TLR's 4x4

Shawn
So wouldn't you use the window on the back of the camera and wind the film until #1 shows up...close the window and fire away? Or do you have to cock the shutter at that time and doesn't that automatically advance the film to #2?

Basically, it will free wind (clockwise) when you are loading it. You stop when you are at one, reset the counter, and backwind (counter clockwise) to cock the shutter. The winder will stop at the point that allows the lever to fold into the body. After that you shoot and the wind clockwise till it stops, then backwind to the stopping point and you are ready to shoot again. That is for the Primo Jr.

On the lever wind Yashica it operates about the same way except that you have to manually cock the shutter one the shutter itself. Not as quick as the Primo but it gives the added advantage of allowing one to overcrank the film which is needed if you are shooting 35mm in it as one crank doesn't advance enough due to the thinner takeup spool without the backing paper.

Shawn
 
Anybody using a ricohflex 44?

I have a Ricohmatic 44... Probably not the same thing; the Ricohmatic had a coupled light meter that was "supposedly" to allow automatic operation. I shoot mine 100% manually though and just ignore the meter. One review of this camera I read described it as "hilariously unintuitive and secretive". An acquired taste I suppose.

I also have Baby Rolleis from 1932 (a very early production model) and 1957, and one from Toyoco or some such brand that is a re-badged Primo I think. My favorite is the 1957 Rollei but they all have their own charms.
 
I use a 1938 Baby Rollei and it’s probably my favorite camera despite the hassle of supplying it with film and the uncoated lens. It’s the perfect size, easy to operate, I can focus it accurately, and 127 is enough bigger than 35mm to be worthwhile. It gets a lot of attention when walking around with it, more then a full size Rolleiflex or a Leica, which is usually not annoying.

I also have the Camerhack film cutter, but I've found it cuts the film too wide for any spool I have that fits into the baby Rolleiflex. I suppose it's possible it's just outside the correct tolerance given it's 3D printed, but even with shimming as much as I could get away with I was never able to get a usable roll from it.
 
I also have the Camerhack film cutter, but I've found it cuts the film too wide for any spool I have that fits into the baby Rolleiflex. I suppose it's possible it's just outside the correct tolerance given it's 3D printed, but even with shimming as much as I could get away with I was never able to get a usable roll from it.

That's unfortunate if it is as imprecise as it sounds.

I have a film cutter made by Holgamods but I don't think they make it any more. It cuts film the correct width but requires a lot of extra handling and you have to roll it into the paper backing yourself afterward. I did a "how to" thread here with photos, but that may be a moot poi9nt now if the cutter is unavailable.

It's worth mentioning here that the 1957+ gray Baby Rollies are particularly sensitive to film and paper widths..... Well, maybe paper mostly. There is a round pin on one side of the film rails and it will squeeze and buckle the paper backing that goes by it if it is too wide. A pinch point, basically. And when the paper buckles, it creates an out-of-focus area in the center of the frame. I've been cutting my own paper backing (with a straightedge) and I eventually started making them narrower than I originally thought I should be, just to fix this issue. Just one more reason why the camera needs to be loaded and unloaded in very subdued light!
 
I use a 1938 Baby Rollei and it’s probably my favorite camera despite the hassle of supplying it with film and the uncoated lens. It’s the perfect size, easy to operate, I can focus it accurately, and 127 is enough bigger than 35mm to be worthwhile. It gets a lot of attention when walking around with it, more then a full size Rolleiflex or a Leica, which is usually not annoying.

I also have the Camerhack film cutter, but I've found it cuts the film too wide for any spool I have that fits into the baby Rolleiflex. I suppose it's possible it's just outside the correct tolerance given it's 3D printed, but even with shimming as much as I could get away with I was never able to get a usable roll from it.

Have you contacted Claudio about this? I'm sure that he could remedy the situation if you let him know - he's pretty responsive. I've not had that particular issue -- if I have any issue with it, it resides in my limited abilities.
 
Have you contacted Claudio about this? I'm sure that he could remedy the situation if you let him know - he's pretty responsive. I've not had that particular issue -- if I have any issue with it, it resides in my limited abilities.

I was considering purchase of one of these things. Nice to know that can communicate with a responsible person....should it be defective or useless.(of course because of my limited abilities)

Right now I sent my Superricoflex back to Mark Hansen. IT just will not focus, although I bought it direct from him. Although I have a nice Autocord with all the bells and whistles, I like the form factor and the simple handling of 6x6 Super ricohflex. It's not much bigger than a baby TLR. when it is returned I will take some phone pictures along with an Autocord and yashicamat 124 G so interested people can see for themselves.

I procured a Sawyer and taking my time selecting a film source and the quirky ways these baby TLR's work.
thanks Vince
 
Any suggestions for a daylight developer tank that works with 127? I might try Cinestill monobath and a changing bag standing in for a dark room. Considering a LAB BOX....but LAB Box not yet set up for 127. Website states....."coming soon".
 
Did you all notice the new 127 film being offered for sale? Shanghai GP3 B&W

I did see that. Always good to see more in the marketplace.

I generally like the Shanghai film but I like Delta 100 better, I've shot a lot of Shanghai..... In 120 size as well as cut down to 127. I haven't tried the new pre-made 127 though.
 
I did see that. Always good to see more in the marketplace.

I generally like the Shanghai film but I like Delta 100 better, I've shot a lot of Shanghai..... In 120 size as well as cut down to 127. I haven't tried the new pre-made 127 though.

i remember crawling the internet about shanghai film. It's a funky business. Went out of business but was resurrected a few years ago. My memory does fail me more often than I would like. However, people who try gp3 have not raved.
 
I just looked up Shanghai GP3 on eBay. Eek: $46 for three rolls--for such a little bit of film? I have a baby Rollei I got from another member, and it might be nice to use it; but I don't know. Really, I just like looking at that little Rollei! At these prices, I don't have to shoot it just to be shooting it (I know, most other films aren't much cheaper).
 
If we could still get a top-quality transparency film in 127 and have the slides mounted as superslides, I would be all over one of these cameras.

(I am already a fan of TLRs and square composition.)

Superslides have the same outside dimensions as standard 135 or 126 slides, with a significantly increased image area, so they should work fine in a standard projector. Also, the square shape of the slides more exactly fits the projection screen, without having to accommodate horizontal and vertical rectangles with the resultant empty screen space. (Slides in 126 were better in this regard, as well.)

- Murray

BHphotovideo has 127 slide film. Not sure where you can the slide holders. They have every type of film, B&W, C41 and slide for around $12 which doesn;t seem too bad of a price these days.
 
BHphotovideo has 127 slide film. Not sure where you can the slide holders. They have every type of film, B&W, C41 and slide for around $12 which doesn;t seem too bad of a price these days.

Thanks for that, Beemermark.

The only color slide film I saw at BHphoto was ReraChrome 100, which is offered at a very decent price. However, this film hasn't done very well under review, has it?

- Murray
 
i remember crawling the internet about shanghai film. It's a funky business. Went out of business but was resurrected a few years ago. My memory does fail me more often than I would like. However, people who try gp3 have not raved.

I think most of the complaints about the film (mostly issues with the backing paper and the printed numbers leaving marks on the negatives) were from the earlier batches of the film. Then the film was off the market for awhile, and now it's been back for a couple years at least with much fewer complaints. I've seen a few issues myself: On one roll, the film wasn't taped to its paper backing. The tape just wasn't there.... Fortunately that was a roll I was unwinding so I could trim it down to 127 size, so there was no worries that time. Another roll, which I shot in a 120 camera, had strange small rows of tiny spots on the negatives, all equally-spaced as if something had happened to the film roll itself.

I will mention however the Shanghai emulsion is much softer and prone to scratches or even little hunks of emulsion can be picked away from it it you're not careful during development and washing. I find myself using the clone tool to fix little imperfection on my scans, much more than any other film.
 
i remember crawling the internet about shanghai film. It's a funky business. Went out of business but was resurrected a few years ago. My memory does fail me more often than I would like. However, people who try gp3 have not raved.

I used it a lot when I was a poor university student in the late 2000s. I really liked the look of the film, especially in Rodinal, but as css9450 has already pointed out, there were big QC issues back then. The backing paper felt like construction paper and the ink for the frame numbers would leach into the film. The pinholes in the emulsion was a common problem, too. It also had a nasty tendency to curl like crazy, making it a nightmare to work with post-development, whether you were scanning or wet printing. Hilariously, I just looked through my 120 negative folder and found a roll I shot in 2012 and it STILL has a bit of curl, even after being crushed in there for almost a decade.

All in all, it was capable of great things when the photography gods were smiling on you, but as soon as I had the money and the means, I swapped over to more consistent films.

Now, if this new company has ironed out the "quirks" and got the consistency up, I'd be more than willing to give it a go - even if only to feed some 220 through my Yashica 24 again and support a company that's willing/mad enough to be producing fresh 620, 220 and 127 in 2021.
 
Thanks for that, Beemermark.

The only color slide film I saw at BHphoto was ReraChrome 100, which is offered at a very decent price. However, this film hasn't done very well under review, has it?

- Murray

I've been scared off of ReraChrome by a batch of defective film ( https://flic.kr/s/aHsmxnYniM ) - mine was from Freestyle in 2019 but I bought a bunch of rolls from a local shop and they were also defective in the same way, so I've been hesitant to try it since then.

Where are people finding Shanghai GP3 in 127 format? The usual sites I check (freestyle, etc) still only have ReraPan and the Film for Classics respools. Is the Shanghai only available on ebay?
 
Putting Xi Jin-Ping's film in my Rolleiflex 4x4 would be sacrilege. I hope one day Ilford will come to their senses and make FP4 in 127, at least a large batch.
 
Christmas came early this year in the form of a great Sawyer's Mark IV with which I am working to get accustomed to.
I am looking for sources of lens hoods and/or filters for the Sawyer's. I believe that, though they are Bay 1 accessories, they need a specific cutout to fit the taking lens because of the tight spacing between the taking and the viewing lens. It does not have to be original hoods or filters.
I thank you in advance for your help.
All the best
Paul
 
You may want to look at the Baby Rollei hood, it too has a cutout to fit the taking lens because of the tight spacing between the taking and viewing lens.

Best,
-Tim
 
Back
Top Bottom