The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Any Rolleiflex Users/Owners Here?
- Thread starter TRSmith
- Start date
Cindy Flood
Super Moderator
Tim, I would love to know more about this camera, too.
Maddoc (Gabor) uses one, maybe he will chime in. I love his Flickr photos with it.
Maddoc (Gabor) uses one, maybe he will chime in. I love his Flickr photos with it.
Per Ofverbeck
Member
Well, time flies... When I started in photography, Rolleiflex had the same kind of image as Rolls Royce or Rolex....
I´ve owned and used a couple of them. The last one, a 2.8E with 2.8/80 Planar, still rests in my glass case. I really loved that camera; far preferred it to my Hasselblad with (nominally) the same lens: it was smaller, quieter, and allowed uninterrupted viewing during, and after, exposure.
Just a moment ago, I was reading Sigma´s brochure about the new Sigma DP2, and it made me think of my old Rollei: a decently small camera with a fixed "normal" lens that could do almost anything, backed by a large negative/sensor that gave excellent resolution and quality. With the Sigma, I´ve no experience, but the Rollei certainly delivered all that. If I ever return to film from digital, the Rollei will be the first of my cameras to get loaded.
OK, you´ve made me nostalgic; now I´ll try to give a few URL´s for more info.
Start with this one: http://photo.net/equipment/rollei/tlr
and this: http://www.siufai.dds.nl/Rollei_History.htm
and this: http://www.cosmonet.org/camera/rollei_e.htm
and this: http://www.rolleiclub.com/
just to get some sense of directions
Then Google along....
If I would recommend it? You bet! :salute::salute::salute:
TRSmith
Subscriber Member
Thank you Per! You are feeding my new found frenzy. Rollei owners seem to share a similar passion to Leica owners.
I've been contemplating a return to film and in this uncertain economy, the Rollei presents an economical path. Now if I can just muster the courage to go back and commit to film again!
Thanks for the links, I'll continue to read up on them.
p.s. Interested in selling yours?
I've been contemplating a return to film and in this uncertain economy, the Rollei presents an economical path. Now if I can just muster the courage to go back and commit to film again!
Thanks for the links, I'll continue to read up on them.
p.s. Interested in selling yours?
Per Ofverbeck
Member
:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
Seriously, I´d guess there will be several around from people who have gone digital and want to clean out their cupboards. I´m sure you´ll find one.
Don Hutton
Member
I've owned a Rolleiflex for years - they are amazing cameras - such a simple, clever, well executed idea. I currently have a 2.8F with the Xenotar - I think it's my favorite configuration ever, although the last GX and FX models had very accurate and handy metering (LEDs at the base of the viewing screen). There are a bunch of goodies which have been made for them over the years - the Rolleinars make them excellent portrait cameras.
Evanjoe610
New member
Tim,
Have you tried eBay and Keh Camera Brokers? I believe that Harry Fleenor and Krikor Maralian, whom are both excellent repairmen of the Rollei mechanical cameras, sells TLR from time to time. Another excellent repairman and seller is Jimmy Koh of Koh Camera.
I have 2.8D Planar, 2.8E3 Xenotar, and 2.8F Planar. The Rolleiflex T is also another good camera that I use too as my light weight MF when I travel overseas.
Have you tried eBay and Keh Camera Brokers? I believe that Harry Fleenor and Krikor Maralian, whom are both excellent repairmen of the Rollei mechanical cameras, sells TLR from time to time. Another excellent repairman and seller is Jimmy Koh of Koh Camera.
I have 2.8D Planar, 2.8E3 Xenotar, and 2.8F Planar. The Rolleiflex T is also another good camera that I use too as my light weight MF when I travel overseas.
TRSmith
Subscriber Member
Thanks gents! You're feeding my excitement. A little research on other forums confirms what you've said. And I have a call into a repairman/seller in NJ to see what he has available. eBay scares me for a product like this. There are so many models out there and some are quite old. I think buying from a trusted name will make me feel a bit more secure in my decision. Wish me luck!
Oh, and if anyone else (besides Per) has one they're willing to part with, you know where to find me. :thumbup:
Oh, and if anyone else (besides Per) has one they're willing to part with, you know where to find me. :thumbup:
Cindy Flood
Super Moderator
Anyone have any scanner suggestions if I go the Rollei route? I just have a Nikon V and it won't scan anything but 35mm. I need to stay on a budget, please!
Oh, I hope Tim doesn't mind me popping into the thread. I know he is interested in the answer, too.
Oh, I hope Tim doesn't mind me popping into the thread. I know he is interested in the answer, too.
Evanjoe610
New member
Cindy,
A scanner for anything bigger then a 35mm would be a personal choice in regards to what you want as a final end result.
It depends on how large you want the final image to be. More like the final end result for THAT use. Now if you have future plans for RE-Purposing that final scanned image, how would you approach that?
I have research the currently available consumer and professional scanners available. I choose to use a Kodak/Creo Eversmart flatbed scanner. These tend to weight at least 165 to 176 lbs. The other consumer grade scanners for MF are the Imacon series, Epson V-750 & the Nikon LS9000 Cool Scan. They are current scanners still being made. The professional scanners tend to be drum scanners and professional flatbed scanner such as the Kodak/Creo Eversmart and IQ line.
Here are Website links where you can research and ask questions:
Large Format Photography Forum
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/index.php
Scan Hi-End Forum on Yahoo!
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ScanHi-End/
Leafscan Scanner Forum on Yahoo!
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Leafscan/
WETMOUNTING · Fluid Mounting / Wet Mounting for Scanners on Yahoo!
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/WETMOUNTING/
I am quite sure that that are many others, but from these mentioned sites, you would be able to determine what your needs are to find the correct scanner for your work.
Good Luck,
Evan
A scanner for anything bigger then a 35mm would be a personal choice in regards to what you want as a final end result.
It depends on how large you want the final image to be. More like the final end result for THAT use. Now if you have future plans for RE-Purposing that final scanned image, how would you approach that?
I have research the currently available consumer and professional scanners available. I choose to use a Kodak/Creo Eversmart flatbed scanner. These tend to weight at least 165 to 176 lbs. The other consumer grade scanners for MF are the Imacon series, Epson V-750 & the Nikon LS9000 Cool Scan. They are current scanners still being made. The professional scanners tend to be drum scanners and professional flatbed scanner such as the Kodak/Creo Eversmart and IQ line.
Here are Website links where you can research and ask questions:
Large Format Photography Forum
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/index.php
Scan Hi-End Forum on Yahoo!
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ScanHi-End/
Leafscan Scanner Forum on Yahoo!
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Leafscan/
WETMOUNTING · Fluid Mounting / Wet Mounting for Scanners on Yahoo!
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/WETMOUNTING/
I am quite sure that that are many others, but from these mentioned sites, you would be able to determine what your needs are to find the correct scanner for your work.
Good Luck,
Evan
Cindy Flood
Super Moderator
Evan,
Thanks for the links.
Cindy
Thanks for the links.
Cindy
Per Ofverbeck
Member
FWIW, during my "transition period" from film to digital, I scanned my medium format negs on an Epson flatbed. Perfectly doable, but didn´t come near to the true potential of the negs.
Resolution as such was OK, but the dynamic range was not, so the highlights were bad (I was a Zone System adherent, so this really hurt..). Also, there was a phenomenon known as "grain aliassing" (Google it; far too complicaded for me to try to explain...) that often resulted in apparent grain much bigger than the real film grain.
I´d say these difficulties were the last nails in the coffin for my silver film use... Looked like either keeping my wet darkroom for enlarging, or pay through the nose for a really good scanner. The third alternative was to go all digital, of course.
But, for anybody ready to use traditional methods all the way, a Rollei is a wonderful tool. If the world ever runs out of silicon....
Resolution as such was OK, but the dynamic range was not, so the highlights were bad (I was a Zone System adherent, so this really hurt..). Also, there was a phenomenon known as "grain aliassing" (Google it; far too complicaded for me to try to explain...) that often resulted in apparent grain much bigger than the real film grain.
I´d say these difficulties were the last nails in the coffin for my silver film use... Looked like either keeping my wet darkroom for enlarging, or pay through the nose for a really good scanner. The third alternative was to go all digital, of course.
But, for anybody ready to use traditional methods all the way, a Rollei is a wonderful tool. If the world ever runs out of silicon....
charlesphoto
New member
I currently own and use a Rolleiflex 2.8F Xenotar. I also love (and stupidly sold) the 3.5E2 Xenotar for it's lack of meter and slightly smaller size.
If you go to my site and look under "travel", most of the b&w square were done with Rolleiflex cameras. I love it for traveling - most people have no idea what you are up to. The image quality equals if not rivals that of most modern alternatives. It draws like no other camera.
IMO everybody should shoot with a Rollei TLR at least once in their life. Alas, I don't use it as often as I used to, but plan on continuing a series of street portraits in Vietnam next time I go.
If you go to my site and look under "travel", most of the b&w square were done with Rolleiflex cameras. I love it for traveling - most people have no idea what you are up to. The image quality equals if not rivals that of most modern alternatives. It draws like no other camera.
IMO everybody should shoot with a Rollei TLR at least once in their life. Alas, I don't use it as often as I used to, but plan on continuing a series of street portraits in Vietnam next time I go.
johnastovall
Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
Rollei R.I.P. an interesting essay by Mike Johnston on the end of Rollei.
Evanjoe610
New member
Tim,
Do you have an idea as to what model (fixed focusing hood or removable focusing hood) and which version you are looking to get (2.8 or 3.5)?
Lens preferences of Carl Zeiss or Schneider?
Are you looking for a Super Nice camera to use once in awhile or a user of a camera?
That will help you set a price range and to target exactly which model/version you are seeking.
Evan
Do you have an idea as to what model (fixed focusing hood or removable focusing hood) and which version you are looking to get (2.8 or 3.5)?
Lens preferences of Carl Zeiss or Schneider?
Are you looking for a Super Nice camera to use once in awhile or a user of a camera?
That will help you set a price range and to target exactly which model/version you are seeking.
Evan
N
nei1
Guest
Have used many in y student days ,would love a new one but at 3300pounds out of my zone but if you can afford it Tim I dont think youll lose on it in the future.Im looking for a "baby rollieflex" in good condition which wil fit in a coat pocket and is one of the most charming cameras Ive ever played with,it takes 127 film which is still available.
http://www.rolleiclub.com/cameras/tlr/info/4x4_tlr.shtml
http://www.rolleiclub.com/cameras/tlr/info/4x4_tlr.shtml
Last edited:
TRSmith
Subscriber Member
After just a couple of days of research, I had landed on a general idea that I wanted a 2.8F. And yes, I want this to be a camera I can use and count on. Nice condition as far as looks go is not as important, but an accurate shutter and a lens that's adjusted to specs is kind of key. Turns out that the 2.8F is considered by many to be the "top-of-the-line." Story of my life. And, in spite of what folks say about how many are available, I'm not finding all that many myself.
At this point, I'd consider C, D, E(E3), or T models with a preference for the Planar and ideally a 2.8. I'm not interested in the GX or FX models or ones that are rare or special editions. There are lots of collectors out there and prices for those tend to be more than I'm willing to pay for a camera that's likely to get used and not just perched on a shelf.
This is yet another deep world built on years of manufactured models with the confusing combination of user ratings and specs that goes along with it. The good news is that unless I end up with a total dog that's badly in need of service, almost any of them will perform well. At least that's what I'm hearing from the Rollei lovers. Sheesh, I thought Leica was a deep morass!
At this point, I'd consider C, D, E(E3), or T models with a preference for the Planar and ideally a 2.8. I'm not interested in the GX or FX models or ones that are rare or special editions. There are lots of collectors out there and prices for those tend to be more than I'm willing to pay for a camera that's likely to get used and not just perched on a shelf.
This is yet another deep world built on years of manufactured models with the confusing combination of user ratings and specs that goes along with it. The good news is that unless I end up with a total dog that's badly in need of service, almost any of them will perform well. At least that's what I'm hearing from the Rollei lovers. Sheesh, I thought Leica was a deep morass!
Evanjoe610
New member
Tim,
Funny that you should mention going the 2.8 route over the 3.5.
For years, I read and heard from many old time users that the 3.5 was sharper then the 2.8 and was just as good if not better.
For me, it was always a choice as a kid. My uncle was a camera buff who introduce me to the world of Zeiss Optics through his Hasselblad 1000F & 500C, Rolleiflex 2.8C, and Contaflex 35mm.
I'm not sure if you were aware of the constant improvement of the optics going from the 2.8C up to the 2.8E2.
The 2.8E3 (Rare) were made after the initial 2.8F. Starting from the 2.8F, I found that color signature was different then the earlier 2.8. The 2.8F and forward models, were sharper and had more color contrast and brillance over the older models.
Granted the older models had a very unique look to its image. The bokeh and color rendition had that 1950's Retro Look. If possible, try to start out with at least the 2.8D, as it did not have the plastic locking tabs on the EVS and shutter speed button. From the 2.8D to the 2.8E3, these cameras were quite similar to each other with the exception of the later removable waist level finder. I would guess that the 3.5 models were similar in its progression of improvement like the 2.8 models.
I base it on your statement that you would rather have a 2.8 Planar over a 3.5 Planar? You can always try the Rolleiflex T ( I have that I will send it to Harry Fleenor). I read that the optics used a rare lanthanum glass in its optics.
Here is an article about it from another website that I think you would find
interesting.
http://www.antiquecameras.net/rolleiflex.html
xxxxxxxxxx
Serial # 2100000-2199999 from 1958-66. About 99000? made. Grey and black versions. 75mm Tessar 3.5 lens or Opton 75/3.5 lens. Meter optional. Synchro-Compur MXV shutter 1/500 to 1, B. Rollei expert Alex Pearlman remarks that the Tessar on the Rolleiflex T utilizes Lanthanum glass for improved resolution and color correction. Detachable hood, improved focus screen. Heidosmat 75mm F2.8 viewing lens. Bay I.
xxxxxxxxx
Funny that you should mention going the 2.8 route over the 3.5.
For years, I read and heard from many old time users that the 3.5 was sharper then the 2.8 and was just as good if not better.
For me, it was always a choice as a kid. My uncle was a camera buff who introduce me to the world of Zeiss Optics through his Hasselblad 1000F & 500C, Rolleiflex 2.8C, and Contaflex 35mm.
I'm not sure if you were aware of the constant improvement of the optics going from the 2.8C up to the 2.8E2.
The 2.8E3 (Rare) were made after the initial 2.8F. Starting from the 2.8F, I found that color signature was different then the earlier 2.8. The 2.8F and forward models, were sharper and had more color contrast and brillance over the older models.
Granted the older models had a very unique look to its image. The bokeh and color rendition had that 1950's Retro Look. If possible, try to start out with at least the 2.8D, as it did not have the plastic locking tabs on the EVS and shutter speed button. From the 2.8D to the 2.8E3, these cameras were quite similar to each other with the exception of the later removable waist level finder. I would guess that the 3.5 models were similar in its progression of improvement like the 2.8 models.
I base it on your statement that you would rather have a 2.8 Planar over a 3.5 Planar? You can always try the Rolleiflex T ( I have that I will send it to Harry Fleenor). I read that the optics used a rare lanthanum glass in its optics.
Here is an article about it from another website that I think you would find
interesting.
http://www.antiquecameras.net/rolleiflex.html
xxxxxxxxxx
Serial # 2100000-2199999 from 1958-66. About 99000? made. Grey and black versions. 75mm Tessar 3.5 lens or Opton 75/3.5 lens. Meter optional. Synchro-Compur MXV shutter 1/500 to 1, B. Rollei expert Alex Pearlman remarks that the Tessar on the Rolleiflex T utilizes Lanthanum glass for improved resolution and color correction. Detachable hood, improved focus screen. Heidosmat 75mm F2.8 viewing lens. Bay I.
xxxxxxxxx
TRSmith
Subscriber Member
Thanks for the info Evanjoe610!
I am such a novice with these cameras that my preference for the 2.8 was based strictly on the slightly faster lens and without any real knowledge of the quality.
I do get a lot of suggestions for the T. I'm just not finding them out there for sale. My situation is complicated by the fact that I need to have a good working model by the end of this month, so no time to buy and have CLA'd.
Most of the well-known names handling Rolleiflex have a few for sale, but they're either rare collectables and expensive, or the GX/FX model which I really don't want. I've got a few different avenues of inquiry open, but so far nothing has presented itself as the "one" for me.
Cheers!
Tim
I am such a novice with these cameras that my preference for the 2.8 was based strictly on the slightly faster lens and without any real knowledge of the quality.
I do get a lot of suggestions for the T. I'm just not finding them out there for sale. My situation is complicated by the fact that I need to have a good working model by the end of this month, so no time to buy and have CLA'd.
Most of the well-known names handling Rolleiflex have a few for sale, but they're either rare collectables and expensive, or the GX/FX model which I really don't want. I've got a few different avenues of inquiry open, but so far nothing has presented itself as the "one" for me.
Cheers!
Tim