• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

New toy

You know that delirium about getting a new toy. Like it kid in a store, you look at this, pick up that, then see something else; putting off the moment of decision because the process of deciding is too much fun, procrastinating to prolong pleasure. Then the Ah Ha! moment comes at last: the toy really you wanted all along but just didn't know you did. All doubts and delectable torment swept away because that toy is about to become your toy come what may.

Nine years ago, a photo shop in a neighboring city had a baby gray Rolleiflex TLR for sale at about $350. It was cute and looked in like-new condition. It spoke seductively to my heart, promised to be a good and faithful camera, pleaded for rescue from its oblivion. Then reason raised its ugly tentacles with questions about the availability of film. Sadly, an an internet search showed that 127 film was sold only from the Ukraine. Reason overcame desire and I left the camera on the shelf.

This summer found me with a few excess dollars in my pocket and thoughts about a photographic purchase. After thinking hard about large format, the eventual outcome (despite excellent advice from members of this forum) was another medium format lens and a few dollars still left over. But in perusing the internet for film cameras, I'd found that 127 film was again available in North America. An outfit in Calgary cuts down Kodak film (I'm guessing Portra 160) and sold through a US affiliate. Whoo! Maybe, just maybe, I hoped, that baby Rolliflex never sold and still languished on the photo store shelf.

Sure enough, when I visited the neighboring city next, there it was. Still crisp and cute, but freshly reconditioned by the store and with a lower price tag. The store clearly wanted it gone, so it was opportune to bargain over the price. There was no need to haggle a lot and we quickly agreed on $175, which with the Canadian dollar now worth more than its American equivalent seemed a good deal indeed. With several rolls of film mail-ordered, I'll post pictures as soon as I have some.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Michael,

I a;ways thought that twin reflex using 2.25" wide film rolls! This is 4x6.5 cm, or 1.57"x2.36". So this is a mini viersion of the famous Rollei twin lens reflex camera that were, with the Mamiya TLR the mainstay of post Graphic photography.

It's exciting that you are using film. We need a spread of capability.

Congrats!

Asher
 
Hi Asher
The baby version takes 4*4 cm square photos, 2/3 the axis lenght of its bigger brother. The shooting lens is a Schneider-Kreuznach Xennar, f 3.5, 60 mm; the viewing lens a Heldosmat f 2.8, 60 mm. According to internet reports, Rollei made the baby until 1963. Any photo lab should have no problem developing 127 film but I'm gonna have to modify the film holder for scanning purposes.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Is the camera much lighter than the regular TLR?

I know the Mamiya C330 is a heavy beast. Still there's nothing better!

Asher
 
Compared with the Nikon F4 I usually lug around it's light indeed. The box part is about a 5*2*2 inch cube with viewer recessed and protruding winders & lens disregarded. It feels heavier than it looks, being solidly built, but easy to carry around. I haven't held a Mamiya TWR but this is no heavy beast.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Well Michael,

When are we going to see the pictures?

As a matter of interest, how are you going to get prints? Are you going back to the wet darkroom or scan and then inkjet?

If you scan, what will you use?

Asher
 
Hi Asher
<frugalphotographer.com> sells 127 film at $6.99 a roll and also compatible slide mounts. Our local lab is able to develop the film. The interesting thing about the 127 slide mounts is they have the same outer rim dimensions as 35mm slide mounts but with a larger image area. So my plan is to put the negatives into the slide mounts, scan them as positives, then invert the image in Photoshop. This scheme should work easily with my Epson 4990 flatbed. The slide mounts will fit my Minolta Dimage 5400 film scanner, too, but whether that machine's configuration will allow for the scanning of a larger than 35mm film area remains to be seen. I'm expecting the film to arrive next week sometime and hope to post the first pictures the week after next.
 
Well it took a while, but 10 rolls of 127 film finally arrived from Frugal Photographer. So expect a post of the first Baby Rollei images next week.
Cheers
Mike
 
Boots and a pipe: Keeping warm in winter

Sorry to be so long in getting a picture from the Rollei on the site. Work got in the way in December, then came Xmas and the New Year festivities. Anyway, I took some photos between holidays and got them developed and printed at a local outlet. Scanning the negatives proved frustrating. Both the Minolta and Epson scanners have plastic film holders that take 127 film but allow scanning only for the 35mm area. I have some 127 slide holders ordered that should solve the problem with the Epson. The photo below was scanned from a print so please forgive the inevitable loss of quality.
rollei.jpg

Taking pictures with the camera was a pleasure. It feels oh so solid with a good bright viewfinder. The latter's lateral inversion was confusing at first, with focusing for distance made difficult because of smallness. It proved easier to guestimate distance and turn the knob rather than rely on the viewfinder for this purpose. I shot four rolls of film but ruined the first because it wasn't properly on the roller. After this first mishap, there were no more problems.

The prints obtained were gentle in color and definition. The camera forces an unhurried thoughtful approach and the prints seemed pleasingly compatible. I'll be able to say more about this after scanning the negatives. The picture above received Photoshop curving, bordering, and a bit of surface blurring in the upper portion to get rid of paper texture that the scanner recorded. The smoke was added because the model couldn't keep the pipe alight. I hope you like it.
 

Ray West

New member
Hi Michael,

I think that is quite good, from a paper print. I guess you can compare the colours with the original print.

Oddly enough, I have everything more or less exactly as you have shown in that photo except hair on head, furry boots, and the snow - but I can make smoke ;-)

Best wishes,

Ray
 
Ray: Someone from Ontario sold a snowbank for $3500 on ebay last month to someone from Quebec. (The money went to charity). We have lots of snow here if you want some sent across the pond. No way will my wife part with the boots though :)
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Great image Michael,

I'd adjust the color of the face a little as she looks rather pale! The smoke might be better taken from something else. Photograph from a lit candle you snuff out.

Asher
 
Top