Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,107   Posts: 1,636,601   Online: 1276
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 40 of 40
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Lobsta
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    566
    Sent you a PM. My internet access is very spotty right now, so I'm not able to respond as quickly to the forum as I might have in the past.

    I appreciate the many kind remarks!

    -Will

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfeye View Post
    Could you tell me more? What sort of cosmetic, mechanical condition is it in? Photos from/of it? Note, I'm replying in the forum and hope you'll reply here too, so that others may consider it too. Just let me have first dibs.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanders McNew View Post
    I confined my remarks to Hasselblads, didn't I? Fight fair, if you're going to fight at all. I made you a challenge: Draw up a list of great 20th-century photographers who shot a Hasselblad and compare it to a similar list of Rolleiflex users. You didn't do that. Nor did you tell us whether you've ever shot a Rolleiflex and, if so, whether you made more than passing acquaintance with it.

    Of course different people have different hands, different eyes, different needs. No one camera is right for everyone. But your remarks about Rolleiflexes betray a fundamental ignorance of the subject.

    Sanders
    My original point was about TLR's in general and MF SLR's in general, not about Rollei vs Hassy. I only brought up Hassies because I thought they were around before TLR's.

    When you made the statement "Wedding photographers shoot Hasselblads. Artists shoot Rolleiflexes.", it looks like you are saying that anybody who doesn't shoot Rolleiflex is NOT an artist.

    TLR's in general ARE budget cameras compared to MF SLR's in general, and it's been that way for a long time. To deny that is portraying a "fundamental ignorance of the subject". A Rolleiflex is the upper end of TLR's, but it's still a TLR. It's an expensive TLR, but it's not as expensive as most MF SLR gear. Even Rollei MF SLR gear is substantially more expensive than Rolleiflexes (current used prices).

    As far as composing a list of 20th century photographers, I'll pass. I owned and operated a custom color lab for a few years and most of my customers were pro photographers. I've also known a lot of other pro photographers (when I say pro, I mean people who make their living from it). I've known pro photographers who shot almost every brand of MF SLR outfits, but I've never met a pro photographer who shot a TLR (not saying that they don't exist somewhere).

  3. #33
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by max_ebb View Post
    When you made the statement "Wedding photographers shoot Hasselblads. Artists shoot Rolleiflexes.", it looks like you are saying that anybody who doesn't shoot Rolleiflex is NOT an artist.
    An equally absurd conclusion would be that wedding photographers shoot only Hasselblads. But neither follows logically from the statement, read in its context.

    Quote Originally Posted by max_ebb View Post
    TLR's in general ARE budget cameras compared to MF SLR's in general, and it's been that way for a long time.
    A Rolleiflex TLR will set you back $4,000 today at B+H. And it has always been priced at levels considered unaffordable to most. As I said, it is a "budget" camera only in the context of current eBay prices. But by that standard, Hasselblads are also budget cameras. C'mon: You really think Dick Avedon was shooting fashion spreads for Vogue with a Rolleiflex to scrimp on equipment?

    Quote Originally Posted by max_ebb View Post

    As far as composing a list of 20th century photographers, I'll pass. I owned and operated a custom color lab for a few years and most of my customers were pro photographers. I've also known a lot of other pro photographers (when I say pro, I mean people who make their living from it). I've known pro photographers who shot almost every brand of MF SLR outfits, but I've never met a pro photographer who shot a TLR (not saying that they don't exist somewhere).
    Well of course you'll pass. I bet you can't even name ten photographers of any consequence in the 20th century who used a Hasselblad with any regularity. In fact, I bet you can't name five.

    The remainder of your remarks simply underscores my earlier observation. Hasselblads were cameras of choice for wedding photographers (as you say, "people who make their living from it") because they had to shoot in wildly different conditions, and the interchangeable backs allowed film changes in midroll. A perfectly good reason to opt for a Hasselblad. But the observation begs the question:

    Why did so many of the leading photographers of the 20th century opt for a Rolleiflex over a Hasselblad? And how do you reconcile that preference with your own view that a Rolleiflex is just a budget camera that no one would shoot, if they could only afford a Hasselblad?

    Sanders
    Last edited by Rolleiflexible; 06-21-2007 at 08:17 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,598
    Gotta say this is one pretty absurd thread.
    Feel like someone's twisting your tail McNew?
    I don't feel the need to make a list of Artists just to further an argument that has no real meaning to anyone but a true blue Rollei user. Unless it's a true blue Hasselblad user who feels their masculinity being threatened.
    "Can't we all just get along"
    Expletive Deleted!

  5. #35
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    One of those days, John. :-)

  6. #36
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    The really good thing about the TLR is that, when shooting people, you get to see what kind of expression they have. There is no mirror black out. Plus, they are quieter. For the kind of work Sanders does, this is a tremendous advantage.

    When I was in the retail camera business, I had opportunity to use and/or buy many MF. Every Mamiya 645 I handled broke. The old Bronicas were constantly going to the shop. The Mamiya C3 and C330 gave me lots of flexibility and were quiet, but a brass gear in the wind just would not hold up.
    My Rolleis were like the Everready Rabbit.
    Trying to decide whether I like the feel of the Blad for my own use, I bought a Kiev 80. I think I could live with a "Blad very nicely. But then what do I do with my trusty old Pentaxs 6x7? Oh, btw, because of the flash synch problems with a focal plane shutter, I bought it with a leaf shutter lens.
    Reminds me: a couple years ago, at a relative's wedding, I was chatting with one of the photogs. She was shooting a strobed Mamiya 645 . During a break, I asked her what film she was using (you know this was some time ago--film....). She was using a 400 speed color of some sort. I noticed her shutter speed (actually, the camera's shutter speed) at 1/30. I told her I thought her shutter speed was too slow. She very snottily informed me that was a leaf shutter and would synch at any speed. Because I do not suffer young fools at all, I merely walked away. Later, her group shots outdoors had ghost images of the heads of virtually every person who waited for the flash, then relaxed. When my sis in law asked me why those outdoor groups looked funny, I told her. I know that job cost the photographer a lot of freebies and discounts because of that young know it all.
    Oh, well. At any rate, I said it before and shall repeat. The biggest bang for the MF buck is a clean late model Rolleicord with a Xenar lens. With art, sometimes it is best to simplify, simplify.

    Anscojohn, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    232
    Sanders;

    It looks like you are just trying to turn this into a pissing contest about Hassy vs Rollei. I already explained that I was talking about TLR's in general, and only mentioned Hassies because I thought they were around before TLR's. I was wrong, my question was answered. The statement that "The TLR was the professional medium format tool of its day" was absolutely correct.

    That was 50+ years ago though. By the 60's or 70's, SLR started becoming the choice of professionals for medium format. At least since the early 80's (long before ebay) TLR's have been a lower cost alternative way to shoot MF compared to SLR's. Rolleiflexes are top of the line TLR's, but on the used market, they're quite a bit cheaper than most MF SLR gear (body with finder, back, and one lens). It's been that way since long before ebay, and the difference was even greater back then. Rolleiflexes have almost a cult like following, so used prices on them haven't dropped as much as they have on most other MF gear.

    To say that "Rolleiflex is by far the superior camera" when comparing to a quality MF SLR outfit (not just hasselblad) is ridiculous.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sanders McNew View Post
    Why did so many of the leading photographers of the 20th century opt for a Rolleiflex over a Hasselblad?
    I don't know that that many did beyond the 70's. I don't know about hassies in general, but most of "the leading photographers of the 20th century" that did a significant amount of MF were using MF SLR's by the 80's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sanders McNew View Post
    And how do you reconcile that preference with your own view that a Rolleiflex is just a budget camera that no one would shoot, if they could only afford a Hasselblad?
    I didn't say anything like that. I'm going to bow out of this thread now.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by Anscojohn View Post
    Oh, well. At any rate, I said it before and shall repeat. The biggest bang for the MF buck is a clean late model Rolleicord with a Xenar lens. With art, sometimes it is best to simplify, simplify.

    Anscojohn, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA
    If it suits the needs of the person looking, then that's probably true, but it can't be the most bang for the buck if it can't do certain things that the person needs.

    Can it do 1:1 (or more) macro? Does it have interchangeable lenses? Is there a wide angle lens available for it? Everybody's needs are different.

    I have a Pentax 6x7 too. I bought a leaf shutter lens more for being able to do multiple exposures than for high shutter speed flash sync (although the high speed flash sync might come in handy some day). Different people have different requirements.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Norfolk, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    250
    No doubt in the '40s, '50s and even possibly '60s most professional photographers shot MF on a Rollei. After that they nearly all used a Hasselblad. Certainly all the guys I knew used Hasselblad when they shot MF – as did I. There really was no choice.

    Later the big Mamiyas began to muscle in on the scene. Then came dig****....

    But all this is rather a long way from the original topic which was about MF on a very tight budget.



    Richard

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The Cape
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfeye View Post
    Would I be better off trying to find a Mamiya or Bronica 645 with 80mm lens and a film back?
    You've answered your own question...

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin