ROLLEICORD 6x6 TWIN LENS REFLEX
Photo Courtesy of Nguyen - [email protected]
Related Links:
Rolleicords..
Rollei Pages
Rolleicord III sales brochure (courtesy Richard Urmonas) [5/2002]
''A great camera to try your hand at medium format yielding 6X6
cm images and the lens is sharp.''
Update:
Rolleicord III (type 2) shutter speed is 1 to 1/500th second plus B per
note from Howard Levy - [email protected] - thanks for the note
Howard!
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998
From: "Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Rollei] Rolleicord
Generally the shutter will be sticky and not fire at the slower shutter
speeds usually 1/8 of a second or slower. Check to make sure the front
plate which houses the 2 lenses moves in and out easily and that it is even
all the way around. If it were dropped this has a temdency to go out of
alignment. Easy way is to crrank the focusing know and then as you begin to
see some aluminum look around and make sure the front is even all the way
around. Last, make sure the focus goes to infinity. If not this is also an
indication of drop damage.
Peter K
From Rollei Mailing List;
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000
From: Richard Knoppow [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Look alikes
you wrote:
>Thanks Curtis, > >I'm still looking forward to my first real crank wound 'Flex, and I >really love my Rolleicord. But there are times when I really want >something less precious. I'm going to keep an eye out for an Autocord. >I have heard some really nice things about them. > >Gene
Snipping here . . .
I have both cord (type IV) and flex. The cord is actually IMHO better
ergonomically. The camera stays in my left hand, focusing and winding with
the right. The shutter release is such that I pull the lever with my index
finger against the ball of my thumb, the camera does not move from this
motion. I can shoot pretty steady pictures at 1 second with it. Film wind
takes a little longer than with the flex but really not that much more.
With the Xenar, a very good lens, and the internal baffing the image
quality is outstanding.
The Rolleicord is an ideal, what shall I call it, straight forward
camera. It has everything you need for excellent pictures but nothing
else. Sometimes the extra features of the flex come in handy but the
simplicity, ease of use, and light weight of the cord make it a very
desirable camera.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
[email protected]
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001
From: Craig Maxwell [email protected]
Subject: [Rollei] Rolleicord Vb comparison to Rolleiflex 3.5F
Hi fellow Rollei Users,
Recently Mr. Nolan Woodbury posted a comment quoting a 1958 Modern
Photography article proclaiming that the late model Rolleicord Vb produced
a photo equal to one from a Rolleiflex of the era. I was really quite
surprised that this post did not elicit more of a response from the group.
Since I actually own both cameras, (my 3.5F just back from a major service
at Mr. Harry Fleenor's shop) I decided to test one against the other. Now
please bear in mind that my testing methods were not very scientific, but
I was curious to see if I could discern any difference between the color
transparencies from each camera. I set up my tripod outside with a
Rolleifix attached, first I made a series of bracketed exposures of the
building across the street with the Rolleicord Vb, then I mounted the
Rolleiflex 3.5F on the tripod mount and made a series of identical
exposures. I then chose two other views and repeated the exposure series
with both cameras. Now I suppose it could be said that I gave a slight
advantage to the Rolleicord, since my base exposure was at f 11.
I was really amazed when I examined both processed rolls of Fujichrome
Provia this morning. I did not notice any significant difference in
sharpness, contrast, fine detail resolution or color rendition between the
two cameras using both a Peak 4X and Wista 8X loupe to examine the
individual frames. I would probably give the Rolleiflex 3.5F a very, very
slight advantage in overall sharpness, but I really had to strain to see
it. Under greater magnification, I might see a bigger difference and most
likely would notice a very big difference if both cameras were used at
their respective maximum apertures. I suppose I will keep my little
Rolleicord after all. Any comments from the group ???
Regards,
Craig Maxwell
From Rollei Mailing List;
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001
From: Nolan Woodbury [email protected]
Subject: [Rollei] Quote from 1958 photo magazine
Hello RUG'ers:
Not trying to start trouble, but a friend of mine just bought a stack of
old photo magazines, and emailed me with a portion of a Rollei article.
Pretty interesting...I'll pass along the tidbit here in a moment.
He's going to send them to me, and I'll try to scan and put it on the
internet somewhere. Anyway, here it is:
"In the "Modern Photography" magazine (May 1958) there is an article by
Herbert Keppler, entitled "Great Cameras? Fact or Fiction", to see if
Rolleis deserved their reputation. They compared the models available at
the time: 2.8E (Planar and Xenotar), 3.5E (Planar and Xenotar), 4x4
Rolleiflex (Xenar), and the Rolleicord Va (Xenar).
They said wonderful things about all of the lenses. Here's what they said
about the Xenar: "The Xenar design is of a traditional four-element
Tessar-type construction. Performance at such a moderate aperture (3.5)
and focal length (75mm) is excellent compared with that of the 75mm f/3.5
5-element Xenotars or Planars." (This after giving a glowing report on
both Planars and both Xenotars - 2.8 and 3.5.)
Going into the general text of the article, it says: "In time past the
more expensive and elaborate Rolleiflexes did take the better pictures.
Some Rolleicords were equipped with three-element lenses whose performance
at large openings left something to be desired. This is no longer true.
Today if you buy a 3.5 Rolleiflex instead of a Rolleicord, or a 2.8
Rolleiflex instead of the 3.5, you are buying differences in external
conveniences and features. Quality is the same for all. That includes
both Rolleiflexes and 'cords. The one supposed 'quality' difference - a
five element f/3.5 on the Rolleiflexes and a four-element lens on the
Rolleicord - doesn't show up in practice, unless you plan on making
wall-sized murals at full aperture."
How does THAT grab ya?!
Nolan Woodbury
From Rollei Mailing List: Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 From: Dave Restall [email protected] Subject: Re: [Rollei] OT: See Rolleicord on cover of March AmatuerPhotographer Hi, > Hey, the Rolleicord is back! > > http://www.amateurphotographer.com/ > > Haven't found a hard-copy of this magazine around here, but I'll pick it up > if I do. For those of you interested, this is an article by Ivor Matanle as part of his Classic Camera series. He did the Rolleiflex in the 8th December 2001 issue. You can order back issues of AP with the articles in. The 8th December article is over six full pages with no adverts apart from a couple of small boxes 3.5" x 2" & 3.5" x 1" for classic camera fairs and the PCCGB. An excellent article, as are most of those in this series. The current Rolleicord article is pretty much the same, six pages, plenty of pictures, the article covers :- TLR History, Differences between Rolleiflex & Rolleicord, body aesthetics (Art Deco & Leather), post war models, buying tips, accessories, prism hood and finally using them. As an aside, I personally think AP is the best photo mag on sale in the UK. Regards,
From: Stephe [email protected] Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format Subject: Re: First impressions of MF / 501CM Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 Douglas Tourtelot wrote: > Would you miss your "greatest" photo because you wouldn't take your > camera, whatever brand, out into the weather (or into any other situation > that might > put it in danger)? If that were true for everyone, we'd have a lot of > mint cameras on shelves (and soon on ebay) and a bunch of pretty boring > photos to > look at. This was shot in the rain with a rolleicord http://miss_stephe.tripod.com/farm.htm#Farm It was lightly misting when this was shot, same camera, same weekend. http://miss_stephe.tripod.com/fog.htm#fog The camera still works fine. Wiped it off with a towel after I got back in my car. Used a lens hood to keep water off the lens while shooting. I've shot plenty of other things in the rain etc and don't "baby" my gear. It's bought to use. -- stephe http://www.geocities.com/kievgurl/
From: Damir Fajdetic [email protected] Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format Subject: Re: Buying Used Rolleiflex Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 Francis A. Miniter "[email protected] wrote: >One more consideration. The Cord allows double exposures. The Flex >does not. I am sorry to inform you that many 'Flexes (if not all) DO have possibility of double exposure. On quite a few models there's a ring (partially serrated, with the arrow pointing in the direction it has to be turned) surrounding the film crank that provides this function. >Francis A. Miniter > > >Bob & Linda Flood wrote: > >>Something else to consider .... >> >>The Flex is a two-handed camera, and the Cord is a right-handed camera. >> >>This distinction can be important for some users. The Flex has the film >>advance on the right and the focus knob on the left - think about how you >>have to change hands when shooting, winding, shooting, etc. Of course, it's >>a non-issue if the camera is on a tripod, but it is an issue for hand held >>shooting, especially for us arthritics whose hands don't cooperate any more. >> >>The Cord helps greatly by making all the manipulations right-hand only, but >>that won't be too satisfying to the average left-hander. As n.t. has pointed out this is true for all 'Cords (including model V) except Va and Vb (which have focusing knob on the left hand side). >>My preference is for the Cord, avoiding the Biotar models - the Xenar is >>everything I need in a lens. >> >>Bob in Las Vegas Back to the OP question... >I see them in eBay all the time, but I don't know where to begin to learn >which ones are good. Are there any pointers you can offer? > >I'm looking for an economical model, and am interested more in the quality >of the lense than in the very latest features on the body. (IMHO) Lens quality - well, it depends on what your needs/subjects are - if you need something from f: 2.8/3.5 to f: 5.6, and/or if you need your pictures to be sharp all the way to the edges, definitely go for: 1. 'Flex with 3.5 Planar; 2. 'Flex with 2.8 Planar; (Xenotar is almost the same - NO FLAME WAR, PLEASE!); but if you're trying to save some money, and if you're comfortable working at f: 8 or higher (smaller f stops), you'll be quite well off with: 1. 'Flex with 3.5 Tessar; 2. 'Flex with 3.5 Xenar; 3. 'Cord with 3.5 Xenar. >If you were going to buy one cheap, which mofel would you buy? Well, it depends on what the prices in your part of the world are, but I'd probably go for 'Cord Vb. (Don't be fooled, I'm 'Flex user and fan!) Furthermore: 1. (IMHO) 'Flexes are better built and faster/easier to use. At the same time they are more complex, many have seen harder (professional) use, so there are more things to be aware of (that are/or could possibly go wrong?). 2. There are at least three concepts/ways of handling the camera in Rollei TLR line: - 'Flexes (some of them also differ); - ' Cords Va and Vb; - V and earlier 'Cords. Although they are all capable of taking great pictures, if it's possible, try to handle (at least one of each of) them to see/feel the advantages/disadvantages of each type before you decide to buy something you might be uncomfortable with. 3. Be aware that most Rollei's would benefit from CLA... Good luck with your purchase, and may you put it to good use, Damir Fajdetic
From: "Glendon" [email protected] Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format Subject: Re: Rolleicord 2a Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 Neither the serial number nor the shutter speed line up with a 2a....see, for example, http://johnsrolleionlypage.homestead.com/Rolleicords.html Start looking for manuals at http://www.matthes.com/Rollei/Manuals/ (He has one for a III , IV, and V) and here http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/index.html and here http://www.stutterheim.nl/rollei/faq.html Search the archives in that last site for a trap in using the fastest shutter speed on early cords.....is it cock before select? or the other way round? can't remember. BTW, welcome to the world of cords! ...
End of Page