Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/08/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]on 1/8/01 4:20 PM, B. D. Colen at bdcolen@earthlink.net wrote: > > > Mark Rabiner wrote: > >> >> Consider a Rolleiflex 2.8 F or a new GX. >> Simplicity in itself unless your work around revolves around a 35mm Focomat >> enlarger. > > There's one real drawback, though, Mark - and that's the scanning issue > (forgetting for a moment the film cost, etc. etc. etc.. The Rollei TLR > is a fabulous camera. It is quieter than an M, unobtrusive, > anachronistic enough to really be ignored by most people, has great > optics, etc. etc. etc.....But if one prints digitally, then one needs a > 120 scanner - which requires a substantial investment in addition to the > investment in the camera. > > BTW - A few nights ago I was looking through a book I have which is a > collection of the photos from some World Photo something or other > competition - in 1964. At the back of the book there is a section giving > technical detail - film, exposure, lens, camera, etc., for all the > photos. And interestingly enough, the Rollei TLR is far and away the > most frequently named camera...by far. There's a smattering of Leicas, a > few other 35s, etc....but shot after shot after shot with Rolleis..... > > Times change.. > > B. D. Casually I'm working on assignment in Buenos Aires and using a Leica M6 with a 35 Summicron for those photos including from head to waist or so and decided to go to my Rollei 3,5F with Rolleikin for full head pictures. TLR gives us lots of possibilities...even working at about 1 meter is almost unobtrusive. of course I go with my leather hood attachment...it's simply great... To be honest Rolleis are almost my first love and Leicas a step below... Yes, yes, glasses, mechanics and whatever you say but Rolleiflexes deliver 6x6 and 35 format with great also... Regards Pablo