Jason Schneider
the Camera Collector
Vintage Classic Cameras:
The Unvarnished Truth About 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 Twin Lens Reflexes. Part 1
6 Cool Non-Interchangeable-Lens TLRs That Aren’t Made By Rollei or Mamiya
By Jason Schneider
A twin lens reflex (TLR) is a camera that uses one lens for viewing and focusing the image and a second separate lens to take the picture. Both lenses are the same focal length, both are carefully calibrated so their focus points match, and both move in and out simultaneously (typically on a common lens board) as you focus the camera. The word “reflex” refers to the mirror placed at a 45° angle behind the viewing lens. It reflects the viewing image upward onto a focusing screen that’s perpendicular to the lens axis, so the waist-level or chest-level viewing image is right-side up, but laterally reversed. The picture-taking lens, typically placed below the viewing lens, projects the image onto the film or sensor when the shutter fires or the lens is uncapped. The TLR’s viewing image is right-side-up, which makes it a lot easier to compose the picture than viewing an upside-down image on a typical view camera screen. Scores of fascinating TLRs were produced from the 1890s through the 1930s but it wasn’t until Franke & Heidecke of Braunschweig, Germany brought for the original Rolleiflex of 1929 that the 6x6 cm (2-1.4 x 2-1/4 inch) roll film TLR became the dominant form. Here we’ll concentrate on user-collector 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 roll film TLRs of the ‘40s though the ‘70s—everything but Rolleiflexes, Rolleicords, and Mamiyaflexes which certainly deserve articles of their own which will be forthcoming. The goal: guiding film shooters toward the best choices for getting into medium format film photography.
Pros and Cons of medium format roll film TLRs
Pros
1.The viewing/focusing image remains fully visible before, during and after the exposure.
2. The viewing lens is always wide open, maintaining viewing brightness.
3. The reflex mirror remains stationary eliminating mirror induced vibration and noise.
4. The 2-1/4 TLR has a compact form factor that facilitates handheld shooting.
5. The square format eliminates the need to turn the camera when composing the shot.
6. Medium format TLRs use quiet, low vibration leaf shutters that provide X sync at high speeds.
7. 2-1/4 TLRs are generally robust, reliable cameras that are easy to maintain and repair.
8. All the 2-1/4 TLRs covered here accept readily available 120 roll film that’s offered in a wide variety of speeds and types including black-and-white, color negative, color transparency and specialized and boutique emulsions.
Cons
1. Because the TLR’s viewing image is laterally reversed, it’s almost impossible to follow fast laterally moving action on the viewing screen, which is why most 2-1/4 TLRs have sports finders built into their viewing hoods. Another solution is installing a top-mounted pentaprism or porroprism finder, but they’re bulky, can be heavy, and may compromise viewing brightness.
2. Most roll film TLRs (except for post-1956 Mamiyas) don’t have interchangeable lenses.
3. The standard 75mm or 80mm lenses on 2-1/4 TLRs usually don’t focus closer than about 3 ft.
4.The square 2-1/4 x 2-1/4-inch format requires cropping to create horizontal or vertical compositions, or to print out the images on standard paper sizes such as 8x10 or 11x14.
5. Most 2-1/4 TLRs (with the notable exception of Rolleis) don’t provide built-in automatic parallax compensation, so achieving precise composition at close distances can be challenging. 6. Mechanical parallax-compensation devices are an effective if clunky workaround for tripod-mounted TLRs. Another (albeit imperfect) solution is using +1, +2, or +3 Rolleinar close-up lenses that have a parallax-compensating prism in the lens mounts over the taking lens. However, to use them your TLR will have to have Bay 1, 2, or 3 bayonet fittings on both lenses.
Practical TLRs by brand: The unvarnished truth
Minolta Autocord with 75mm f/3.5 Rokkor lens and Citizen shutter
Minolta Autocord: Often referred to as “the second best TLR ever,” it was surpassed only by the class-leading Rolleiflex among non-interchangeable-lens models. The Autocord was produced by Chiyoda Kogaku Seiko K.K. of Osaka, Japan, commonly known as Minolta Corp. from 1955-1966 in well over a dozen iterations. All feature crank wind, semi-automatic loading (auto frame positioning and counting after initially aligning an arrow on the paper backing) a 75mm f/3.5 Rokkor taking lens (a highly esteemed 4-element Tessar type), a full range of shutter speeds down to 1 sec, and a double exposure override button that let you turn the crank backwards to cock the shutter without advancing the film.
A defining feature of the Autocord is the helicoid focusing lever, which is mounted below the lens board where it can be operated by either hand, so you don’t have to shift hands to wind the film. However, while the rest of the camera’s metallurgy is first rate this lever is made of brittle pot metal, is vulnerable to breakage, and is virtually impossible to fix. Make sure the focusing lever is intact before you buy one, don’t force it or subject it to impact, and you should be OK. Also, the Autocord incorporated several different shutters over its long production run and the ones with Seikosha or Citizen shutters are preferable to those fitted with Optiper shutters, which are somewhat less reliable and harder to fix. It’s not a deal breaker, just a suggestion if you have the choice. Finally, the Minolta Autocord was offered in several versions with built-in, uncoupled, transfer-the-setting meters. Selenium meter versions like the Autocord L are fine when they’re working but virtually impossible to fix if the meter cell goes bad. CdS-meter versions like the Autocord CDS III have less delicate meter mechanisms but were designed to use mercuric oxide calls and will have to be modified to accept currently available equivalent alkaline or silver-oxide batteries.
Minolta Autocord CDS lll
Bottom line: Minolta Autocords are great cameras, but they’ve gotten pricey over the past few years. You’re probably safer to opt for a meter-less model, but if you can get a clean functional Autocord with a working built-in meter at a good price, go for it.
Ciro-flex: Dubbed “the working man’s Rolleiflex,” the Ciro-flexes are solid, basic no-frills cameras that have a crude but effective snail cam focusing system, uncoupled red window film advance, and a decent but unexceptional viewfinder. All were fitted with Wollensak lenses and shutters, most models having a slightly longer-than-normal 85mm f/3.5 Wollensak Anastigmat lens which was able to achieve pretty good sharpness in the corners of the 2¼×2¼-inch frame despite using a simple triplet design. Postwar Ciro-Flexes were made in Delaware, Ohio.
The model serious shooters should look for is the top-of-the-line Ciro-flex F of 1948-1951, which had an excellent 83mm f/3.2 Wollensak Raptar lens (a 4-element Tessar formula) mounted in a high-end Rapax 1-1/400 sec plus B and T shutter, but it’s not easy to find and often commands a premium price. However, any working Ciro-flex is a good entry-level TLR. Ciro-flexes were later sold under the Graflex 22 nameplate, and comments apply to both.
Bottom line: Don’t expect finesse or exquisite craftsmanship, just good value.
Yashica-Mat: Closely based on the design of the mid-‘50s Rolleiflex Automat MX down to the right-hand single-stroke film crank, small aperture and shutter speed dials nestled in the side spaces between the viewing and picture taking lenses, and a dual readout window for both settings atop the lens surround, the Yashica-Mat was introduced in 1957 and was immensely popular though the ‘60s and ‘70s . Indeed, the last of the breed, the Yashica-Mat 124 G didn’t go out of production until 1986. While the Yashica-Mat, named for its “automatic” film wind crank, lacked some Rolleiflex refinements, it’s a solid, reliable camera and a highly capable picture taker. In 1958 Yashica released the model D, essentially a Yashica-Mat with knob wind.
The earliest Yashica-Mats were fitted with 75mm f/3.5 Lumaxar taking lenses, and later 80mm f/3.5 Lumaxar lenses, but all subsequent Yashica-Mats until the very last used 80mm f/3.5 Yashinon taking lenses and 80mm f/3.2 viewing lenses. All are excellent 4-element, 3-group Tessar types, they perform on a par with the comparable Tessar or Xenar lenses on Rolleis, and they have Bay 1 mounts (on both lenses) to allow the use of Rollei and Rollei-type accessories. Yashica used the very reliable Copal MX or MXV 1-1/500 sec plus B shutters in the Yashica-Mats and in the Yashica D. In general, all these cameras provide commendably bright viewing images, and they handle very well despite being on the heavy side at a bit over 2.6 pounds.
Yashica-Mats from the late ‘50s through the ‘60s have all metal components (such as knobs and dials) that are more esthetic (and possibly more durable) than the plastic ones found on later models such as the Yashica-Mat 124 G. If you opt for a Yashica D, make sure it has a (4-element) Yashinon lens rather than a Yashikor lens (a decent triplet) if you want great imaging performance. Finally, make sure the film transport is in good shape—it’s not bulletproof and can be damaged through rough handling.
Bottom line: Yashica-Mats are plentiful, affordable ($150-$300) at present, and they can take great pictures. That’s why they’re still so popular among TLR aficionados.
Ricohflex Diacord G and L: All through the 1950s, Ricoh of Tokyo produced a series of pedestrian low-end 2-1/4 x 2-1/4-inch Ricohflex TLRs. Then in 1958 the company brought forth the Ricohflex Diacord G, a much more advanced, high performance, enthusiast-aimed TLR to compete with the Minolta Autocord, the Yashica-Mat, and a slew of others. The Diacord G and the Diacord L (which added a built-in uncoupled selenium cell meter) are very well-made cameras with excellent lenses, reliable shutters, and bright viewfinders. Their 80mm f/3.5 Rikenon taking lenses are 4-element. 3-group Tessar types that deliver excellent imaging performance, all L’s and most G’s are fitted with 80mm f/3.2 viewing lenses to enhance viewing brightness, all feature a knob-type film advance with semi-automatic loading and automatic film stop at the next frame, and all have Bay 1 mounts on both lenses for adding accessories.
The signature feature of the cast aluminum bodied Diacord G and L is a helicoid focusing system with focusing levers located on both the right-hand and left-hand sides of the lens panel—the company called it a “Duo-Lever Focusing System.” The shutter has to be cocked manually on both models—Ricoh didn’t get around to adding a film-wind crank with combined film wind and shutter cocking until the Ricohmatic 225 of 1959, which also had a built-in uncoupled selenium light meter. The shutter most commonly found in both models is a Citizen-MXL with speeds of 1-1/400 sec plus B, but the top speed was upped to 1/500 sec in late models. The Diacord G lens has a 10-bladed diaphragm, which should enhance bokeh, while the Diacord L has a 5-bladed diaphragm—just like late model Rolleis.
Bottom line: Any Ricohflex TLR that has lens-panel focusing, including the Japanese market Dia and Diamond, models with a Ricohflex nameplate, all Diacords, and the Ricohmatic 225 is capable of outstanding performance on a par with a Tessar- or Xenar-lensed Rollei (albeit without automatic parallax compensation). In short, you’re OK so long as the lens I.D. ring says Rikenon, (not Riconar, a decent triplet) and the shutter is a Citizen-MXL. While the prices for high quality Ricohflex TLRs has gone up over the last few years, they’re still great buys.
Flexaret: This long-running series of 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 TLRs by Meopta, based in the former Czechoslovakia, are solid, well-made cameras that are generally reliable and durable. The most desirable and practical choice as a picture taker is the Flexaret VII of 1966-1971, the last and most advanced model with 80mm f/3.5 Belar lens (a very good quality 4-element Tessar type) used for both taking and viewing lenses, a Pentacon-Prestor 1-1/500 plus B leaf shutter, knob wind, semiautomatic film loading and automatic frame counter, and a double ended focusing lever below the lens panel that can be operated by either hand (similar to the one on the Minota Autocord) and has the added refinement of an engraved depth of field scale. The Flexaret VII is the only model with a top shutter speed of 1/500 sec—others had a top speed of 1/400 sec or slower—and it also allows 6x4.5cm exposures to be made using an internal baffle.
The Flexaret VI, VII, and Standard are covered in a striking silver gray clothlike material; all others had a conventional black leatherette covering, and models VI and Vll are the only ones with automatic film counters coupled to the film advance mechanism—previous models require separate shutter cocking, but some, such as the Flexaret IV and IVa provide blank and double exposure prevention. Meopta offered its own close-up lenses for Flexarets, but the lenses don’t have standard bayonet fittings.
Bottom line: If your primary goal is taking pictures, any Flexaret from the model IV to the Model VII (including the Standard) that has 80mm f/3.5 Belar lenses is a solid precision camera capable of delivering excellent image quality. Caution: The coatings on Belar lenses are pretty soft and easily damaged so check before you buy an avoid excessive cleaning. Generally, steer clear earlier models, or any Flexaret with a 3-element Mirar lenses or a so-so Metax shutter. Prices for clean, fully functional late model Flexarets have increased over the past 5 years but they’re still very affordable and distinctive classics.
Ikoflex: Zeiss Ikoflex TLRs were produced in a dozen iterations from 1934-1960,amd all are very well made and finished, though they can be finicky and temperamental compared to, say, Rolleiflexes, and the upper-tier models are mechanically complex and can be challenging to fix. Having said that, any (postwar) Ikoflex with a coated 75mm f/3.5 Zeiss Tessar lens and a Prontor or Compur shutter is capable of outstanding imaging performance and therefore a great choice for picture taking.
My personal favorite is the beautifully finished (pun intended) Ikoflex Favorit of 1957-1960, the last Ikoflex ever, which has Rollei-style milled aperture and shutter-speed setting wheels nestled in the between the viewing and taking lenses, a 75mm f/3.5 Zeiss Tessar lens, a Synchro-Compur 1-1/500 sec plus B shutter, and a built in selenium LVS light meter with its needle displayed at the bottom of the viewfinder screen. The late version of the Ikoflex IIa of 1950-1952, basically a meter-less Favorit, is another good choice, as is the uglier earlier version that has aperture and shutter speed peep holes flanking the lens. Other Ikoflexes worth considering are the simple Spartan Ikoflex la, lb, and lc (basically a built-in meter version of the lb). All are fitted with Prontor shutters and are excellent performers as long as they’re fitted with 75mm f/3.5 Tessar (not 3-element Novar) lenses. Zeiss Ikon offered one-piece, two-lens closeup lens units with built-in parallax compensating prisms that considerably enhance their shooting flexibility.
Bottom line: If you must shoot with a beautifully made precision German medium-format TLR other than a Rolleiflex or Rolleicord, Ikoflexes are an attractive high-performance alternative, and models other than the Favorit are widely available at relatively modest prices.
The Unvarnished Truth About 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 Twin Lens Reflexes. Part 1
6 Cool Non-Interchangeable-Lens TLRs That Aren’t Made By Rollei or Mamiya
By Jason Schneider
A twin lens reflex (TLR) is a camera that uses one lens for viewing and focusing the image and a second separate lens to take the picture. Both lenses are the same focal length, both are carefully calibrated so their focus points match, and both move in and out simultaneously (typically on a common lens board) as you focus the camera. The word “reflex” refers to the mirror placed at a 45° angle behind the viewing lens. It reflects the viewing image upward onto a focusing screen that’s perpendicular to the lens axis, so the waist-level or chest-level viewing image is right-side up, but laterally reversed. The picture-taking lens, typically placed below the viewing lens, projects the image onto the film or sensor when the shutter fires or the lens is uncapped. The TLR’s viewing image is right-side-up, which makes it a lot easier to compose the picture than viewing an upside-down image on a typical view camera screen. Scores of fascinating TLRs were produced from the 1890s through the 1930s but it wasn’t until Franke & Heidecke of Braunschweig, Germany brought for the original Rolleiflex of 1929 that the 6x6 cm (2-1.4 x 2-1/4 inch) roll film TLR became the dominant form. Here we’ll concentrate on user-collector 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 roll film TLRs of the ‘40s though the ‘70s—everything but Rolleiflexes, Rolleicords, and Mamiyaflexes which certainly deserve articles of their own which will be forthcoming. The goal: guiding film shooters toward the best choices for getting into medium format film photography.
Pros and Cons of medium format roll film TLRs
Pros
1.The viewing/focusing image remains fully visible before, during and after the exposure.
2. The viewing lens is always wide open, maintaining viewing brightness.
3. The reflex mirror remains stationary eliminating mirror induced vibration and noise.
4. The 2-1/4 TLR has a compact form factor that facilitates handheld shooting.
5. The square format eliminates the need to turn the camera when composing the shot.
6. Medium format TLRs use quiet, low vibration leaf shutters that provide X sync at high speeds.
7. 2-1/4 TLRs are generally robust, reliable cameras that are easy to maintain and repair.
8. All the 2-1/4 TLRs covered here accept readily available 120 roll film that’s offered in a wide variety of speeds and types including black-and-white, color negative, color transparency and specialized and boutique emulsions.
Cons
1. Because the TLR’s viewing image is laterally reversed, it’s almost impossible to follow fast laterally moving action on the viewing screen, which is why most 2-1/4 TLRs have sports finders built into their viewing hoods. Another solution is installing a top-mounted pentaprism or porroprism finder, but they’re bulky, can be heavy, and may compromise viewing brightness.
2. Most roll film TLRs (except for post-1956 Mamiyas) don’t have interchangeable lenses.
3. The standard 75mm or 80mm lenses on 2-1/4 TLRs usually don’t focus closer than about 3 ft.
4.The square 2-1/4 x 2-1/4-inch format requires cropping to create horizontal or vertical compositions, or to print out the images on standard paper sizes such as 8x10 or 11x14.
5. Most 2-1/4 TLRs (with the notable exception of Rolleis) don’t provide built-in automatic parallax compensation, so achieving precise composition at close distances can be challenging. 6. Mechanical parallax-compensation devices are an effective if clunky workaround for tripod-mounted TLRs. Another (albeit imperfect) solution is using +1, +2, or +3 Rolleinar close-up lenses that have a parallax-compensating prism in the lens mounts over the taking lens. However, to use them your TLR will have to have Bay 1, 2, or 3 bayonet fittings on both lenses.
Practical TLRs by brand: The unvarnished truth
Minolta Autocord with 75mm f/3.5 Rokkor lens and Citizen shutter
Minolta Autocord: Often referred to as “the second best TLR ever,” it was surpassed only by the class-leading Rolleiflex among non-interchangeable-lens models. The Autocord was produced by Chiyoda Kogaku Seiko K.K. of Osaka, Japan, commonly known as Minolta Corp. from 1955-1966 in well over a dozen iterations. All feature crank wind, semi-automatic loading (auto frame positioning and counting after initially aligning an arrow on the paper backing) a 75mm f/3.5 Rokkor taking lens (a highly esteemed 4-element Tessar type), a full range of shutter speeds down to 1 sec, and a double exposure override button that let you turn the crank backwards to cock the shutter without advancing the film.
A defining feature of the Autocord is the helicoid focusing lever, which is mounted below the lens board where it can be operated by either hand, so you don’t have to shift hands to wind the film. However, while the rest of the camera’s metallurgy is first rate this lever is made of brittle pot metal, is vulnerable to breakage, and is virtually impossible to fix. Make sure the focusing lever is intact before you buy one, don’t force it or subject it to impact, and you should be OK. Also, the Autocord incorporated several different shutters over its long production run and the ones with Seikosha or Citizen shutters are preferable to those fitted with Optiper shutters, which are somewhat less reliable and harder to fix. It’s not a deal breaker, just a suggestion if you have the choice. Finally, the Minolta Autocord was offered in several versions with built-in, uncoupled, transfer-the-setting meters. Selenium meter versions like the Autocord L are fine when they’re working but virtually impossible to fix if the meter cell goes bad. CdS-meter versions like the Autocord CDS III have less delicate meter mechanisms but were designed to use mercuric oxide calls and will have to be modified to accept currently available equivalent alkaline or silver-oxide batteries.
Minolta Autocord CDS lll
Bottom line: Minolta Autocords are great cameras, but they’ve gotten pricey over the past few years. You’re probably safer to opt for a meter-less model, but if you can get a clean functional Autocord with a working built-in meter at a good price, go for it.
Ciro-flex: Dubbed “the working man’s Rolleiflex,” the Ciro-flexes are solid, basic no-frills cameras that have a crude but effective snail cam focusing system, uncoupled red window film advance, and a decent but unexceptional viewfinder. All were fitted with Wollensak lenses and shutters, most models having a slightly longer-than-normal 85mm f/3.5 Wollensak Anastigmat lens which was able to achieve pretty good sharpness in the corners of the 2¼×2¼-inch frame despite using a simple triplet design. Postwar Ciro-Flexes were made in Delaware, Ohio.
The model serious shooters should look for is the top-of-the-line Ciro-flex F of 1948-1951, which had an excellent 83mm f/3.2 Wollensak Raptar lens (a 4-element Tessar formula) mounted in a high-end Rapax 1-1/400 sec plus B and T shutter, but it’s not easy to find and often commands a premium price. However, any working Ciro-flex is a good entry-level TLR. Ciro-flexes were later sold under the Graflex 22 nameplate, and comments apply to both.
Bottom line: Don’t expect finesse or exquisite craftsmanship, just good value.
Yashica-Mat: Closely based on the design of the mid-‘50s Rolleiflex Automat MX down to the right-hand single-stroke film crank, small aperture and shutter speed dials nestled in the side spaces between the viewing and picture taking lenses, and a dual readout window for both settings atop the lens surround, the Yashica-Mat was introduced in 1957 and was immensely popular though the ‘60s and ‘70s . Indeed, the last of the breed, the Yashica-Mat 124 G didn’t go out of production until 1986. While the Yashica-Mat, named for its “automatic” film wind crank, lacked some Rolleiflex refinements, it’s a solid, reliable camera and a highly capable picture taker. In 1958 Yashica released the model D, essentially a Yashica-Mat with knob wind.
The earliest Yashica-Mats were fitted with 75mm f/3.5 Lumaxar taking lenses, and later 80mm f/3.5 Lumaxar lenses, but all subsequent Yashica-Mats until the very last used 80mm f/3.5 Yashinon taking lenses and 80mm f/3.2 viewing lenses. All are excellent 4-element, 3-group Tessar types, they perform on a par with the comparable Tessar or Xenar lenses on Rolleis, and they have Bay 1 mounts (on both lenses) to allow the use of Rollei and Rollei-type accessories. Yashica used the very reliable Copal MX or MXV 1-1/500 sec plus B shutters in the Yashica-Mats and in the Yashica D. In general, all these cameras provide commendably bright viewing images, and they handle very well despite being on the heavy side at a bit over 2.6 pounds.
Yashica-Mats from the late ‘50s through the ‘60s have all metal components (such as knobs and dials) that are more esthetic (and possibly more durable) than the plastic ones found on later models such as the Yashica-Mat 124 G. If you opt for a Yashica D, make sure it has a (4-element) Yashinon lens rather than a Yashikor lens (a decent triplet) if you want great imaging performance. Finally, make sure the film transport is in good shape—it’s not bulletproof and can be damaged through rough handling.
Bottom line: Yashica-Mats are plentiful, affordable ($150-$300) at present, and they can take great pictures. That’s why they’re still so popular among TLR aficionados.
Ricohflex Diacord G and L: All through the 1950s, Ricoh of Tokyo produced a series of pedestrian low-end 2-1/4 x 2-1/4-inch Ricohflex TLRs. Then in 1958 the company brought forth the Ricohflex Diacord G, a much more advanced, high performance, enthusiast-aimed TLR to compete with the Minolta Autocord, the Yashica-Mat, and a slew of others. The Diacord G and the Diacord L (which added a built-in uncoupled selenium cell meter) are very well-made cameras with excellent lenses, reliable shutters, and bright viewfinders. Their 80mm f/3.5 Rikenon taking lenses are 4-element. 3-group Tessar types that deliver excellent imaging performance, all L’s and most G’s are fitted with 80mm f/3.2 viewing lenses to enhance viewing brightness, all feature a knob-type film advance with semi-automatic loading and automatic film stop at the next frame, and all have Bay 1 mounts on both lenses for adding accessories.
The signature feature of the cast aluminum bodied Diacord G and L is a helicoid focusing system with focusing levers located on both the right-hand and left-hand sides of the lens panel—the company called it a “Duo-Lever Focusing System.” The shutter has to be cocked manually on both models—Ricoh didn’t get around to adding a film-wind crank with combined film wind and shutter cocking until the Ricohmatic 225 of 1959, which also had a built-in uncoupled selenium light meter. The shutter most commonly found in both models is a Citizen-MXL with speeds of 1-1/400 sec plus B, but the top speed was upped to 1/500 sec in late models. The Diacord G lens has a 10-bladed diaphragm, which should enhance bokeh, while the Diacord L has a 5-bladed diaphragm—just like late model Rolleis.
Bottom line: Any Ricohflex TLR that has lens-panel focusing, including the Japanese market Dia and Diamond, models with a Ricohflex nameplate, all Diacords, and the Ricohmatic 225 is capable of outstanding performance on a par with a Tessar- or Xenar-lensed Rollei (albeit without automatic parallax compensation). In short, you’re OK so long as the lens I.D. ring says Rikenon, (not Riconar, a decent triplet) and the shutter is a Citizen-MXL. While the prices for high quality Ricohflex TLRs has gone up over the last few years, they’re still great buys.
Flexaret: This long-running series of 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 TLRs by Meopta, based in the former Czechoslovakia, are solid, well-made cameras that are generally reliable and durable. The most desirable and practical choice as a picture taker is the Flexaret VII of 1966-1971, the last and most advanced model with 80mm f/3.5 Belar lens (a very good quality 4-element Tessar type) used for both taking and viewing lenses, a Pentacon-Prestor 1-1/500 plus B leaf shutter, knob wind, semiautomatic film loading and automatic frame counter, and a double ended focusing lever below the lens panel that can be operated by either hand (similar to the one on the Minota Autocord) and has the added refinement of an engraved depth of field scale. The Flexaret VII is the only model with a top shutter speed of 1/500 sec—others had a top speed of 1/400 sec or slower—and it also allows 6x4.5cm exposures to be made using an internal baffle.
The Flexaret VI, VII, and Standard are covered in a striking silver gray clothlike material; all others had a conventional black leatherette covering, and models VI and Vll are the only ones with automatic film counters coupled to the film advance mechanism—previous models require separate shutter cocking, but some, such as the Flexaret IV and IVa provide blank and double exposure prevention. Meopta offered its own close-up lenses for Flexarets, but the lenses don’t have standard bayonet fittings.
Bottom line: If your primary goal is taking pictures, any Flexaret from the model IV to the Model VII (including the Standard) that has 80mm f/3.5 Belar lenses is a solid precision camera capable of delivering excellent image quality. Caution: The coatings on Belar lenses are pretty soft and easily damaged so check before you buy an avoid excessive cleaning. Generally, steer clear earlier models, or any Flexaret with a 3-element Mirar lenses or a so-so Metax shutter. Prices for clean, fully functional late model Flexarets have increased over the past 5 years but they’re still very affordable and distinctive classics.
Ikoflex: Zeiss Ikoflex TLRs were produced in a dozen iterations from 1934-1960,amd all are very well made and finished, though they can be finicky and temperamental compared to, say, Rolleiflexes, and the upper-tier models are mechanically complex and can be challenging to fix. Having said that, any (postwar) Ikoflex with a coated 75mm f/3.5 Zeiss Tessar lens and a Prontor or Compur shutter is capable of outstanding imaging performance and therefore a great choice for picture taking.
My personal favorite is the beautifully finished (pun intended) Ikoflex Favorit of 1957-1960, the last Ikoflex ever, which has Rollei-style milled aperture and shutter-speed setting wheels nestled in the between the viewing and taking lenses, a 75mm f/3.5 Zeiss Tessar lens, a Synchro-Compur 1-1/500 sec plus B shutter, and a built in selenium LVS light meter with its needle displayed at the bottom of the viewfinder screen. The late version of the Ikoflex IIa of 1950-1952, basically a meter-less Favorit, is another good choice, as is the uglier earlier version that has aperture and shutter speed peep holes flanking the lens. Other Ikoflexes worth considering are the simple Spartan Ikoflex la, lb, and lc (basically a built-in meter version of the lb). All are fitted with Prontor shutters and are excellent performers as long as they’re fitted with 75mm f/3.5 Tessar (not 3-element Novar) lenses. Zeiss Ikon offered one-piece, two-lens closeup lens units with built-in parallax compensating prisms that considerably enhance their shooting flexibility.
Bottom line: If you must shoot with a beautifully made precision German medium-format TLR other than a Rolleiflex or Rolleicord, Ikoflexes are an attractive high-performance alternative, and models other than the Favorit are widely available at relatively modest prices.
charjohncarter
Mentor
I have two Diacord G(s). I really like the focusing levers especially if you have a flash attached. The focusing screen is OK, but I wish the G had a larger aperture viewing lens. There isn't a double exposure protection but I've never goofed it up (as of today). They take a Bayonet 1 filter and accessories which is nice for me as I have some Rolleiflex filters and hood. I found a bayonet 1 to 49mm filter adapter so I can use any filter of that size. I even have a Vivitar Macro 5000 ringflash I've used; it makes a big rig but with a tripod: OK.
As you say the lens is excellent. Thanks for this thread. It is fun to see what maybe I should have done when I bought the G(s).
As you say the lens is excellent. Thanks for this thread. It is fun to see what maybe I should have done when I bought the G(s).
valdas
Mentor
What I love about my Mamiya C330 is the selection of interchangeable lenses and the ability to focus really close:
Rolleiflex is, on the other hand, much more easy to carry and use - it is such an elegant camera.
Rolleiflex is, on the other hand, much more easy to carry and use - it is such an elegant camera.
Mackinaw
Think Different
Nice TLR writeup.
I thoroughly enjoy my $15.00 Yashica Mat 124G (Craigslist.....the guy thought it was hopelessly broken). Takes great pics.
Jim B.
I thoroughly enjoy my $15.00 Yashica Mat 124G (Craigslist.....the guy thought it was hopelessly broken). Takes great pics.
Jim B.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
Waiting for your assessment of the Kalloflex, which I think is really a fine camera.
The Ikoflexes -- I prefer the mechanism of the IIa to the Favorit; don't need the meter. And I do wish ZI used the Rollei bayonet like basically everyone else (Mamiya excepted).
All you say about the Autocord is true; I am just not crazy about the focusing lever or the ergonomics of the wind crank. Rollei and Yashica got the crank position right -- 2:00 instead of 10:00. Esthetically, I like the later ones with the lower case "minolta" logo.
The Diacord focusing levers are really great to use. I just wish the knob wind models had blank and double exposure prevention, like the Rolleicords. Same comment applies to the Yashica D, a great camera in all other respects.
I have a Flexaret packed away somewhere. The shutter needs attention but I want to put it to use. Not crazy about the focusing mechanism, which is rather clumsy in my opinion.
The Ikoflexes -- I prefer the mechanism of the IIa to the Favorit; don't need the meter. And I do wish ZI used the Rollei bayonet like basically everyone else (Mamiya excepted).
All you say about the Autocord is true; I am just not crazy about the focusing lever or the ergonomics of the wind crank. Rollei and Yashica got the crank position right -- 2:00 instead of 10:00. Esthetically, I like the later ones with the lower case "minolta" logo.
The Diacord focusing levers are really great to use. I just wish the knob wind models had blank and double exposure prevention, like the Rolleicords. Same comment applies to the Yashica D, a great camera in all other respects.
I have a Flexaret packed away somewhere. The shutter needs attention but I want to put it to use. Not crazy about the focusing mechanism, which is rather clumsy in my opinion.
Pentode
Well-known
Thanks for the thread! It's a very nice summary.
Along with my grandfather's Rolleiflex (4K model) I have a Ciroflex D, My late mother-in-law's Yashicamat, a Kalloflex and a Flexaret VII. I'm on the lookout for an Autocord but it's not a high priority.
I'm pretty much in agreement with everything you've stated about these models. I will also stand with KoNickon and await your thoughts on the Kalloflex. I really like mine. It's a very solid (literally.... it weighs a ton!) camera with a very good lens.
I will also add that shooting the Flexaret with the 6x4.5 mask is a hoot. I'm used to 6x4.5 folders and RFs, which default to a vertical orientation, so I find it really interesting to shoot the Flexaret because it uses a horizontal orientation. Those of you who shoot with 645 SLRs are used to horizontal and wouldn't find it unusual, but I don't have a 645 SLR so it's unique for me.
The later Flexarets also had optional gadgets that allowed the use of 35mm film canisters both with and without the 6x4.5 mask and a weird variety of frame counter configurations to allow for them. They're very quirky cameras but I'm really impressed with both the build quality and the innovation.
Anyone searching a Flexaret out should investigate Ebay seller 'cupog'. I have no affiliation with him other than as a repeat customer. He's a very competent technician and very honest dealer based in Eastern Europe (Slovakia) and he specializes in Flexarets which, as I understand it, are a nuisance to work on. He almost always has them in stock and he CLAs them before sale, which is a good idea for any 50-60 year-old camera anyway.
Along with my grandfather's Rolleiflex (4K model) I have a Ciroflex D, My late mother-in-law's Yashicamat, a Kalloflex and a Flexaret VII. I'm on the lookout for an Autocord but it's not a high priority.
I'm pretty much in agreement with everything you've stated about these models. I will also stand with KoNickon and await your thoughts on the Kalloflex. I really like mine. It's a very solid (literally.... it weighs a ton!) camera with a very good lens.
I will also add that shooting the Flexaret with the 6x4.5 mask is a hoot. I'm used to 6x4.5 folders and RFs, which default to a vertical orientation, so I find it really interesting to shoot the Flexaret because it uses a horizontal orientation. Those of you who shoot with 645 SLRs are used to horizontal and wouldn't find it unusual, but I don't have a 645 SLR so it's unique for me.
The later Flexarets also had optional gadgets that allowed the use of 35mm film canisters both with and without the 6x4.5 mask and a weird variety of frame counter configurations to allow for them. They're very quirky cameras but I'm really impressed with both the build quality and the innovation.
Anyone searching a Flexaret out should investigate Ebay seller 'cupog'. I have no affiliation with him other than as a repeat customer. He's a very competent technician and very honest dealer based in Eastern Europe (Slovakia) and he specializes in Flexarets which, as I understand it, are a nuisance to work on. He almost always has them in stock and he CLAs them before sale, which is a good idea for any 50-60 year-old camera anyway.
Deardorff38
Mentor
Nice writing Jason. I have to say I have a soft spot for my Rolleiflex. If push came to shove and i could have only one camera to use, it would win out over my Leica M, & my 4x5, and its reliability would put it ahead of my Makina 670. It always delivers the goods. Small, light, big negative (to print from)..... What more could you reasonably ask for?
Flickr
Ambro51
Collector/Photographer
Again, the Ansco Automatic Reflex gets no love :-(. After years of a Rolleicord Vb I’ve found the AAR more than it’s equal.
Benjamin Marks
Mentor
I owned a couple of Mamiyas in the 1990s. Nice rigs, great close focusing capabilities, affordable back then compared to other medium format cameras. They were a great way into MF back in the day without losing your shirt. The Rolleiflexes were a step up on the lens quality if you printed large. The Rolleis were definitely pro cameras, made to be repaired rather than replaced. Image quality like a Hasselblad.
Really nice write-up by the way. The kind of piece that will serve as a resource for years to come. . .Well done!
Really nice write-up by the way. The kind of piece that will serve as a resource for years to come. . .Well done!
charjohncarter
Mentor
Well, back to the list of 6x6 cameras that Jason so nicely limited this thread. Here is my G with a Vivitar Macro 5000 ringflash mounted on a very overcast (rare) day in California:
Arista EDU 400 HC-110h by John Carter, on Flickr
and with a normal flash that is balanced with outside ambient light. That is one of the great features of the leaf shutter 6x6 cameras:
Arista EDU ultra 100- Arista Liquid developer by John Carter, on Flickr
Arista EDU 400 HC-110h by John Carter, on Flickrand with a normal flash that is balanced with outside ambient light. That is one of the great features of the leaf shutter 6x6 cameras:
Arista EDU ultra 100- Arista Liquid developer by John Carter, on Flickr
BillBingham2
Registered User
Most excellent work it’s lots of great information to reference.
Looking forward to both Part Deux AND a similar write up on MF folders please....
B2 (;->
Looking forward to both Part Deux AND a similar write up on MF folders please....
B2 (;->
selahsean
Member
Really love the Autocord so much so that I sold my 2.8E Rollei in favor of it. To my eye the images between the two were largely indistinguishable and the focusing lever of the Autocord made it's usability much better. Being able to use the Autocrd with one hand made it faster and easier for me to use and after a Karl Bryan CLA and lever replacement it should last for quite a while.
Beemermark
Mentor
I've owned quite a number of Rollei's and have two at present. I had a Ikoflex Favorit of 1957-1960. A very nice camera with a neat metering system that is on par with the Leica Visoflex adapters for kludge factor. Sold that (demands a rather price being uncommon) and bought a IIA which I like.
CMur12
Well-known
Thanks, Jason. TLRs are my favorite cameras, so I was pleased to find this thread.
My goal from childhood was to one day have a Rolleiflex. I now have a couple of them, but my favorite TLRs are my Autocords and Mamiyas.
Like KoNickon and Pentode, I would love to see your take on the Kalloflex. I get the itch occasionally to try to find one of these.
- Murray
My goal from childhood was to one day have a Rolleiflex. I now have a couple of them, but my favorite TLRs are my Autocords and Mamiyas.
Like KoNickon and Pentode, I would love to see your take on the Kalloflex. I get the itch occasionally to try to find one of these.
- Murray
ACullen
Well-known
Also notice no love for the very beautiful Ikoflex III from 1939. Complicated design but lovely look at. It's fitted with an uncoated Tessar 80/2.8.
Swirly wide open with limited DOF and sharpens up well enough when stopped down. It's a finicky machine that has required a fair bit of input from my repair guy. VF is ok but is nowhere near the brightness of my 3.5F. It's fun to use periodically but I'd never depend on it. I can see it locking up again but meanwhile it'll provide some joy.
Those interested in an Ikoflex probably ought to look elsewhere in the range , a IIa sounds good.
Swirly wide open with limited DOF and sharpens up well enough when stopped down. It's a finicky machine that has required a fair bit of input from my repair guy. VF is ok but is nowhere near the brightness of my 3.5F. It's fun to use periodically but I'd never depend on it. I can see it locking up again but meanwhile it'll provide some joy.
Those interested in an Ikoflex probably ought to look elsewhere in the range , a IIa sounds good.
Jason Schneider
the Camera Collector
Ciro-Flex F
Ciro-Flex F
Ciro-Flex F
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
An interesting read, Jason! Thanks for writing this.
markjwyatt
Well-known
The Zeiss Contaflex gets very little attention in TLR discussions. Maybe because it is so rare and expensive, plus it is 35mm, and it has a different focal length viewing lens than the taking lens (with special accommodations). They also have lens interchangeability (use Contax RF lenses with a modification), but only change the taking lens.
oftheherd
Mentor
Thanks for the write up. My first TLR was the Yashica MAT 124 G. I really loved that camera and didn't mind the square format. Sadly it was damaged but still worked, then shortly afterwards, stolen. My next was the Rolleiflex which I just never could bond with and gave away. I then got a Perfekta which is a hoot, but by then I just wasn't in to TLRs as much.
Fun to use but I preferred my Mamiya Super Press 23 by then which I got to replace my Yashica. Perhaps the reason the Rolleiflex didn't fit so well with me.
Again, thanks for the thread. I always enjoy your insights and comments.
Fun to use but I preferred my Mamiya Super Press 23 by then which I got to replace my Yashica. Perhaps the reason the Rolleiflex didn't fit so well with me.
Again, thanks for the thread. I always enjoy your insights and comments.
jmilkins
Digited User
Excellent, informative article thanks which helped me i.d. my Ricoh as a Diachord L. And appreciate it next to my Rollei 2.8E.
Looking forward to more in the series.
Looking forward to more in the series.