Moving from 35mm rangefinder to 6x6 TLR (Rolei GX)

[RezaLoghme]

After some insight I gained about 6x6 TLRs being ideal for protraits of people I am now thinking about dumping my M6 and related gear in exchange for a 6x6 TLR namely the Rolei GX. Has anyone ever made such a move, and if so, how was it for you:

- did your image quality improve (as per the larger negative)
- did your models/subjects prefer the "stealth" shoot from the hip WLF style
- did you make a profit or loss from selling M cameras in exchange for a Rolei GX

Also wondering whether the standard GX is enough or if its worth going for the grey or lizard ones (not sure what they are called like).

 

[GregY]

RL, grey or lizard are vanity options. BTW, personally I would choose a more classic older Rolleiflex rather than a GX.
As far as model's opinion about your camera, .....it has no impact on the final image.

 

[RezaLoghme]

You think a lesser model will be fine? or even a Yashica 6x6 in terms of Image Quality

 

[ntenny]

They’re very different cameras, and some people like TLRs and others don’t. I love them, but experiment before committing.

-NT

 

[Paul Howell]

I shoot 35mm and MF, 6X6, TLR and SLR. With modern film, up to 8X10 I don't think you will see much difference, unless you print square you are really shooting 6X4.5 at 11X14 you will start to notice the difference of the larger negative. When shooting Portraits I tend to a eye level viewfinder on my SLR, I use Yashica TRLs which the only option for eye level viewing is the sports finder. In terms of cost and functionality I would think about a Mamyia 220, a bit heavier than a Rollie, very good 80mm 2.8 standard lens, then wide to tele for the price a Rolli.

 

[Michael Howard]

Boxxy couldn't troll this any better...

 

[MattKing]

Keep what seems to be working for you now. If you and your existing camera(s) are working well together, don't disturb the connection. Because it is the photographer-camera connection that might be described as "ideal", not the camera itself,
If you wish to experiment with alternatives for doing portraiture, experiment with something cheaper. If a 6x6 TLR will work for you, the Lubitel you mentioned earlier will tell you that as well as an expensive GX. And if you get results that you prefer to your Leica(s) from the Lubitel, then it will be worth your while to improve things a bit more with a total switch - assuming you want to concentrate on portraiture to the exclusion of other photography.
But if you are like many of us, and like to use cameras for a bunch of different things, you may be happier having camera choices available to you.

 

[GregY]

Keep what seems to be working for you now. If you and your existing camera(s) are working well together, don't disturb the connection. Because it is the photographer-camera connection that might be described as "ideal", not the camera itself,
If you wish to experiment with alternatives for doing portraiture, experiment with something cheaper. If a 6x6 TLR will work for you, the Lubitel you mentioned earlier will tell you that as well as an expensive GX. And if you get results that you prefer to your Leica(s) from the Lubitel, then it will be worth your while to improve things a bit more with a total switch - assuming you want to concentrate on portraiture to the exclusion of other photography.
But if you are like many of us, and like to use cameras for a bunch of different things, you may be happier having camera choices available to you.

Yes.... lots of pro photographers use/d both
Check out my friend Jim Herrington's bag. & his award winning "The Climbers" book

The Climbers Book — jimherrington

www.jimherrington.com

IN YOUR BAG 1758 – JAMES HERRINGTON - Japan Camera Hunter

IN YOUR BAG 1758 – JAMES HERRINGTON For this week’s “In Your Bag” we have James his M6 and Rolleiflex! Check it out: I’ve been a follower of JCH for years

www.japancamerahunter.com

 

[Rick A]

I started shooting 6x6 TLR's in high school (60's) on the yearbook staff, I shot everything with a Yashica including sports. I stayed with Yashica's through college because they were affordable and good value for the price. I still love them even though I haven't owned one in years. Don't dump your 35mm gear, just spend less than you're planning and look for a Yashica or Rollei TLR.

 

[RezaLoghme]

Does it have to be a Yashica or can lesser brand provide the same IQ?

 

[GregY]

Does it have to be a Yashica or can lesser brand provide the same IQ?

You'll be slumming somewhat going from considering a pricey Rolleiflex GX to a Lubitel or Seagull TLR....almost like asking if there's much difference between a Leica & Holga image....
Yashica, Minolta, Mamiya on the other hand
.... have very good quality lenses.

 

[MattKing]

Does it have to be a Yashica or can lesser brand provide the same IQ?

This is from an essentially free (to me) mid-1950s era, consumer market oriented 6x6 fixed lens TLR:

Net Loft Floats #10

• MattKing
• Nov 18, 2024
• 2

A detail from some of the nets and floats on display at the Net Loft building at the Brittania...

A very satisfying 11x14 darkroom print of this is currently hanging in our Darkroom Group's Gallery Show at the Reach Gallery in Abbotsord, BC.
Yes, there are incremental benefits from top line cameras.
Many of those benefits are related to handling, or faster lenses, or brighter and more contrasty viewing and focusing systems, but if you are in experimentation or learning stage, you can get the most important benefit of a larger TLR - the larger negative - from the less expensive options.

 

[Paul Howell]

Does it have to be a Yashica or can lesser brand provide the same IQ?

Yashica made TLR with both 3 and 4 element taking lens, Minolta I think only a 4 element taking lens. The 3 element taking is good stopped down to F8 or 11, the 4 element lens is better wide. The Mamiya 80 2.8 is a 5 element lens. There were many others TLR, once you have a name you can look to find out about the lens. A Mamiya C220 is not much more than a Yashica 124.

 

[Ben 4]

This is from an essentially free (to me) mid-1950s era, consumer market oriented 6x6 fixed lens TLR:

Net Loft Floats #10

• MattKing
• Nov 18, 2024
• 2

A detail from some of the nets and floats on display at the Net Loft building at the Brittania...

A very satisfying 11x14 darkroom print of this is currently hanging in our Darkroom Group's Gallery Show at the Reach Gallery in Abbotsord, BC.
Yes, there are incremental benefits from top line cameras.
Many of those benefits are related to handling, or faster lenses, or brighter and more contrasty viewing and focusing systems, but if you are in experimentation or learning stage, you can get the most important benefit of a larger TLR - the larger negative - from the less expensive options.

That's lovely Matt!

 

[Ben 4]

6x6 TLRs are there very own rabbit hole, with lots of options and entry points. Many relatively inexpensive TLRs with 4-element lenses (I use a 1950s Rolleiflex with a Tessar lens) can be spectacular, as Matt's image shows. But you can definitely go up the price scale too, in camera brands, condition, and type of lens). I would echo the advice to keep your 35mm gear while you explore—it's very different from shooting 6x6. And though I've never used a GX, I know many Rollei fans prefer older F models with 5- or 6-element lenses for their build quality and features.

 

[Cholentpot]

First get a cheap TLR and see how you adjust before selling your rangefinder kit. It's a different beast using a TLR. I'd stick with an SLR for portraits to be honest. TLR does fine, SLR does better. Trade the M6 for an SLR style 120 camera.

 

[baachitraka]

Rolleicord Vb + lens hood.

No matter which camera, the most important is the condition. If it requires clean, lubricate, adjust then that will cost more.

*I have Rolleicord Va, surprisingly it has really a bright screen.

For me the real portrait machine is Rolleicord with a Triotar lens. Cheap and have a lot of character. Down side, screen is dim.

 

[GregY]

First get a cheap TLR and see how you adjust before selling your rangefinder kit. It's a different beast using a TLR. I'd stick with an SLR for portraits to be honest. TLR does fine, SLR does better. Trade the M6 for an SLR style 120 camera.

C, That's your personal opinion. I never cared for the SLR..... I used a Pentax 6x7 and a Rolleiflex with a prism....never stuck with them. I sure preferred the Mamiya 6 MF..... & in the end....a view camera or Rolleiflex on a tripod. Even the P645 I have now...i prefer to use on a tripod & more for landscape/travel than portraits...
In the end, it's the connection, not the camera....
(photo w Mamiya 6 MF/75)

 

[Hassasin]

TLR is most certainly not an ideal camera to shoot portraits of people. I'm not even sure what that means. TLR can be used to take portraits though, just like any other type. Result is in the eyes (and hands) of the beholder not in what he holds.

 

[Cholentpot]

C, That's your personal opinion. I never cared for the SLR..... I used a Pentax 6x7 and a Rolleiflex with a prism....never stuck with them. I sure preferred the Mamiya 6 MF..... & in the end....a view camera or Rolleiflex on a tripod. Even the P645 I have now...i prefer to use on a tripod & more for landscape/travel than portraits...
In the end, it's the connection, not the camera....
(photo w Mamiya 6 MF/75)

My personal opinion shared by the millions and millions of SLRs that unseated the TLR as the primary camera of the latter half of the 20th century.

Also, can I point out that your model is sitting? Like I pointed out in the other TLR thread, good TLR portraits have the subject sitting or on level with the lens.

 

[Cholentpot]

TLR is most certainly not an ideal camera to shoot portraits of people. I'm not even sure what that means. TLR can be used to take portraits though, just like any other type. Result is in the eyes (and hands) of the beholder not in what he holds.

Try shooting portraits of children or pets on a TLR. It's a challenge to put it lightly.

 

[GregY]

My personal opinion shared by the millions and millions of SLRs that unseated the TLR as the primary camera of the latter half of the 20th century.

Also, can I point out that your model is sitting? Like I pointed out in the other TLR thread, good TLR portraits have the subject sitting or on level with the lens.

My model was standing in an open window....
Millions of amateurs used 35mm SLRs....
Many professionals used TLRs in their studios and on the road.
Let's remember it's not a p***ing match.

 

[Cholentpot]

My model was standing in an open window....
Millions of amateurs used 35mm SLRs....
Many professionals used TLRs in their studios and on the road.
Let's remember it's not a p***ing match.

Are you significantly taller than the model? I'm medium height and shooting head and shoulders of any adult is tough for me unless I stand on a chair.

As for SLRs vs TLRs. The numbers speak for themselves. I grew up in the 80's and 90's and never saw anything other than an SLR style camera being used in professional settings. Only TLRs I saw were in old movies when the reporters jostled to interview Superman and got beat up by the guy with a Pacemaker.

I'm not knocking TLRs. They're my favorite kind of camera. It's what got me started on my photographic journey. I own a Yashica Mat, Yashica A, Yashicaflex, Yashica 44, Yashica 44 with a crank, Richoflex, RichoSuper44, Rolleicord III, Mamiya C3 and Mamiya C33. I use them all and enjoy all of them but if a client calls that they need a portrait on 120 film I'm grabbing my M645 or Bornica S2.

It's not about a urinary match. It's about reality. Arguably the most famous portrait of my generation was taken on a Nikon FM2 with a 105 2.5. You can argue all you'd like but facts are facts. For the vast majority of photographers the flippy mirror at eye level using a prism is easier to compose and shoot portraits.

 

[GregY]

Are you significantly taller than the model? I'm medium height and shooting head and shoulders of any adult is tough for me unless I stand on a chair.

As for SLRs vs TLRs. The numbers speak for themselves. I grew up in the 80's and 90's and never saw anything other than an SLR style camera being used in professional settings. Only TLRs I saw were in old movies when the reporters jostled to interview Superman and got beat up by the guy with a Pacemaker.

I'm not knocking TLRs. They're my favorite kind of camera. It's what got me started on my photographic journey. I own a Yashica Mat, Yashica A, Yashicaflex, Yashica 44, Yashica 44 with a crank, Richoflex, RichoSuper44, Rolleicord III, Mamiya C3 and Mamiya C33. I use them all and enjoy all of them but if a client calls that they need a portrait on 120 film I'm grabbing my M645 or Bornica S2.

It's not about a urinary match. It's about reality. Arguably the most famous portrait of my generation was taken on a Nikon FM2 with a 105 2.5. You can argue all you'd like but facts are facts. For the vast majority of photographers the flippy mirror at eye level using a prism is easier to compose and shoot portraits.

I assume you're talking about the photo by Steve McCurry. Photojournalism is another story entirely.
Lots of TLRs with waist level finders were used in studios. Right up to Gowlandflex TLRs in 4x5.
Many extremely well known photographers used & still use them (those still alive).
Then you have the studio SLR users w waist level finders on their Hasselblads.....

 

[RezaLoghme]

TLR is most certainly not an ideal camera to shoot portraits of people. I'm not even sure what that means. TLR can be used to take portraits though, just like any other type. Result is in the eyes (and hands) of the beholder not in what he holds.

Portraits with TLR

https://www.flickr.com/groups/887691@N21/pool/ Rolleinar I Disclaimer: Not my photo. All credit goes to the original photographer.

www.photrio.com

I follow the notion that it is ideal.