Any Rolleiflex TLR users here?

thanks todd.
it really is bad timing for me but the bid was at 50 bucks up till the last 5 minutes or so.
at 75 i could not pass it up.

and bertram, i need a projector, yes!
i actually have a large box of slides from my mamiya 6, the one i sold to get back to 35mm.

it really never ends, does it?

joe
 
backalley photo said:
it really never ends, does it?

joe
Click to expand...

Right. Don't forget the screen, could be too small , I think it should be 6ftX6ft to have the full bang ! With a normal projection lens you need a minimum distance of about 12feet between lens and screen.
so it could happen you first have to get you a larger screen and later a larger living room !!!!!
It really never ends, how true ! :D

Have fun !
Bertram
 
Of the three tlrs I have the Rollei gets used the most. It is the lightest of the 3. I would have to blow the prints up really big to see the difference in the lenses. I know the Rollei's S-K lens would most likely be better than the Mamiya Sekor or Yashica 124, but it would have to be bigger that 12x12 to see the difference. I have 10x10s of each and they are all exceptionally sharp.
 
backalley photo said:
i'd like to start by laying blame at the feet of all who have posted to this thread!!!

i just won a yashicamat 124g on ebay.

only 75 bucks and it looks to be in good shape, recently overhauled and has a working meter.

now, if you will excuse me i have to go and roll some quarters...;)

joe
Click to expand...

BTW Joe, i haven'r seen this mentioned before here: This camera can be used at very low light too, I mean if it is too dark to get any reliable information on the screen.
Best with hyperfocal setting of the aperture or for flash use.

None of the press photogs of the 60s here in Europe used the screen of their TLRs while using them with flash in the dark.

Also the 124G has a built in "sportsfinder" which is a flap at the frontside of the
hood and a squew whole at the backside if the finder's hood.

Invest in some test shots to get a feeling for the parallax at short distances and maybe ( it never ends) in a side grip to mount a small flash on.

In hyperfocal mode ( flash or no flash) you get a lightning fast camera with an unaudible shutter !

Regards,
Bertram
 
backalley photo said:
is there a dedicated grip for the mat?

joe
Click to expand...

No, AFAIK. I bought a standard noname grip with a cold-shoe on top.
Mut Mamyia makes a wonderful one for the C 220/330 , steel and wood ! At Ebay sometimes.
A grip is nice for this camera, changes the whole feeling. I have mine mounted close enuff at the rhs that I can focus with two fingers and hold it with the other three fingers.

Best,
Bertram
 
Re: grip -- I think a TLR works better from a neckstrap than 35mm does. You're looking down anyway and you can pull the strap tight around your neck for extra support and stability at low shutter speeds.

Gene
 
neckstraps are a proven pain for me gene.
even the slightest extended pressure on my neck and i get some nasty headaches.

i know that a neckstrap can add some stability in shooting but i'm likely not going to be able to take advantage.

joe
 
backalley photo said:
neckstraps are a proven pain for me gene.
even the slightest extended pressure on my neck and i get some nasty headaches.

i know that a neckstrap can add some stability in shooting but i'm likely not going to be able to take advantage.

joe
Click to expand...
Forgot about that... a cheap flashbracket/tripod attachment makes a pretty decent grip on a TLR

Gene
 
i was thinking the same thing.

there might even be something in town i could get rather then hitting the ebay trail.

maybe i can adapt one of those canon side grips...

joe
 
There's a really nice sculpted Vivitar flash bracket, with exchangeable dedicated plates for 35mm- and TLR/box-shaped MF-cameras; quite heavy, though, almost doubles the weight of a TLR...

Roman
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It really is worth running a roll of Velvia through it. Not only to to make sure everything is working as it should, but also for the shear pleasure of seeing those 6x6 slides.

Of course, doing this will lead you to ponder....if 6x6 is this good, 6x9 must be even better :cool:
 
I picked up my Rolleicord from the repair shop two days ago, where they fitted the Maxwell screen I bought for it. The old screen was so dark and dull.

This is the same camera my parents bought new in '51 or '52, and my father used to talk about replacing that dull focus screen decades ago. Now I finally got around and did it!

When I looked through it the first time I just went wow - wow - wow. I still flip it open at times and are awed by it. The downside is that it is a reflex, being a bit painful to focus compared to a rangefinder.

I just order 100 rolls of APX 100, sadly it was backordered. I wonder if I will ever get them? I think I need to order some other film from another maker as I only have about 10 left in the fridge and I fear I might use them up pretty quickly...

/Håkan
 
I have a 'flex with the brighter screen and at times I think I need my sunglasses! Have you tried some of the new Tri X? I like it alot.
 
hth said:
I just order 100 rolls of APX 100, sadly it was backordered. I wonder if I will ever get them? I think I need to order some other film from another maker as I only have about 10 left in the fridge and I fear I might use them up pretty quickly...

/Håkan
Click to expand...

Agfa has not produced APX100 in 120 size for a few months (they stooped even before they went bankrupt); what's left is just old stock, some German mail-order houses already have run out of it.
A good replacement with similar looks is Fomapan 100.

Roman
 
My Rolleiflex (Automat IV w/Xenar) is a beauty. The only gripe is the very dim focusing screen. I know there are Beattie screens for them out there, but they're over US$100; does anybody have a good source for bright screens for the Automat IV (1950's model if you're unsure). Tx.
 
I tried Tri-X in my TLR and got some good results from it. It worked very well scanned and printed at about 2x magnification.

I have had trouble with Tri-x in 35mm in the past when scanned and enlarged more, grain aliasing I think it is called. For this reason I made a switch to Neopan 400 which works better for me scanned. In the darkroom Neopan and Tri-x work equally well for me.

I still do not know which ISO 100 B&W to use though, so I use whatever I can get at a decent price until I can sort it out. I used to use TMX, but since Kodak does not seem to want to do B&W stuff and I want to use Rodinal, I am trying with Acros and FP4+ at the moment.

/Håkan
 
FP4+ works very well with Rodinal.
As I said, do consider Fomapan 100, an excellent film (unlike the 400 version...), and very inexpensive, works well with Rodinal, if you cannot get it locally, look at www.fotoimpex.de, they ship everywhere in the EU for 10 Euro postage (and their stuff is really good and inexpensive, so it is worth ordering there).

Roman
 
gabrielma said:
My Rolleiflex (Automat IV w/Xenar) is a beauty. The only gripe is the very dim focusing screen. I know there are Beattie screens for them out there, but they're over US$100; does anybody have a good source for bright screens for the Automat IV (1950's model if you're unsure). Tx.
Click to expand...

Look for Ebay seller 'redleica1', I have one of his screens in my Rolleicord Va, and reported my results on RFF a few months ago - basically, yes, much brighter than the original screen, esp. in the corners, BUT, the original, dark screen had more'snap' when coming from out of focus into focus, and when using the 'redleica1' screen with the focussing loupe, you have to rely on the split-image patch on the screen, as the lines from the fresnel lens around that patch are too coarse for focussing there with the loupe.

Roman
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom