Rolleiflex TLR
-
A
- Thread starter cliveh
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale 3.25x4.25 adox CHS 100 II
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
For Sale Fuji fp3000b & Fp100c fridgestored
- Started by belichten
-
For Sale Beautiful Tenba Messenger Bag
- Started by chuckroast
Forum statistics
I'm not a Rolleiflex expert but the fastest lens I know about was the 2.8. There were also the 3.5 and 3.8. I believe the wide and tele Rolleiflexes used an f/4 lens.
According to the Rolleiclub web site the 2.8 was the fastest lens. You will pay a premium for a 2.8 model over a 3.5 model. I have the 3.5 version and it's one of my favorite cameras. I've never felt that I needed a 2.8.
http://www.rolleiclub.com/cameras/tlr/info/all_TLR.shtml
http://www.rolleiclub.com/cameras/tlr/info/all_TLR.shtml
f/2.8 is the fastest that I know about for any TLR.
The fastest lenses in common production medium format would be:
-Mamiya 645 : 80/1.9
-Contax 645 : 80/2.0
-Hasselblad 200/2000 : 110/2.0
-Pentax 6x7 : 105/2.4
The fastest lenses in common production medium format would be:
-Mamiya 645 : 80/1.9
-Contax 645 : 80/2.0
-Hasselblad 200/2000 : 110/2.0
-Pentax 6x7 : 105/2.4
Yes and the most expensive. I used a 3.5F with the Planner for years, it was a great lens. I miss it.
The f/3.5 models have a very noticeable weight advantage over the f/2.8 models as well. I have a 2.8 Planar model but prefer an old Automat with the slower Schneider lens, its easier to handle and I can't see the difference in the quality of the images.
TheFlyingCamera
Membership Council
Yes, the 2.8 is the fastest lens for a Rollei TLR. The wide and tele versions are f4's. There may have been faster lenses for the Rollei SL series SLRs which have focal plane shutters.
I have a pair of 2.8E Planar bodies and a Tele with the 135 F4 lens. They are truly exemplary lenses and will produce outstanding images when used with diligence.
I have a pair of 2.8E Planar bodies and a Tele with the 135 F4 lens. They are truly exemplary lenses and will produce outstanding images when used with diligence.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2009
- Messages
- 3,589
- Format
- Medium Format
Have had a Rollei 2.8F since about 1970. Great compact camera that is easy to handle. A faster lens would have to be quite a hunk of glass, thereby creating quite a different camera from the Rollei tlr we know. In fact, among my own mf cameras (Hassy, Super Ikonta b, Fuji, Kodak Medalist) none has a lens faster than f2.8. The weight of the Rollei, its smooth shutter release and ease of holding and leaf shutter allow very slow shutter speeds, making 2.8 more than adequate.
The 2.8 may not sound fast, but it's somewhat the norm for medium format (e.g. 80/2.8 for Hasselblad, Mamiya and Fuji are slower).
The Rollei 2.8 lens occupies a large portion of the front of the camera as well. Here is my 2.8D (K7D) next to a 3.5F model 2 (K4E) with homemade cheap paper meter cover.
So Theo, did Angela Merkel force you to buy the Rolleiflexes?
I never thought I'd buy a TLR - just not my style. However, over the years I've come to realize that finely crafted all-manual mechanical cameras are objects of an era that will never exist again. That, and that these are instruments which can continue to function indefinitely - whereas things built today like... like... oh, a 2008 Porsche Cayman S, for example... has got so many electronic subsystems and such built-in obsolescence that it'll be ready for recycling in 20 years along with most other cars, digital cameras, computers, etc.
So I appreciate the Rolleiflex (among other cameras) for its high quality and as an example of a different age.
When I first became interested in them, I was a bit surprised (though I shouldn't've been) that their production essentially fell off in the 1960's (during the reign of the SLR) to just a trickle in the decades that followed. So when you see them, they really are from a distant era.
Rolleiflexes are really nice cameras. A very good buddy of mine owns at least four. I've tried to trade him out of one but it hasn't worked yet.
I've always owned SLR's. A while back I bought a Mamiya C220f because of the interchangeable lenses. It's not as refined as a Rolleiflex and has it's own advantages and disadvantages. I like it so far. The lenses are great and really inexpensive. I recently ran across a close to mint looking Minolta Autocord cheap. The shutter won't cock so I think it broke and then was stored away. It really feels good in my hands so I'm going to have it repaired and CLA'd.
Electronics are great until they stop working.
Rolleiflexes are really nice cameras. A very good buddy of mine owns at least four. I've tried to trade him out of one but it hasn't worked yet.
I've always owned SLR's. A while back I bought a Mamiya C220f because of the interchangeable lenses. It's not as refined as a Rolleiflex and has it's own advantages and disadvantages. I like it so far. The lenses are great and really inexpensive. I recently ran across a close to mint looking Minolta Autocord cheap. The shutter won't cock so I think it broke and then was stored away. It really feels good in my hands so I'm going to have it repaired and CLA'd.
Electronics are great until they stop working.
I have a couple of Rolleiflex cameras an E2 f3.5 Xenotar and an Automat with an Opton Tessar, never found f3.5 to be an issue, I also have a Rolleicord to restore and an MPP Microcord (a Cord clone but much better better built) and the Ross Xpres lens is superb, extremely sharp at all apertures.
In the past I've owned Mamiya TLRs which I used for work, really nice, great lenses, but heavy, I much prefer the Rollei's (inc Microcord) or a Yashicamat 124 I leave/keep in Turkey.
Ian
Rolleiflexes have a bling factor that Hasselblad does not have: You need to carry three cameras around your neck if you want to shoot normal, wide, telephoto photographs.
There's a purity and simplicity of working with a camera with a fixed lens that's quite conducive to creativity, the same can be said for using just one lens with a camera with inter-changeable lenses.
If shooting project work the TLR is a second camera alongside LF for me, and I love the saquare format. however outside project work I like a TLR, minimal equipment usually no tripod, spare films and a meter in a pocket, great fun and excellent results.
It can make you think
Ian
[QUOTE="It can make you think
Ian
And that is what it's all about.[/QUOTE]
I'll qualify that. I was on a coach tour of Spain 7 years ago DSLR for snapshots and the images my wife wanted, I had my Yashicamat 124 for anything I might want and after feeling disappointed seeing Gaudi's Sagrada Família with all the construction cranes realised, it was easy
Dead Link Removed
These days I've long ditched 35mm for serious work but insteadmy TLR's have far more than replaced them they've become an important part of my photographu.
Ian
Had I to do it over again, I'd avoid a Rolleiflex with a meter (I'm referring to older models). The reasons are twofold: many selenium meters are losing their sensitivity and the meter linkage (to the shutter and aperture dials) is complex to deal with for CLA's and repairs. A D or E model without a meter can offer a lifetime of service with minimal issues.
If I were looking for a Rolleiflex, the E2 or E3 would be my first choice. I don't ever see any E3's for sale though. My understanding is that the E2 and E3 are basically the F camera without a meter so they are less expensive. I use a Pentax digital spot meter for all my film cameras so I don't need/want an old meter in a camera.
My C220f weighs the same as the Hasselblad that I used to own. The Autocord I bought is a little smaller and and a little lighter according to my postage scale but feels much smaller and lighter in my hands for some reason. I just put money in my Jeep with new bows, new top and a throttle position sensor. I can't wait to get the Autocord fixed. I'm considering a new Maxwell screen for it too. I had a Beattie Intenscreen in my 500/cm and loved it. Surprisingly, the Autocord screen is quite bright but in low light a Maxwell screen would be appreciated by my 55 year old eyes.
Nice shot, Ian!
Quite curiously, the E2's which are basically US/UK model F's (IIRC) seem to be seen rather often for sale and at good prices.
I have a Cord V, which is a nice option as a TLR but have yet to use it more. Actually the Xenar Tessar type was a standard across TLRs and has a classic draw to it. The price of a Flex, even automats, is rather steep and I don't want to commit much yet.
Sirius, have you already walked with a 500 and an SWC around your neck?
(joking)
TheFlyingCamera
Membership Council
Fortunately the meter is not coupled to anything on the E - it's just there. If it dies, you can just ignore it and shoot as normal, which is what I do. I use a handheld meter with mine. The meter in one of my E1's is functional, but about all I trust it to do is confirm that Sunny 16 applies, and the meter in the other one is pretty close to non-responsive. I'm not in the least concerned about either, and as you can see from the images I post, it has zero impact on the usability or image quality from the cameras.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |