (if you can call $1500 a deal), but beat-to-hell Wides still run well north of $2K, and good clean ones are more like $3500-4000.

TheFlyingCamera said:

The early (especially the pre-war) Rolleiflexes are not all that ergonomic or sensible. Good cameras for the time period? Certainly. Good cameras for today? Not so much. The sweet spot, IMHO, for a Rolleiflex is a 2.8 or 3.5 E or F. A 3.5 E is probably the best bargain out there for the big name 'flexes. That or one of the MX-EVS models. The Rolleiflex T's have their following as well, and are a lot less expensive than the E/F variations. I know they can inspire a Leica-esque cult following, but they're a tool, like any other camera.

The challenge with your dream setup is the Wide. Regardless of vintage or modern, the RolleiWide models are really pricey. I found a deal on my Tele (if you can call $1500 a deal), but beat-to-hell Wides still run well north of $2K, and good clean ones are more like $3500-4000.

Click to expand...

Yeah, my Rolleiflex is an Automat Tessar, and I think it's one of the earlier models, as I have the old film speeds: 10, 25, 50, 100, etc. It works great though, and I can't complain. I could probably keep it as my main camera (if I don't go back to the Autocord) and then just get the Rollei Wide, but I'd have to sell some camera gear to finance that (probably my Mamiya 6 set up). Before I do that though, I'd like to find one that I could handle to make sure that that is what I want to do.

So the general consensus seems to be, "get the 635."

This particular example has a 3.5 yashikor, which I'm also told has a tendency to have a more swirly bokeh, which sounds pretty yummy to me!

I'm going to pick it up on the 17th!

mooseontheloose said:

I just mean that people talk about Rolleis like others talk about Leicas. Yes, they are great cameras, but that doesn't mean you can't get great results with other cameras. It always seems that whenever people ask about TLRs, the recommendation is always to save for a Rollei instead, like none of the others matter. And personally for me, after a decade of shooting with an Autocord (and other TLRs), when I finally got a Rollei I have to admit I was disappointed in it. It's not as user-friendly or as easy to use (this is a very relative term though) compared to the Autocord. But, I'm trying to give it a chance, so I'm shooting with it much more than the Autocord. However, I have an early model Rolleiflex, so I am interested in getting newer/better model in the future when and if I can afford one - I am inspired by you Scott, and would like a similar set-up with two Rolleis (normal and wide) than I could use as a permanent set up.

Click to expand...

I agree with this. I've got stellar results off of much inferior TLRs. I have a Ricoflex VIIIIIII or something that does the job. Would I like a Rollie? Sure. Will I ever buy one? No.

Indeed, many TLRs are somewhat over-hyped, but by no luck. Shoots with my early Y 635 (Yashikor lens) is less sharp than my Y 124 (Yashinon) which is in turn is less sharp than my Rolleiflex T (gray model, Tessar lens with lanthanum glass). By using these cameras for a while their differences in their qualities become more apparent. Also the Yashikor makes the background a bit swirly (but lovely). From these three, the Rolleiflex T has the best quality and ease of use. A fine focusing screen, an excellent lens and the ability to shift the shutter and the aperture maintaining the EV value.
The Y 124 has the plus of being able to use the 220 rolls of film.
Yet I love them all, along with the three (but all different) Lubitel 2 cameras I own (a Lomo, a Loomp, and a Gomz with the brand inscription on their taking lens ring). The Lubitel tlrs besides delivering great results, they are cheap and the lightest of all.

Huss said:

Hmm. My old $400 3.5 MX-EVS is much better made and finished than my $2000+ 2.8GX. The GX has an easier to focus screen and spot meter but that is the only advantage. The pics look the same.

Click to expand...

My MX-EVS was fitted with a Mamiya focusing screen (from an RB67 I believe) and it makes wonder.