Bay 3 filters for Rolleiflex 2.8F or use an adapter with 43mm screw-in filters?

[bherman]

All;

I have a Rolleiflex 2.8F which uses Bay 3 (RIII) bayonet filters. For Bay 3 filters one can choose Rollei, B+W or Heliopan, when available, and when they are, they are quite costly.

My question is this, I can pickup a Bay 3 to 43mm adapter by fotodiox and source new B+W circular filters for around $35.00/ea, or a few $$ more for MRC Multicoated. I always use the Rollei shade, and I heard that the 43mm adapter fits inside the Rollei shade.

The B+W Bay filters will run $62.00/ea. or the original Rollei filters can run a little less (or more) depending upon the condition.I'm looking for a yellow, orange and maybe a red one.

Besides running me 30% more, and inherent advantages of the Bay 3 over the screw in? I'm sure that the adapter isn't of the same quality as the B+W filter thread, so I suppose I run the risk of the filter not coming off or jamming - maybe or maybe not?

Or, should I just get the Bay 3 filters while I can?

Any comments on this?

 

[Vics]

My question would be, will the hood go on over the 43mm filter adaptor? I think that I would buy a medium yellow Rollei filter and use it a while, then think about the next one while saving up for it. I think the bay3 filters will be simpler to use and that's in keeping with the tao of Rollei.

 

[Calzone]

Using a hood on a Rollieflex is a good idea, and I'm not sure using an adapter will allow concentric use of both a filter and hood at the same time.

In my case I use Bay II B&W and Rollie filters with a Bay II hood on a 3.5F of which I bought all used. I feel assured that because of rarity that I could easily sell and get my money back. I use a B&W Bay II MRC UV filter on my viewing lens to protect it. Rollie offers a lite yellow and a medium yellow, and I use either one or the other with the hood.

Cal

 

[craygc]

I use the adaptors on a Rolleiflex bay II and the hood fits fine...

 

[f16sunshine]

I used an adapter with my Tele so I could use a bit larger hood than the standard Bay iii.
Given the choice at what sounds like only a $30 premium... I would choose the Bay iii filters over adapting any day. The adapter never fit quite right it felt a bit off center or loose.
I have the Heliopan ones (UV, Yellow, and, light green) for my 2.8D and find the build fit and glass quality beyond any other manufacturers standard. It's pretty impressive for a filter.

 

[Dan Daniel]

There's a seller on Ebay by the name of 'puffypen' who sells a fair amount of Rollei Bay series filters. He's a helpful guy, so I would suggest that you drop him a note. He's probably seen more of this kind of thing than anyone here.
http://stores.ebay.com/PuffyPens-Camera-Shop?_rdc=1

And Tim at filterfinder sells a Bay III to 43 adapter. He's another helpful person with lots of experience with people using filters, so again drop him a note for advise?
http://www.filterfind.net/Home.html

Either direction will probably work fine. The single Rollei filters will be easier to use in the field- no unscrewing and rescrewing to change the filter on the adapter, so less chance of dropping. But the adapter method will be cheaper, so you can afford to drop a filter or two over the years?

 

[bherman]

Bay 3 filters for Rolleiflex 2.8F or use an adapter with 43mm screw-in filters?

Thanks to all for the great responses. I will probably go with some Rollei filters or B+W filters in the Bay 3 size.

Thanks!

-Brad

 

[bherman]

OK, so now for the next question. With regard to versatility, I understand that a yellow is a 'must', but there is light yellow and dark yellow. Also there is a light or dark red and a red-orange and a green. Black an white filters are somewhat new to me so any comments are welcomed.

Thanks!

-Brad

 

[Vics]

I think medium yellow (K2?) is pretty basic because the Rollei shows a lot of sky. It eats one stop. Then maybe orange which is a swimilar effect, only more se. Again, I'd advise buying them one at a time and see what you need. If you shoot a lot at high altitude or near the sea, maybe UV to start.

 

[Dan Daniel]

OK, so now for the next question. With regard to versatility, I understand that a yellow is a 'must', but there is light yellow and dark yellow. Also there is a light or dark red and a red-orange and a green. Black an white filters are somewhat new to me so any comments are welcomed.

Thanks!

-Brad

One thing to note is that different films react differently to the same filter color. I find that Neopan ACROS is not affected much by a yellow filter, for example. FP4+ works well with a medium yellow for me, and an X0 yellow green or Rollei hellgrun works well with Delta 400 for me.

The Rollei light yellow ('sport' I believe was another name for it) was for the basic color response of films in the 1940s-50s, which were a bit heavy on the blue end. I would avoid it for now until you see what a medium yellow does.

You'll need to run tests, that's the answer. Get a medium yellow, hellgrun/yellow green, and a red or orange to start. Put the camera on a tripod, and shoot the same scene without any filter and with each filter. Remember the filter factor. See what you think.

 

[mfogiel]

I would invert the thought process first.

1) What film/s are you going to use?
2) What subjects do you shoot most often?

In my experience, if you use a film like Tri X or HP5+ - which would be my recommendation, and you shoot mainly street, the filters are not necessary. They are also not really necessary for portraiture, so one reason you might want to use a filter would be shooting in open landscape/sea/mountains. In these circumstances, an orange filter will give you more bang to make a difference. Yellow filters are mostly thing of the past, when films were not as good as they are today. Let it suffice, that Salgado claims to never have used filters - have you seen his photographs?
If you get a filter, be patient and get a clean Rollei bayIII, or better still a multicoated Heliopan. Don't use clear filters on the lens, only the hood - this will minimize flare.

 

[bherman]

How would it work with Ilford XP2 C-41 black and white?

 

[Dan Daniel]

How would it work with Ilford XP2 C-41 black and white?

You can download technical data on films which include spectral response curves. For example, here's XP2-
http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/201142711321939.pdf
Top of page 2 is the graph. SHowing that it is less sensitive in the blue end and more in the red end with a pretty smooth overall response.

I fell into using an X0 yellow green on Delta 400, then saw the curve for it iwth a dip in the green repsonse. Lucky me-
http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2010628953322222.pdf

Tri-X shows an increased response at the blue end and a dip at green-
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4017/f4017.pdf

Neopan ACROS, my favorite 120 film, shows a crazy dip in the middle-
http://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/AF3-083E.pdf

Most people who have used a film like Tri-X over decades have noticed its changing spectral response. You just can't get that bland sky of 1960s Lee Freidlander with today's Tri-X! This is what mfogiel is getting at- older films may have 'needed' a yellow filter to balance out the uneven response and get something close to 'what we see' (when we see in B&W, of course 🙂. Film makers have been slowly evening out the response so filters aren't 'needed.'

The problem with B&W film is that you get one shot and that's it- per frame, that is. If you convert color digital to B&W you can pull the spectral response/conversion all over the place. Make a red car stand out from the green bushes, for example. So this is where filters are useful with film. If you use a red filter while shooting the red car in front of the green bushes, you will get good separation in tone.

Now why would I use red car/green bush as an example? Because a couple of days ago I was running my own tests on B&W filters, and this was one shot. The film is Neopan ACROS, the left shot is no filter, the right shot is a Tiffen 25, red, filter (horseman 6x9 camera with 75mm Super Angulon, but close enough to pretend it's your Rolleiflex).

The only way to get this difference shooting B&W film is with color filters.

 

[Rayt]

Color filters are essential for landscapes where there is sky but what about street photography in low or diffused light? I keep a yellow filter on my Rollei but when I need the speed I just take it off thinking it does not matter at that point.

 

[mfogiel]

XP2 is a film for wedding photographers or for the homeless. Anybody who has a sink can develop Tri X or HP5+ at home. The difference is substantial.