Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > TLR Forum - Twin Lens Reflex

TLR Forum - Twin Lens Reflex another alternative to the dreaded SLR way of seeing, this forum for all format TLR cameras

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

New (to me) TLR.
Old 11-16-2016   #1
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
New (to me) TLR.

Although I'm delighted with my C220 now that the light baffles have been replaced, I wanted a slightly smaller camera too. I looked around and decided the best value user currently is a CLA'd Flexaret.

I scored a 1964 Flexaret Standard last week, and it's in the post now. Should be here in a couple of weeks - can't wait!
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2016   #2
unixrevolution
Registered User
 
unixrevolution's Avatar
 
unixrevolution is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 34
Posts: 840
Why did you decide on the Flexaret instead of the much more prevalent Yashicas?
__________________
Please, call me Erik.
Find me on: Flickr | PentaxForums | Large Format Photography Forum

"I decided to stop collecting cameras and become a photographer."
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2016   #3
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by unixrevolution View Post
Why did you decide on the Flexaret instead of the much more prevalent Yashicas?
I got a CLA'd Flexaret in a good deal. I like the look of them, and that 3.5 lens is killer (or not, depending on who pushes the button ).

Nothing wrong with Yashica's. I used a little Yashica J rangefinder for years - Yashinon lens - very nice stopped down.
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2016   #4
Chromacomaphoto
Registered User
 
Chromacomaphoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 282
Well done and congrats. Would love a little feedback and write up after you've had it a while, maybe even with a picture or two? They certainly have their fanbase and I must admit to having had my interest piqued by them once or twice before. As well as their image taking potential, I do like the way they look.

Will at least look forward to hopefully hearing a little more about it.
__________________
http://www.chromacomaphoto.com
Photos of Thailand and Thai people. Bangkok street and candids, urban landscapes, and lots of film work plus a blog on all of this.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2016   #5
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 7,493
I bought two Ricoh Diacord G(s) to complement my Rolleiflex T. No problems with any of them but I've had all CLAd. What I really like aside from the obvious larger negative than the miniature 35mm, and a square format, is the angle of view that waist level finder provides: it is a whole other world. Especially after looking through eyelevel finders.

Sorry IR film:

EfkeIR820 DiacordG HC110h HoyaR72 by John Carter, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2016   #6
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromacomaphoto View Post
Well done and congrats. Would love a little feedback and write up after you've had it a while, maybe even with a picture or two? They certainly have their fanbase and I must admit to having had my interest piqued by them once or twice before. As well as their image taking potential, I do like the way they look.

Will at least look forward to hopefully hearing a little more about it.
I'll be delighted to do a short write-up once it arrives and I've put a film or two through it.

Most TLRs seem capable of great results - some need stopped down more than others, I'm thinking Lubitel. When I was researching the Flexaret I read comments about how there were plenty of pictures taken with the Flexaret which were not sharp, and it's true - I've seen some of them. I've also seen pictures taken with Rollei TLRs which are not sharp, and I've also seen pictures taken with both which are superb.

The Flexaret is not a Rollei - no-one is suggesting it is. The Standard, which is what I've bought, is a stripped-of-frills TLR workhorse which looks nice and by all accounts is well-made.

Anyway - happy to report back when it arrives - thanks for the interest.
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2016   #7
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by charjohncarter View Post
I bought two Ricoh Diacord G(s) to complement my Rolleiflex T. No problems with any of them but I've had all CLAd. What I really like aside from the obvious larger negative than the miniature 35mm, and a square format, is the angle of view that waist level finder provides: it is a whole other world. Especially after looking through eyelevel finders.

Sorry IR film:

EfkeIR820 DiacordG HC110h HoyaR72 by John Carter, on Flickr
Very nice!
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2016   #8
Joao
Negativistic forever
 
Joao's Avatar
 
Joao is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 38.40.807N 9.09.499' W
Posts: 760
Scigeek
You won't be disappointed with the results if the camera is in good shape. I have and use a Flexaret IIa similar to this
http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Flexaret_II

Some samples I've got (with Czech film!) here
https://www.flickr.com/photos/joaofr...57675101276762

The camera is sharp enough (for me) and very reliable.

Good luck with your Flexaret

Joao
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2016   #9
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joao View Post
Scigeek
You won't be disappointed with the results if the camera is in good shape. I have and use a Flexaret IIa similar to this
http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Flexaret_II

Some samples I've got (with Czech film!) here
https://www.flickr.com/photos/joaofr...57675101276762

The camera is sharp enough (for me) and very reliable.

Good luck with your Flexaret

Joao
Thanks Joao. Your camera seems to have the 4.5 lens. Mine has the 3.5. I know both are sharp. I'll take the time to look at your pics soon.

Regards,

David
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2016   #10
Chromacomaphoto
Registered User
 
Chromacomaphoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by charjohncarter View Post
I bought two Ricoh Diacord G(s) to complement my Rolleiflex T. No problems with any of them but I've had all CLAd. What I really like aside from the obvious larger negative than the miniature 35mm, and a square format, is the angle of view that waist level finder provides: it is a whole other world. Especially after looking through eyelevel finders.

Sorry IR film:

EfkeIR820 DiacordG HC110h HoyaR72 by John Carter, on Flickr
Bravo! I think this is a really excellent shot indeed.
__________________
http://www.chromacomaphoto.com
Photos of Thailand and Thai people. Bangkok street and candids, urban landscapes, and lots of film work plus a blog on all of this.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2016   #11
Chromacomaphoto
Registered User
 
Chromacomaphoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by scigeek View Post
I'll be delighted to do a short write-up once it arrives and I've put a film or two through it.

Most TLRs seem capable of great results - some need stopped down more than others, I'm thinking Lubitel. When I was researching the Flexaret I read comments about how there were plenty of pictures taken with the Flexaret which were not sharp, and it's true - I've seen some of them. I've also seen pictures taken with Rollei TLRs which are not sharp, and I've also seen pictures taken with both which are superb.

The Flexaret is not a Rollei - no-one is suggesting it is. The Standard, which is what I've bought, is a stripped-of-frills TLR workhorse which looks nice and by all accounts is well-made.

Anyway - happy to report back when it arrives - thanks for the interest.
Quite, I really don't think of them as a poor man's Rollei at all though...they are certainly capable. As you say, MF TLR's generally are. BTW, I seem to recall seeing an interesting 10-15 minute video or two dedicated to them on that 'Art of Photography' channel on youtube. That Ted bloke did them a lot of justice in the videos, check them out if you haven't already.

In the meantime looking forward to any updates in the future.
__________________
http://www.chromacomaphoto.com
Photos of Thailand and Thai people. Bangkok street and candids, urban landscapes, and lots of film work plus a blog on all of this.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-22-2016   #12
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
Well it arrived today - a little over a week from winning it on the bay.
Well-packaged, and with a nice fitted leather case.

The camera is a Standard, made in the 60's. So while it has a decent set of Belar 3.5 coated lenses and a Metax shutter, it doesn't have any of the niceities of some of the other Flexarets - a frame counter for instance, or automatic cocking.
This means less to go wrong in a 50 year-old camera.

The camera had a CLA as part of the purchase price, and looks the business. I loaded a film (took about the same time as loading my C220), so I'm ready to try a film and see how the lens performs.
The viewing screen is nice and bright - and clear.
Focussing on the Standard, like all the Flexarets, is by a lever underneath the taking lens - looks useful.

First impressions - a nice little camera. If it works as good as it looks I'll be very happy.



__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2016   #13
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
Having now had a chance to check the camera thoroughly I feel I can comment a little more. It is both substantial and well-finished, and comes with a nice leather case, and a plastic one-piece lens cover for both lenses.
It seems the Flexaret Standard was made for one year only - 1964. Really, it's a stripped out Flexaret with no automatic cocking, no film counter, no coupled aperture/speed, and no accessory shoe. It has the 3.5 Belar lenses for viewing and taking, and a Metax shutter (which I believe is a Compur copy). The Belar lens is described as a Tessar-type.
As said before, the viewing screen is clear and bright, and there is a magnifier, and hinged front for direct viewing.

The camera has the usual Flexaret failsafe back catch which consists of a push-in button connected to a spindle which can be screwed home to lock the back securely. It will take 120 and 220 film, and has two red windows to count film frames. The window on the right counts 220, the window on the left counts 120. There is a sliding cover over the windows to ensure stray light does not get in.
Unlike other Flexarets the Standard does not take 35mm.

Once the film is loaded the back can be closed and locked and the film can be advanced to the first frame. The shutter is cocked by means of a small lever which sits at 7 o-clock on the taking lens. The shutter release is a button situated on the right of the face of the camera between the lenses. It has a lock to save taking a pic inadvertently, and is threaded for a cable release.

Unsurprisingly the camera is smaller and lighter than the Mamiya C220, and so is much handier and more practical for sticking in a (big) pocket or bag. The C220, being bigger, is more practical in terms of viewing and focussing but it's a big lump to heft around, and I suspect that the Flexoret will get more use overall.

I'll report on the lens once the film is finished and processed.
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2016   #14
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is online now
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 50
Posts: 4,244
Looks very impressive as TLR and how CLA was made. It is sparkling!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2016   #15
leicapixie
Registered User
 
leicapixie is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto.Canada
Posts: 1,246
I am curious how one would use 220 film?
There is only paper backing at beginning and end.
so there are no numbers visible in "window" but naked film!
Maybe not for 220 but 120, 16 exposures?.
Otherwise enjoy your camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2016   #16
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by leicapixie View Post
I am curious how one would use 220 film?
There is only paper backing at beginning and end.
so there are no numbers visible in "window" but naked film!
Maybe not for 220 but 120, 16 exposures?.
Otherwise enjoy your camera.
I can tell you that I'm up to frame four on 120 film and the frame number is clearly visible in the left window.
For 220 I assume I would use 120 film and a framing mask to give 220 equivalent. There are numbers also visible in the right window, but more of them.
Good point.
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2016   #17
Chromacomaphoto
Registered User
 
Chromacomaphoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 282
Wow, that looks super clean and tidy, the glass and the body. I guess it's now just down to what the first roll comes out looking like. There's nothing like getting a good result from that first roll on a new (old) mechanical camera at several different speeds and apertures. I love that feeling, part joy and part relief! May luck be on your side sir.
__________________
http://www.chromacomaphoto.com
Photos of Thailand and Thai people. Bangkok street and candids, urban landscapes, and lots of film work plus a blog on all of this.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2016   #18
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromacomaphoto View Post
Wow, that looks super clean and tidy, the glass and the body. I guess it's now just down to what the first roll comes out looking like. There's nothing like getting a good result from that first roll on a new (old) mechanical camera at several different speeds and apertures. I love that feeling, part joy and part relief! May luck be on your side sir.
Thank you.
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2016   #19
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by leicapixie View Post
I am curious how one would use 220 film?
There is only paper backing at beginning and end.
so there are no numbers visible in "window" but naked film!
Maybe not for 220 but 120, 16 exposures?.
Otherwise enjoy your camera.
My question and answer/suggestion as well, when I first read OP's writeup that said 220.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scigeek View Post
I can tell you that I'm up to frame four on 120 film and the frame number is clearly visible in the left window.
For 220 I assume I would use 120 film and a framing mask to give 220 equivalent. There are numbers also visible in the right window, but more of them.
Good point.
What you are seeing in the other window must be the 645 size, which would have required a mask inside as well. I have a couple of 6x6 folders, one a Welta and the other a Fujica, that both have two windows, and masks. Of course, the 645 window will show more numbers since that is a smaller (and verticle format) negative.

Original masks are very hard to find for any camera. But they can be made by any competent machinist, either of a appropriate thickness of thin metal, or thin plastic, and a small amount of measuring/experimentation. Since you apparently wish 6x6 negatives, I wouldn't worry about it.

EDIT: I said the 645 would be verticle, but it probably is not. On thinking of it, in a TLR, it very probably would be horizontal since the film would move vertically. In a most 6x6 folders, the film moves horizontally, so the negatives are verticle.

EDIT 2: If you do not have lines marking off 645, I would guess you would either have to put them in yourself on the view screen, using a piece of ground glass with the back open, or make a mask for the viewfinder as well. Another reason to stick with 6x6.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2016   #20
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by oftheherd View Post
My question and answer/suggestion as well, when I first read OP's writeup that said 220.



What you are seeing in the other window must be the 645 size, which would have required a mask inside as well. I have a couple of 6x6 folders, one a Welta and the other a Fujica, that both have two windows, and masks. Of course, the 645 window will show more numbers since that is a smaller (and verticle format) negative.

Original masks are very hard to find for any camera. But they can be made by any competent machinist, either of a appropriate thickness of thin metal, or thin plastic, and a small amount of measuring/experimentation. Since you apparently wish 6x6 negatives, I wouldn't worry about it.

EDIT: I said the 645 would be verticle, but it probably is not. On thinking of it, in a TLR, it very probably would be horizontal since the film would move vertically. In a most 6x6 folders, the film moves horizontally, so the negatives are verticle.

EDIT 2: If you do not have lines marking off 645, I would guess you would either have to put them in yourself on the view screen, using a piece of ground glass with the back open, or make a mask for the viewfinder as well. Another reason to stick with 6x6.
I'm happy with 120!

There are lines on the viewing screen, and they are horizontal. Pretty new to any format other than 35mm - as you can probably tell!

I took the camera out with me this morning when I took the dogs out. It, and case, will fit into a pocket - very handy.

A small but significant difference between the usability of the Flexaret and the C220 is the shutter release. The shutter release on the C220 is operated by pushing the sliding bar down. It works but it tends to move the camera.
The Flexaret shutter release is a button which is pushed/squeezed in. This allows the camera to be held firmly, and I'm hopeful of low light steady shots at 1/20th.
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2016   #21
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
The bayonet hood arrived today - 25 from another seller, so all set now. The first film is at the lab so should be able to post a sample taken with this lens next week.
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2016   #22
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
So my first film through this camera arrived back today.
This is a test shot with the lens wide open at 3.5, and a slow shutter speed.
I detect a little camera shake, but not bad sharpness otherwise, and nice contrast.

I'm happy with that.
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #23
unixrevolution
Registered User
 
unixrevolution's Avatar
 
unixrevolution is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 34
Posts: 840
Results look pretty good! I'd love to see more
__________________
Please, call me Erik.
Find me on: Flickr | PentaxForums | Large Format Photography Forum

"I decided to stop collecting cameras and become a photographer."
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-07-2017   #24
scigeek
Registered User
 
scigeek's Avatar
 
scigeek is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wales, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 253
2nd film through the camera….
Where I live.

I'm very happy with the camera.
__________________
"She stripped off her rancid poncho, and laid out nekkid on the floor. We did it 'till we were unconcho, and it was useless any more." F. Zappa .
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:29.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.