jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
Hello, after few months I'm back to TLRs, with my Start 66, Made in Poland. As everybody know, 1m is not enough to shot close portraits with 80mm medium format lens. Bay I Rolleinar-type close-up lenses are pretty easy to find and cheap too. Also Tessar-type of lens produce wide open beautiful results with b&w.
Now, I'm considering Rolleiflex Automat (post war), Yashica Mat... and dunno what more. Its all about ergonomics and robustness, matt screen could be changed with one from Rick Oleson, tessar is tessar... Crank winding is also nice to have. Any help appreciated.
Now, I'm considering Rolleiflex Automat (post war), Yashica Mat... and dunno what more. Its all about ergonomics and robustness, matt screen could be changed with one from Rick Oleson, tessar is tessar... Crank winding is also nice to have. Any help appreciated.
jpa66
Jan as in "Jan and Dean"
Look at the Yashica A - D's. I have an A and am happy with it's rendering. The lens on the D is supposed to be much better, however ( as I have heard ). They are all reasonably priced. I don't use mine as much since I got a Rolleiflex, but it's still a good camera that I do use from time to time.
PMCC
Late adopter.
I have nothing better to do at the moment, so brace yourself for a core dump. I'm at risk of going overboard on TLRs, so I'm not very objective -- I'm a sucker for them all, whether good, better or best. Thus my two zlotys regarding your criteria:
Bay 1: Agreed that this size is most available for choice of accessories and thus economy. Bay II and beyond is Rolleiflex territory and not for most folks who work for a living (pro photographers excepted). But if you are afflicted with the Rollei bug (I'm resisting but losing ground in this battle), then economy goes by the wayside. OK, back to Bay I.
Ergonomics: I much prefer right hand focus, as used in the Rolleicord III, IV and V and Yashica D. (I also love how light these cameras are.) Works better for me than having my hands pushing in opposite directions during camera handling, which is the problem with left-hand focus/right-hand film advance and shutter release. Even better, consider levered helical focus, ala Autocord, Diacord and Ricohmatic 225, and Flexaret (I have yet to come by one myself; Czech-made so I'm guessing more commonly seen in your part of the world). Best lever focus versions are the Ricohs, which have dual teeter-totter style levers on either side of the camera, so you can focus either left, right or both handed. The Ricoh levers are made of stainless steel, whereas the Autocord single focus lever is notoriously fragile, made of compressed sugar and prone to breakage either by colliding with the open camera back, or due to simple material fatigue, exacerbated by a focus helical stiffened or frozen by dried-up lubricants. All remediable, however, by a good camera tech or if you have good hands and more mechanical courage than I. And I work on restoring Swiss watches in my spare time. Not.
Oleson screen: I only know that he does them for Autocords, Yashicas, and the older Rolleicords and Automats. I don't think he can do the late models with detachable finders, which require larger screens (Rick told me that cutting down a Mamiya 6x7 SLR screen is OK -- one of them (RB?) is big enough to work). Personally, I like the original screens in Japanese cameras so long as they are fresnel equipped; of the Autocords I've come by, only the very earliest model didn't come with a fresnel and thus needed a modern bright screen. The Yashica Mat screens are quite bright. I think screen replacement is a matter of preference, not a given, depending on whether you value edge brightness over ease of focus. The old, coarse screens pop in and out of focus more positively, so if you can live with a little gloom, I say don't change them. But the older Stygian Rolleicords and Automats cry out for a screen upgrade, and the Oleson screen I installed in a Rolleicord V works a treat.
Crank-winding: Yes, nice, along with auto-shutter charging. But the speed of use trade-off of crank-winding may be offset by the handling issues that arise (for me at least) from the left hand focus that usually comes with it. There's also a wonderful odd-duck made by Kowa, the Kalloflex, which features a crank wind lever that is co-axial with the focus knob, along with a shutter release that falls beneath my left thumb. Sweet!
Optics: Ricohmatic 225 Rikenon +1, Autocord Rokkor +2, Yashinons a crap shoot due I guess to individual variation, but the late model coatings are better. I find the Rokkors to be right up there with good Zeiss Tessars and Xenars.
Overall build quality and robustness: Rolleiflex. Also impressive but thin on the ground is the Kalloflex, a picture-taking anvil.
Other things that matter to me: light baffles in film chamber. Autocords, Diacords, Ricohmatics and of the Yashica Mats only the last model, 124G, have them; later model Rolleiflex Automat MXs and later have them; later Rolleicords (at least my V) have them. The Autocord and the Ricohmatic 225 both feed film from top to bottom, which is better for film flatness. All the Autocords have fine shutters. If you get a Yashica Mat, always set synch to X and never use the self-timer. I prefer non-linked EV shutter speeds. Weight counts. I prefer the non-metered versions of any given model, although the coupled meters are handy for broad daylight if they work, if you have a proper battery solution, and until they inevitably fail, when they serve as a reminder of dharmic impermanence. Other than that, they are great.
Cameras i'd like to try: MPP Microcord, Microflex; Flexaret; Voigtlander Superb (for a Masochistic indulgence); Rolleiflex 3.5E3. Not many of these are Bay I. Non-Bay I camera I've tried and didn't get on with: Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex Ia, an ergonomic and mechanical nightmare. Zeiss never quite got the user-friendly handling thing down.
If money is no object, if glass is the pre-eminent criterion, and if you willing to grow a third hand to deal with sub-optimal Rolleiflex ergonomics: 3.5 Zeiss Planars or JSK Xenotars, either of them in the later six-glass versions. They're tops! Bay II, alas. The 2.8 versions may be as good or even better, but weight counts in more ways than one, and with Rollei you pay by the gram.
Executive summary: my personal candidates -- admittedly subjective trade-offs -- for the best-sorted, best zing-for-the-zloty configurations of all of the above considerations:
(1) Minolta Autocord I, meterless. Worth the trouble to seek out. Best to swap out the proprietary strap lugs with replacement universal lugs (can be cannibalized from older Autocords).
(2) Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS with Tessar and de-linkable EV settings. As someone else here said, the epitome of the Bauhaus Rollei, nothing missing, nothing extra, pure form-follows-function. Easy to find, cheap (for Rollei) and abundant.
(3) All the rest. Maybe someone will post on the myriad other makes of TLR not mentioned.
Good luck and keep us in the loop,
Piotr.
Bay 1: Agreed that this size is most available for choice of accessories and thus economy. Bay II and beyond is Rolleiflex territory and not for most folks who work for a living (pro photographers excepted). But if you are afflicted with the Rollei bug (I'm resisting but losing ground in this battle), then economy goes by the wayside. OK, back to Bay I.
Ergonomics: I much prefer right hand focus, as used in the Rolleicord III, IV and V and Yashica D. (I also love how light these cameras are.) Works better for me than having my hands pushing in opposite directions during camera handling, which is the problem with left-hand focus/right-hand film advance and shutter release. Even better, consider levered helical focus, ala Autocord, Diacord and Ricohmatic 225, and Flexaret (I have yet to come by one myself; Czech-made so I'm guessing more commonly seen in your part of the world). Best lever focus versions are the Ricohs, which have dual teeter-totter style levers on either side of the camera, so you can focus either left, right or both handed. The Ricoh levers are made of stainless steel, whereas the Autocord single focus lever is notoriously fragile, made of compressed sugar and prone to breakage either by colliding with the open camera back, or due to simple material fatigue, exacerbated by a focus helical stiffened or frozen by dried-up lubricants. All remediable, however, by a good camera tech or if you have good hands and more mechanical courage than I. And I work on restoring Swiss watches in my spare time. Not.
Oleson screen: I only know that he does them for Autocords, Yashicas, and the older Rolleicords and Automats. I don't think he can do the late models with detachable finders, which require larger screens (Rick told me that cutting down a Mamiya 6x7 SLR screen is OK -- one of them (RB?) is big enough to work). Personally, I like the original screens in Japanese cameras so long as they are fresnel equipped; of the Autocords I've come by, only the very earliest model didn't come with a fresnel and thus needed a modern bright screen. The Yashica Mat screens are quite bright. I think screen replacement is a matter of preference, not a given, depending on whether you value edge brightness over ease of focus. The old, coarse screens pop in and out of focus more positively, so if you can live with a little gloom, I say don't change them. But the older Stygian Rolleicords and Automats cry out for a screen upgrade, and the Oleson screen I installed in a Rolleicord V works a treat.
Crank-winding: Yes, nice, along with auto-shutter charging. But the speed of use trade-off of crank-winding may be offset by the handling issues that arise (for me at least) from the left hand focus that usually comes with it. There's also a wonderful odd-duck made by Kowa, the Kalloflex, which features a crank wind lever that is co-axial with the focus knob, along with a shutter release that falls beneath my left thumb. Sweet!
Optics: Ricohmatic 225 Rikenon +1, Autocord Rokkor +2, Yashinons a crap shoot due I guess to individual variation, but the late model coatings are better. I find the Rokkors to be right up there with good Zeiss Tessars and Xenars.
Overall build quality and robustness: Rolleiflex. Also impressive but thin on the ground is the Kalloflex, a picture-taking anvil.
Other things that matter to me: light baffles in film chamber. Autocords, Diacords, Ricohmatics and of the Yashica Mats only the last model, 124G, have them; later model Rolleiflex Automat MXs and later have them; later Rolleicords (at least my V) have them. The Autocord and the Ricohmatic 225 both feed film from top to bottom, which is better for film flatness. All the Autocords have fine shutters. If you get a Yashica Mat, always set synch to X and never use the self-timer. I prefer non-linked EV shutter speeds. Weight counts. I prefer the non-metered versions of any given model, although the coupled meters are handy for broad daylight if they work, if you have a proper battery solution, and until they inevitably fail, when they serve as a reminder of dharmic impermanence. Other than that, they are great.
Cameras i'd like to try: MPP Microcord, Microflex; Flexaret; Voigtlander Superb (for a Masochistic indulgence); Rolleiflex 3.5E3. Not many of these are Bay I. Non-Bay I camera I've tried and didn't get on with: Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex Ia, an ergonomic and mechanical nightmare. Zeiss never quite got the user-friendly handling thing down.
If money is no object, if glass is the pre-eminent criterion, and if you willing to grow a third hand to deal with sub-optimal Rolleiflex ergonomics: 3.5 Zeiss Planars or JSK Xenotars, either of them in the later six-glass versions. They're tops! Bay II, alas. The 2.8 versions may be as good or even better, but weight counts in more ways than one, and with Rollei you pay by the gram.
Executive summary: my personal candidates -- admittedly subjective trade-offs -- for the best-sorted, best zing-for-the-zloty configurations of all of the above considerations:
(1) Minolta Autocord I, meterless. Worth the trouble to seek out. Best to swap out the proprietary strap lugs with replacement universal lugs (can be cannibalized from older Autocords).
(2) Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS with Tessar and de-linkable EV settings. As someone else here said, the epitome of the Bauhaus Rollei, nothing missing, nothing extra, pure form-follows-function. Easy to find, cheap (for Rollei) and abundant.
(3) All the rest. Maybe someone will post on the myriad other makes of TLR not mentioned.
Good luck and keep us in the loop,
Piotr.
Last edited:
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
I hope to have something to report on the Kalloflex within a few days, at least with respect to ergonomics. It the only TLR I know of that has crank wind and focusing knob intergrated into the same module on the right hand side(as seen from photographer's point of view). Its Prominar lens is supposed to be very good, and build quality too. See Kalloflex thread on thus forum.
Dan Daniel
Well-known
Minolta Autocord. Rolleicord, Rolleiflex T.
After a certain level of lens and mechanics, more important is the condition of the camera.
After a certain level of lens and mechanics, more important is the condition of the camera.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
And ergonomics. If you don't gel with how the camera handles it won't get used, no matter how good it is technically.
Lilserenity
Well-known
Probably the best bit of advice that one!
I had a C330F, no question about it being a good camera, but ergonomically it wasn't for me (I could only liken to to lugging around a cast iron bath tub around my neck!) and consequently it didn't really get used. However, the Autocord gets used all the time.
Vicky
PMCC
Late adopter.
Hard to disagree with you on the Autocord. Never met an Autocord I didn't like.
i prefer some Rolleicord models over others. While the Vb fetches a premium in the market, I prefer the more common plain V for reasons posted earlier. Previous models of the 'Cord are less well developed. I'm an agnostic on the Rolleiflex T, which I've never come across. Supposedly it had the most advanced Tessar version Rollei ever used, but the T's official cost-cutter role in the Franke & Heidecke lineup draws critics to question its mechanical robustness. I dunno. It's pricey for a Tessar, and I'm not certain it's Bay I. Anybody?
Of course, when comparing cameras for picture taking purposes, it makes sense to stipulate comparable condition. My intact, clean, smoothly-working tin can Super Ricohflex trumps my cranky scratchy Mamiyaflex with petri dish lenses. My Yashica Mat 124 was in such fine fettle that my daughter thought it was too good for me to keep and decided she should take protective custody of it. That's what I get for showing her how to use the darkroom.
PMCC
Late adopter.
Looking forward to your report with bated breath. We can compare notes.
ChrisN
Striving
Best summary of the C330 I've read anywhere! Agree totally!I have a Rolleiflex Automat (1937-39) which is beautifully light and compact, and handles very well for this format, but yes, the focusing screen could certainly be brighter. Wonderful little camera.
Are old Hasselblad's within the possible budget? A 500C/M with a 150 Sonnar "C" lens makes for a fine portrait camera.
Last edited:
Mablo
Well-known
Rolleiflex T is indeed Bay-1.
+1 for Rolleicord V. I've taken some beautiful portraits with my Rolleicord V fully open. Some Tessar variants can render a muddy image at f/3.5 but not the Rolleicord Xenar.
The other side of the coin is that Rolleicords basically need a brighter screen ($30] and the removable shutter trigger knob has disappeared in 9 times of 10.
+1 for Rolleicord V. I've taken some beautiful portraits with my Rolleicord V fully open. Some Tessar variants can render a muddy image at f/3.5 but not the Rolleicord Xenar.
The other side of the coin is that Rolleicords basically need a brighter screen ($30] and the removable shutter trigger knob has disappeared in 9 times of 10.
jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
Thank you gentlemen!
PMCC, thats a hell of a overview, great help as except for Rolleiflex 3.5C (BayII with Tessar, some kind of frankenstein) I owned I really dont know much about other TLRs. And its ergonomics were quite perfect, shutter, knobs, all in proper place. Ant those small wheels for shutter/aperture, I love them, cause there is no way to change anything accidentally. Bay I is easiest to find, money aside, last time I spent couple months to find one for Bay II.
ChrisN, Hasselblad is heavy, too heavy. 1kg is the limit for me.
Which models (flex and cord) include those linked EV settings? Rolleiclub site mention only Automat K4A and K4B...
Those Rolleicords have wierd placed shutter trigger, but I just checked with my Start 66 that a short cable relase works great, I always have trouble with blurry shots caused by camera shake.
PMCC, thats a hell of a overview, great help as except for Rolleiflex 3.5C (BayII with Tessar, some kind of frankenstein) I owned I really dont know much about other TLRs. And its ergonomics were quite perfect, shutter, knobs, all in proper place. Ant those small wheels for shutter/aperture, I love them, cause there is no way to change anything accidentally. Bay I is easiest to find, money aside, last time I spent couple months to find one for Bay II.
ChrisN, Hasselblad is heavy, too heavy. 1kg is the limit for me.
Which models (flex and cord) include those linked EV settings? Rolleiclub site mention only Automat K4A and K4B...
Those Rolleicords have wierd placed shutter trigger, but I just checked with my Start 66 that a short cable relase works great, I always have trouble with blurry shots caused by camera shake.
Last edited:
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Piotr,
If I may ask, what would be the base of this conclusion?
I agree with everything you have written except the above.
I have looked (very carefully) at loads of photos (high and low resolution) from both cameras and I could not find a single shred of proof that Autocord lens is optically more capable (in any visible significance) than the Rikenon on the Diacord or Ricohmatic.
What I know personally, is that when you make a 11x11 inches print from the Ricohmatic negatives, you get an image whose subjects jump at you
PMCC
Late adopter.
de gustibus non disputandem est
de gustibus non disputandem est
Since I feel substantially the same about what I've read of yours, I hereby declare you to be a scholar, gentleman and kindred spirit! We few, we happy few, we band of admirers of the rare and ineffably wondrous Ricohmatic 225 salute each other. I've enjoyed and learned a lot from reading your posts. Thank you, more please.
Great to hear. I have both cameras, and enjoy them both immensely. +1 vs +2 is not to be taken as the overarching truth, but does reflect my own fierce personal preferences at this moment. Both cameras have "sharp" enough and "capable" enough lenses, and beyond that what one man finds full of charm and beauty, another might find anodyne and banal. That said, I make no claim to optical connoisseurship, but I do enjoy the cameras, and value your input as a fellow aficionado.
Yikes. I don't relish being ambushed in the darkroom.
Pedro.
de gustibus non disputandem est
Since I feel substantially the same about what I've read of yours, I hereby declare you to be a scholar, gentleman and kindred spirit! We few, we happy few, we band of admirers of the rare and ineffably wondrous Ricohmatic 225 salute each other. I've enjoyed and learned a lot from reading your posts. Thank you, more please.
Great to hear. I have both cameras, and enjoy them both immensely. +1 vs +2 is not to be taken as the overarching truth, but does reflect my own fierce personal preferences at this moment. Both cameras have "sharp" enough and "capable" enough lenses, and beyond that what one man finds full of charm and beauty, another might find anodyne and banal. That said, I make no claim to optical connoisseurship, but I do enjoy the cameras, and value your input as a fellow aficionado.
What I know personally, is that when you make a 11x11 inches print from the Ricohmatic negatives, you get an image whose subjects jump at you
Yikes. I don't relish being ambushed in the darkroom.
Pedro.
mike_j
Established
I have a Microcord. The lens is good (Ross Xpres) and the Epsilon shutter is OK but it suffers from wind on problems like many of its type. Handling generally is quite good and weight is reasonable at 885g compared with my Yashica Mat at 1095g.
It's unlikely that you would be very impressed.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
The regard is mutual. I enjoyed reading your writing also.
I'm no scholar, just appreciate good cameras, some more than the other
Make sense, and a valid observation. Thank you for clarifying.
Vics
Veteran
My only Bay 1 experience has been a Yashica 12 I had in the '60s, and the Rollei MX I have now.
The Yashica was a pretty poor performer at wide apertures, and finally died because the focusing helical broke.
The MX on the other hand, is a great performer at all apertures. It has a 75mm Xenon 3.5. It's a 1951 camera with the high health-care costs that go along with old age.
One should remember that the rollinars work by making the already wide-ish 75mm lens even wider, thus producing the closer focusing capability. Getting really close with a wide lens can produce some very strange distortion of facial features in portraits. I get better results by backing away from the subject and cropping to "fill the frame." A 6x6 neg can stand quite a bit of cropping before the grain starts to show, especially with a film like FP4+ or others at 100 ISO.
I hope this helps
The Yashica was a pretty poor performer at wide apertures, and finally died because the focusing helical broke.
The MX on the other hand, is a great performer at all apertures. It has a 75mm Xenon 3.5. It's a 1951 camera with the high health-care costs that go along with old age.
One should remember that the rollinars work by making the already wide-ish 75mm lens even wider, thus producing the closer focusing capability. Getting really close with a wide lens can produce some very strange distortion of facial features in portraits. I get better results by backing away from the subject and cropping to "fill the frame." A 6x6 neg can stand quite a bit of cropping before the grain starts to show, especially with a film like FP4+ or others at 100 ISO.
I hope this helps
Last edited:
jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
Vic, those close portraits, slightly from below, are bit weird but I like em. For now I gonna try cropping to 4x5 ratio as I have nice guide lines on my matt screen.
Autocord users, please tell me how you handle it? Which hand is focusing? I'm more and more interested in this camera, now waiting for some damned bank transfers...
Autocord users, please tell me how you handle it? Which hand is focusing? I'm more and more interested in this camera, now waiting for some damned bank transfers...
Dan Daniel
Well-known
Had my Autocord out just this morning for a roll. Basically the camera is cradled in my left hand while the left index finger does the focusing. Left thumb can change aperture. Usually the right thumb is on the back of the camera, index finger can change shutter speed, ring finger is slightly 'pinching' the camera with the thumb to hold it steady. Shutter is fired by middle finger. Winding is done by right hand while camera stays cradled in left hand. Well, this may all change in actual use.
I usually hold the camera close to my face and use the magnifier for viewing.
What I find nice is that my hands aren't moving around much.
I really want to put a 3.5 Planar on an Autocord body some day. But you know what you want in the Tessar look, so I am certain the Autocord lens will work well. Sharp, but goes soft to the edges at wider apertures.
I usually hold the camera close to my face and use the magnifier for viewing.
What I find nice is that my hands aren't moving around much.
I really want to put a 3.5 Planar on an Autocord body some day. But you know what you want in the Tessar look, so I am certain the Autocord lens will work well. Sharp, but goes soft to the edges at wider apertures.
Mablo
Well-known
About handling an Autocord. I'm right handed. I place the camera on the palm of my left hand and operate the focus lever mainly with my left hand index finger. My right hand remains free to operate shutter speed and aperture levers, trigger the shutter and crank a new frame. It's very comfortable TLR camera to operate at least for me.