TLR Users

[Rolleiflexible]

I too have been to Krikor's shop several times.
I am very fond of him. But I no longer use him.
Several of my Rolleiflexes have had transport
and shutter issues. I took them to Krikor. When
he returned them, he said they were fine but
mumbled something each time about them being
old cameras and implied that they were not up
to standard. All three cameras had the problems
return within a matter of weeks, after nearly a
thousand dollars' worth of repairs.

So I sent them to Paul Ebel in Wisconsin. Paul
fixed them. They all work fine now. No mumbles
about the cameras being old.

Paul also told me that two of the cameras were
out of focus because the screens had been
replaced (a 2.8C and a 3.5Ev1) and the
replacement screens had not been properly
shimmed when installed. Krikor had
installed both screens.

Sanders McNew

 

[dpurdy]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLLEIFLEX-2-8F...285254262QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item120285254262

This is an interesting camera on ebay that I have watched be listed and relisted several times. The seller has changed his ebay name recently.
The interesting thing is that he is calling it a 295series White Face with Xenotar which would make it from the last series of Fs ever made. However if you look at the sides of the camera you see that the strap hangers have the chrome half moon shape which is from the first series of Fs. And if you look closely at the name plate/meters sensor housing, you see that it has been repainted.. which makes me wonder if there is another serial number under the paint. Also I think the leather on the sides looks like the old real leather instead of the newer leatherette of the later cameras. So I would have to conclude that this camera is an old F body with a newer White Face front put on it.

I have tracked the 295xxxx series 2.8Fs on ebay for a few years since I got mine and love it so much I keep thinking I should get another someday. (I got and FX instead). The same seller of this camera once put a Whiteface 295 series with Xenotar for sale at a high price and it didn't sell. Then later he put the same camera with the same serial number for sale again and this time it had a Planar lens!! Strange things happen.
Dennis

 

[Mark Antony]

Dennis there are a lot of dodgy dealers out there caveat emptor as they say.
Funny thing happened a couple of days back I went to see my brother to collect my Rolleinar 2 (he is ebay buyer for me) and he spotted a 1951 Automat 3 on ebay with 4 mins left at £55. he said "is it a good camera"? err yes I said he bid on it and won.
My brother has never owned more than a P&S and after seeing my T has caught the rolleiflex bug.

I'm going to give him lessons before he takes it on holiday....

 

[Toffle]

Thanks for the heads up, Dennis. The problem is, eventually someone will pay what this guy is asking and may never know that this camera is not as advertised.

 

[dpurdy]

Actually I think my own 2.8F 295series is a bit dodgy. It got listed from New Jersey at what would be 2:30 AM there. It looked pristine in the pictures and the serial number is one of the latest I have seen and he had buy it now 865.00 on it. I couldn't resist and bought it within ten minutes of the listing. When it arrived it was nearly perfect mint, but when I gave it a shake it rattled. It seemed to work great though. After a few days while shooting a test with it I discovered that sometimes the focus would get hung up and not have the full range. I sent it to Harry Fleenor and he found a loose screw inside and fixed it for 40 dollars. I win. Recently I took the front cover off because I wanted to easily unscrew the lenses and clean out some specks of dust. I discovered when the cover was off that my viewing lens and taking lens don't have matching serial numbers. They are very close.. like within 5, but they are supposed to match. I don't know if one of the lenses was swapped out or if when originally manufactured the technician got the viewing lens mixed up with another on his table.. they are that close in number. What ever it tests out sharp at all distances and I still love it.
Dennis

 

[Mark Antony]

Just uploaded a pic taken with the Rolleinar #2
I love the way you can get in close....

 

[Toffle]

Beautiful shots, Mark... and beautiful kids.

Those Rolleinars are such wonderful lenses. Sharp to the edges.

Cheers,
Tom

 

[Jack Lusted]

From time to time I've come across some nugget of knowledge that is so obvious and liberating that I've wondered just why it was that I had never come across it before. About two years ago I learned about the 'sunny 16' rule. When I tried it out (with some trepidation) I was amazed at just how well exposed the negs were. As a result I hardly ever bother to take a meter with me now. This has improved my experience photography no end as I no longer find myself fiddling about with a light meter for every shot.
I wonder, are there some other simple liberating rules and techniques that we would all do well to know?

 

[dpurdy]

there could be the sunny snow rule. Or the cloudy day rule or the North side of a building rule. Remember when film boxes had exposure recommendations for exposures in various conditions? Maybe they still do I haven't looked in a long time.
The sunny 16 rule doesn't work way up here in North Oregon. More like the sunny 8'nahalf rule, especially if you like shadow detail.
Dennis
Once when I was sick as a dog with flu I went around my house shooting stuff with my 4x5 and just guessing exposures in the multiple seconds. Nearly everything was acceptably close to right.

Mark I love the picture of your two girls. Very nice. Seems you must have been about as distant as possible with a #2. Now you need a #3

 

[Anscojohn]

Well, TLRers, I am back from two weeks on a package tour of the Danube. Despite my arthritic joints and bad back, I schlepped a trusty old Yashica 635 and a couple of rolls fo FOMA 100. With all the tourist activities, I had very little opportunity to do any photography--some discreet street shooting only a true TLRer can accomplish by sitting on a park bench near a bubbling, back-lighted public water fountain in a town square in Bulgaria. In a few days I shall know if I have anything worth printing. Must needs mix up some fresh D23 and get to work.

 

[Mark Antony]

Dennis
Those shots were as far away as I could get with the #2 quite amazing how close you can get.
Tonight I'm processing some close up shots taken at 25,000 EI with Delta 3200 not expecting too much, they should be close ups of just my brothers face lighting is just his laptop....
Mark

 

[Mark Antony]

I just popped 2 shots into the gallery.
They are the tests of delta 3200 shot at 25,000 both use Rolleinar 2.

 

[dpurdy]

You are doing some good Portraits Mark. I even like the total lack of detail in the shadow side of your bro's face. Very intense portrait. I have to say that camera fits you to a T.
Dennis
by the way at least in my tests I get much less grain with D3200 developing in DDX than any other developer.. though I like the grain you got there.

 

[Mark Antony]

thanks Dennis.
I like the results too, I used Microphen to develop them as I've been told that it is a powder version of DDX
I used the DDX dev time of 25? mins
i've never tried to push a film to 25,000 before and its good to know I have that option.
Like I said my brothers face is only illuminated (if that's the word) by a 14" laptop screen from 3-4 feet away...
I now feel i need to do some serious work with my T, if I use it a lot I might need a brighter screen especially with laptops as my main light ;-)

 

[Toffle]

I was once subjected to a flame war (on another site) for for having the nerve to post a portrait with only half the face illuminated. So my response to you is, "good shot". To me the composition is so strong and compelling... It's interesting how by hiding something, we show so much more. Good shot, Mark.
Tom

 

[Mark Antony]

Thanks Tom.
I really just wanted to really push the film.
I think the look on my brothers face is saying "how long is he going to take to focus that **%dy thing"
Mark
PS I'm going to be out of the office a few days....

 

[Xia_Ke]

Love the shot of your bro's face Mark.

Tom, I can't believe someone actually flamed you over that. Oh well, THEIR loss.

 

[Shmoo]

I have a borrowed Rolleicord IV...that would love to grow up to be a Rolleiflex 2.8....someday. It was my main camera when I went on vacation to Vienna & Salzburg last year. LOVE this camera.

 

[Rolleijoe]

Finally decided to join here, the other groups are becoming annoying (hehe)

 

[Toffle]

k....
question (which I'm embarrassed to ask in the forums...)
I accidentally exposed a roll of Pan f+ at ISO 125 in my Rolleiflex on vacation last week. The only developer I use is HC-110 (it's literally the only developer in town) I know Pan f+ doesn't push well. (at all?) What do I do?

 

[Ian Grant]

Toffle, you'd need to use a developer like Microphen or better still Diafine they give slightly more inherent speed. Microphen normally gives approx 64 ISO but if you increase the development time by about 50% that gets you closer to 100 ISO, but the negs will be contrasty.

 

[Toffle]

Thanks Ian. I think I'll pop that film into storage until I can grab some developer. I'm headed off to Chicago in a couple of weeks; I'll stop at Central. (If you've never been, Central Camera is a real treat... something like 106 years in the same location... and some back stock going back that far too.)

 

[ts103706@ohio.edu]

Due to certain financial situations, I am selling my Rolleiflex. It is a 2.8f, and I am not sure what type. The serial number is 2950265. The closest serial number I have seen to this was on a white face, which leads me to believe this was made in the late 70's. It is pretty clean as you can see by the pictures I added to the gallery. I have a prism with case, but the prism has a small dent in it that is only cosmetic. I also have a nice condition Rollei lens hood and Rollei UV haze filter for it. The meter is pretty accurate and all shutter speeds are accurate. It was serviced once a year, every year, before it was put into storage for 4 years. I have run both 120 and 220 film through it, and both work. Does anyone have any idea what I can expect to get for it? Thanks

 

[ts103706@ohio.edu]

In case anyone was interested for their own purposes, I got an answer from Dpurdy in the forums.



I have tracked, as well as I could, all the 295 series 2.8Fs in ebay for about 3 years and in that time I have watched 112 of them go through. It is interesting to note that over all the 295 series is very nearly all Xenotars. However I have noticed on the early 295s they started out as Planars.

2950110, 2950228 and 2950286 were all with Planars and those are 3 of the earliest four 295s I have seen. After that there were only 4 other Planars listed in the over 100 cameras and 2 of those were by a seller I am pretty sure switched lenses in them.

The legit, near mint condition 295 Planars have all sold for over 2500 USD. If you do a good job writing your camera up and make good professional looking pictures I would expect you to get that as well.. if your camera is as good condition as it looks in your pictures.

If you want to fix the small dent in the prism it is easy to do. You just take out the 2 small screws on both sides of the housing and pull the housing off and then with a blunt hard tool of some kind you work the dent back out and smooth it out a little at a time.

The 295series 2.8Fs are often called type 4 and with the Planar and the 12/24 switch and the good condition and receipts for service, this is the most valuable 2.8F Rollei there is. So good luck

Dennis

 

[dpurdy]

170244301212 ebay item number

By the way this 2.8F #2955857 which is listed with a Planar is very very dodgy and doubtful as the serial number for the Planar lens predates Fs and has coating loss. Otherwise it is the latest 295 with Planar I ever saw.
Dennis