Rolleiflex for street photography?

VictorM. said:
My 3.5E has become my daily shooter...look at my Flickr Series "Parkdalians" for some results.
Click to expand...


If anyone looks at that series and doesn't think the rolliei TLR is not a top-notch street cam (In the right hands of course dear sir!) then they must be on better drugs than I can procure in my neighbourhood :D
 
If you decide you like the Rollei for street/landscape etc, you can look for one of the 2.8F 12/24 cameras. I found one a year or so ago, and I love the extra convenience of the 220 film. It really does add a lot, since I've also found bargain film lots available in 220, as well.

There is no question that the negatives are fantastic, but some people just don't like the square format, or the limitation of the 80mm lens. I just find it a different tool to use in situations where I'm comfortable with the camera.

Harry
 
The Rolleiflex is a GREAT street shooting camera. You don't want to snap millions of pictures. If that's your goal, get a digital SLR. A Rollei will help you learn some of the most valuable lessons one can learn in photography: care in composition and framing, and even better patience. You've got 12 shots per roll, and believe me, you will soon begin to learn them well. The trick to this is lingering a bit in a setting, taking its temperature, letting people stop responding so much to your presence, studying your subject, and then shooting. As previously remarked, it is quieter than even a rangefinder, and Rollei glass bears comparison with anything.

Have a look at these images from Manhattan, all Rollei street shots: http://www.howardwfrench.com/photos/albums.php?set_albumListPage=1
 
Thanks for kind words, Toby. Your childrens' portraits on Flickr are great; I know all too well how difficult children can be.
 
Last edited:
The shutter is very quiet. There isn't a camera up at your face and folks don't even know you are making a photo if that makes a difference in your street style, but a 6x6 isn't usually tucked away because of its size also. I like to interact with people I'm photographing so the Rollei can be an advantage, people like it (the camera) and it becomes a part of the party. I can't tell you how many times I've had someone come up to me and say "my father had one of those" and conversations and a short friendship develops that may lead to an image.

In general I would say its just what ever you are comfortable using. Personally I love my Rollei maybe the most of any of my cameras. Its not as fast as a Leica, but working with it is different and so the photography isn't the same.
 
You guys are killing me. I can't wait to get my hands on it tomorrow morning. :(
After looking at all the shots posted in this thread, there's no doubt of the rolleiflex's capabilites as a street camera.
 
Last edited:
I'll add my agreement to the above. It is the ultimate none threatening camera. Once you raise a camera to your eye and point it at someone whether it's a point and shoot, RF or DSLR you likely to get the 'why the hell are you taking my picture?" reaction.

People seem to cut you more slack with your antique looking camera specially when the moment you are pressing the shutter you appear to be looking down futzing with your cool old toy rather then pointing something at them which is much more confrontational and invasive of their personal space. Plus it's quieter then even a Leica and the additional film real estate provides better quality then even with the most expensive 35mm kit.
 
I've used a Holga on the street for many years. The Rolleiflex is my next mission. I have one sitting in my darkroom, waiting to be put in my camera bag.

http://www.metaincognita.com

Some of my older Holga images. Just purchased a Bessa-L and am planning to use that, too.


city14.jpg



city06.jpg


city11.jpg
 
Last edited:
Todd.Hanz said:
Rollei's work well on the street but they do require you to slow down a bit and are not as fast to use as an RF. People don't seems to get "put off" as much when I use mine, maybe it's the whole "retro" look.

I like to use the focus scale on the knob to set the hyperfocal range when shooting street stuff, Tri-X at 400 and f11 means most things will be in focus on a sunny day.

a few of mine taken with a 2.8 Planar:
Click to expand...
Let's do Todd's pictures some justice and have them show right away:

thai_protest.jpg


black_dahlia.jpg


crooked_man.jpg



Click on these to go to the original page:



 
For many years, and even today, folks have used Speed Graphics on the street. The Rollei will be fine. Carry a 35mm camera too if you're worried about lack of exposures. Being limited to 12 exposures makes you think twice or thrice before commiting to pushing the button. Your pictures will benefit!
 
Mike: using the Rolleiflex, specially the older ones with their original, dimmer screens, command a different discipline when doing street photography than when using more automated cameras.

I am bringing my Rolleiflex to my trip to Paris, no question about it. I am waiting for a bright screen to arrive from Maxwell Optics. This will allow me to handle it better; given, of course, that I recalibrate it properly.
 
Ash said:
The shutter is so quiet, you can use it for any purpose. I agree that 12 frames is limiting (there was a 24-frame add-on somewhere on the market I read about) or else buy a Rolleikin and use 35mm as well!
Click to expand...
I like to think about it as something that demands you use your best judgement for taking that shot, really aim to get it right, since there is very little room/frames for error.

Here are three different examples of my experience:

1) I was right behind these two women, and it was so bright outside I could barely see the image on the focusing screen, so I had to guess the distance; I was off by a few feet:




2) I had time to take this shot; the girl was on her phone all the time, pacing. I waited for the time she'd turn, but didn't. I had only one frame left.




3) I had to think quickly. No light meter. Dark. I stopped to set the shutter speed to my best guess for f/3.5 (widest aperture). I framed but had to tilt a little because to avoid glare from a light above.

[url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/362150410/]
362150410_1e3682b556.jpg
[/url]


If I had a DSLR with me, I'm sure I'd taken a few more takes, just to be safe. The ones that made you sweat are somehow also the sweetest. I don't care if there are those who say "as long as I have the image, who cares what I use". It's about me as a photographer, who cares how I take a picture. As a viewer, if you care, fine, but you should not talk down the experience of the photographer.

Have fun!
 
Gabriel, you are just the person I want to talk to.

I have a Rolleiflex 2.8E and want buy a Maxwell Hi-Lux Brilliant Matte focusing screen for my camera. As you know, they are a bit difficult to see through with the original screen. I will be interested to know your opinion after you've had a chance to use the Maxwell.

I like your shots and appreciate the difficulty of night street shooting with the camera, especially with the original, dim screen.

For what it's worth, I started out street shooting with a Rolleicord 3.5. As I didn't k now any better and didn't have any preconceptions, I used it constantly. Even covered motorcycle racing for Cycle World magazine, plus anti-war demonstrations. (some of these images are in a show traveling world-wide called "'Nam and the Sixties."

So it can be done, and done better if you can see what you want to see.

There aren't a lot of fast films out there in 120 size. Ilford has Delta Pro ISO 3200, Kodak has TMAX ISO 400 and TRIX ISO 400, and Forte and Fomapan have it in ISO 400. I wish Fujifilm offered there very good Neopan 1600 in 120, but they don't seem to.

Obviously Delta Pro is the fastest. I've never used it and know nothing about it. Might be time to find out.

Ted
 
I finally got a Rolleiflex 3.5F after reading the posts in this thread. I think I even made a new thread about it.
But I'm glad someone bumped the thread. I took the camera to Korea, although I didn't have time to take a lot of pictures. The number of frames was not a problem at all (in my experience) and I found the screen to be very nice to compose. Here's a few frames:

20070105094048_photo06_6_phixr.jpg


20070109055444_photo10_10_phixr.jpg


20070109060555_photo12_12_phixr.jpg


I should have gotten a lot closer for the last frame...
Anyway, I still have three rolls to develop, so I'll post some more frames if there's something interesting. ;)

By the way, the rolleiflex got infected by fungus :bang:
Since I live in argentina, it's not an easy option to send my camera to a rolleiflex specialist like Harry Fleenor or Mr. Hansen. Am I safe having the lens cleaned in any pro shop? I mean, is it an easy thing to take care of, considering it's just two 1mm dots of fungus (or even smaller)?
 
Ted,

I recently swapped my original 3.5E screen for a Maxwell -- the difference is huge, my aging eyes are very thankful.

JT
 
JT:

As my Rolleiflex seems to work just fine, I think I'll order the Maxwell screen tomorrow.

Apparently installation will be a bit fiddly as my camera does not have the removable hood. Must be unscrewed. Maxwell sent me the instructions. Seems the original screen is 0.050 thick and his is 0.060 thick so some 0.010 shims (actually, tape) are included.

He says to place the shims between the hood and the camera to RAISE the position of the new screen.

Doesn't make sense to me as it would seem to make the situation worse, but that's what his instructions say.

Ted



Ted
 
I don't understand the need to shim a screen if the matte side is on the bottom.

If the original is 0.050 thick, and the new one is 0.060, then the new screen is thicker than the original and therefore either wouldn't need shimmed or would need a negative shim to get it down to 0.05.

If the new screen is thinner than the old screen, then you would need a spacer above the screen so it wouldn't move or rattle.
 
 
Last edited:
Mike:

It's possible Mr. Maxwell may have erred in his instructions. I will call him tomorrow. Didn't make sense to me, nor to you, nor to Matt Cook, the resident techie/camera nerd here in town.

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