Rollei 6008 vs Rolleiflex TLR

Discussion in 'Medium Format Cameras and Accessories' started by snaggs, Jun 19, 2005.

  1. snaggs

    snaggs Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Location:
    Perth, Austr
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Quick question. Is there any reason a Rollei 6008 with mirror lockup wouldn't be as good as a TLR for taking photos handheld in low light?

    Daniel.
     
  2. ian_greant

    ian_greant Member

    Messages:
    405
    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Location:
    Calgary
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yes, Vibration from the mirror slap.
    Having the mirror locked up may prevent vibration but it won't help your composition much when using the camera handheld.
     
  3. snaggs

    snaggs Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Location:
    Perth, Austr
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I have a Leica M6 for candit street photography, Im interested in Rollei for its square format and landscapes (with occasional use for street). With the 6008 I at least have the option of a d*****l back should I fall in love with the lenses. I currently have a D70 for my digital, but my Leica M6 has obsoleted it forever for general purpose, and it isn't really good enough for serious landscapes. I was going to get a D2X or 1dsMk2, but I figured getting the 6008 would be a good compliment to my Leica, and it could shoot film too & sate my need for a square format TLR.

    Daniel.
     
  4. jeanba3000

    jeanba3000 Member

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2004
    Location:
    Paris - Fran
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hello. I'm a satisfied 6008 owner.

    You can pre release the mirror before shooting to prevent vibrations, but of course you don't see what you shoot. It's weight requires from you a good physical condition to carry it hours, and it's noise is as loud as your Leica is quiet... But it's the most ergonomic and easy 6x6 you'll find. For landscapes and other subjects that takes time, it's a great camera, for more reactive subjects, it's usable, but not as easy as a small camera with AF. The 6008AF will probably do the things easier. The max apertures you'll find in the 6000 system are the standard f/2-80mm, the f/2-110mm, the f/2.8-50mm, the f/2.8-180mm and the f/3.5-40mm which are not comparable with what we use to have in 35mm cameras, and are very expensives.

    The Rolleiflex TLR is pretty quiet and has low vibrations thanks to it's central shutter and fixed mirror. For landscape, you should look at the Rollei Wide and it's 50 mm.

    My advice finally is that you should try and manipulate those cameras to make your own opinion.
     
  5. benjiboy

    benjiboy Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,598
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    U.K.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I may be wrong, but I believe that on S.L.R.s by the time the mirror has reached the end of its travel the exposure has been made, I would imagine that providing you give the camera a few seconds to stop vibrating after the mirror shock, before your next shot is about all you can do, and in low lighting you would be more danger of camera shake by hand holding.
     
  6. antielectrons

    antielectrons Inactive

    Messages:
    205
    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    My Rollei 6003 with Xenotar 80/2.8 delivers wonderfully sharp images handheld in low light with mirror lockup. Overall i would say that the 6000 series outperforms the old TLRs in pretty much every way. I have owned both, and whilst the TLRs are certainly in the game still, there is definately an edge tot he modern equipment that puts it ahead. Low light, high light any light at all, the 6000 series is a much more flexible and precise instrument for taking photos, just make sure you get the smaller not cartridge type back for handheld and you will be blown away by the results. I know I have been.
     
  7. David H. Bebbington

    David H. Bebbington Inactive

    Messages:
    2,364
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Location:
    East Kent, U
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
     
  8. df cardwell

    df cardwell Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,341
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Location:
    Dearborn,Mic
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I think there are at least 12 reasons the 6008 is superior to a TLR for low light, handheld shooting, beginning with viewing and metering, and ending with exposure accuracy and reliability.

    The mirror issue, in my experience, is a theoretical, intellectual possibility
    that I was simply unaware of before the internet. Before that, I just shot my 5x7 Home Portrait graflex and got great results. And, brothers and sisters, if that camera ain't the Prince of Mirror Slap, I'm Elvis.

    Mama she done told me,
    Papa done told me too
    'Son, that gal your foolin' with,
    She ain't no good for you'
    But, that's all right, that's all right.
    That's all right now mama, anyway you do
     
  9. Claire Senft

    Claire Senft Member

    Messages:
    3,242
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Location:
    Milwaukee, W
    Shooter:
    35mm
    For handheld, low light useage the Rollei TLR has a couple advantages. You can push back the center of the WLF and you get a resonably accurate frame finder while retaining the ability to focus on the central part of the ground glass. You have a camera that will be extremely quiet...I doubt that a Leica is any quieter. If you wished more accurate framing you could buy a prism finder. The Rollei TLR is also a very light camera.

    Unless one was using a recent vintage o a Rollei TLR you would only have a single layer lens coating instead of HFT coating and photographing in lowlight can present challenges as far as flare is concerned.

    The Rollei SLR should have a better quality optic.

    Used without a very sturdy tripod It will be difficult to use this additional optical quality...flare excepted.
     
  10. David H. Bebbington

    David H. Bebbington Inactive

    Messages:
    2,364
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Location:
    East Kent, U
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Never used a 5x7 Graflex, have used Ensign 1/4-plate reflex, imagine the design is similar in that the mirror is raised by thumb power. If so, it is relatively easy to raise the mirror fairly quickly but gently and minimise mirror slap. Maybe it's just me, but I have found mirror slap has ruined pictures with every second-hand 35 mm SLR I ever owned (including Nikon F3, FM, FE). As a result, I vowed never to buy a second-hand SLR again, only new ones which I get rid of after 10 years.
     
  11. df cardwell

    df cardwell Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,341
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Location:
    Dearborn,Mic
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Amazing. And scary. Thanks.
     
  12. TimVermont

    TimVermont Subscriber

    Messages:
    433
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Boston
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    6000's=Bright Viewfinders

    I currently own and use 6000 series cameras and have used a 2.8 Xenotar C series TLR. I was unable to find a replacment viewfinder screen for the TLR that was anywhere near as bright and useable as the 6000 screens with an 80/2.8 attached. YMMV.
     
  13. Claire Senft

    Claire Senft Member

    Messages:
    3,242
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Location:
    Milwaukee, W
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Tim, I am not up-to-date at all as far as ground glass screens upgrades for a Rollei TLR are concerned.

    Are you sure that a 6000 series screen will not work?

    Have you tried the Rollei Club of America to see what they may advise?
     
  14. JosBurke

    JosBurke Member

    Messages:
    464
    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Location:
    KY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Rollei

    I'm not going to touch the 6008 vs TLR issue BUT I can say I'm a big Rollei TLR fan with a couple of F's with 3,5 Planar, a 2,8 Planar, and a pair of Tele-Rollei's with the 135 f/4 Sonnar. Fabulous cameras as if you would expect any other response. Excellent with my favorite Ilford FP4+. Love the TLR's but the focus screens are kinda lacking EXCEPT one of my 3,5 Planars (12/24 model) has one of Bill Maxwells Split Image focus Screens--Nice and bright and contrasty and on par with my Hasselblad Acute Matte Split Image---EXCELLENT and I shuffle it to the Tele models when using them because it is that much better but then I do prefer the split image focus. As for Mirror Slap--I've never noticed any issues using my Hasselblads (501 and 503) and vibration BUT can't comment on the 6008 Rollei but I expect no issue---If not using strobes with the Hasselblad I do tend to trip the mirror in advance--kind of habit forming!! My suggestion is try a RolleiFlex TLR with either the Planar or Xenotar lens--I have a couple of Tessar cameras but I really like that very sharp and shallow DOF characteristic of these two lenses--not quite a Tessar trait is it!! If I could have only one MF camera and one Focal length then the 3,5 Planar Rollei TLR is my 1st choice but then my Hasselblad with 100mm Planar is mighty, mighty fine!!

    Joseph Burke
     
  15. Sparky

    Sparky Member

    Messages:
    2,099
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2005
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  16. cvik

    cvik Member

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm not sure what type of images you are going to shoot but available light often means outdoor/street photography. The Rolleiflex 6008 is way to large, noisy, obtrusive and heavy for that type of photography - it works best for planned location or studio work. The Rolleiflex TLR is something inbetween those two. I don't own one so i can't really comment on it except that it's a lot smaller and is known to be quiet.

    The best type of cameras for available light are the rangefinder cameras as they will always have a very bright viewfinder and you're able to compose and focus easily even when it's very dark. If you really need medium format, maybe a Fuji MF rangefinder would be a better choice? If MF is not a requirement, I would have chosen a Leica M.