You can find pictures of the old Rollei cameras on line,
maybe can identify what you had.
You Tube has a lot of old boxing matches on it. I found it
interesting to look at the ringside photographers. Nearly all
used Speed Graphics until maybe the early 1950s, then Rolleis
began to show up. After a few years all were using 35mm cameras
and the old Graphics were gone.
Of course part of this was the availability of better film
but I think the flexibility and speed of the 35mm cameras doomed
the others. Rolleis began to appear in newsreels at around the
same period as in the above boxing but I think being waist level
hurt them. Of course you could hold a reflex camera over your
head the same way that press guys held Speed Graphics over their
heads. Since the cameras had semi- wide angle lenses you just had
to get it pointed in the general direction of the action to get
something. I think press photographers still do that with cell
phones.
There were many competitors to the Speed Graphic, some
probably better cameras, but none ever caught on. Graflex also
tried for years to promote 3-3/4 x 4-3/4 in place of 4x5 but it
never caught on. Those cameras are now total orphans. I think the
press guys wanted _big_ negatives. The 3-3/4x4-3/4 was not quite
large enough, the cameras were not that much smaller and lighter,
and if you were going to go to something smaller the Rollei had
many advantages plus as you point out, the negatives were not
that delicate and were large enough to blow up for newspaper use.
Think about the really early days of illustrated newspapers
when typical press cameras were 5x7 Graflex SLRs with flash powder.
"Come on Miss, more cheesecake." And of course the most
famous "Just one more." What a life...
On 7/9/2020 5:19 PM, Les Myers wrote:
The camera belonged to the newspaper. I don't remember its model, and it was my first
experience using a TLR. The newspaper had little faith in 35mm negative quality at the
time (maybe their processing was sloppy). I worked for a Washington DC news bureau for
several years, and the boss said "Get a Rollei!" I did, and have never
regretted it. But he, too, was rough on film processing, and believed that 120 handled
abuse better than 35mm.
-----Original Message-----
From: dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 18:02:03 -0700
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Old Rolleicord
Which version of the 'Cord did you have? My first real camera
was a 'Cord IV bought just after they were discontinued (thanks
mom). I used it for years until it was stolen. I have a duplicate
now. IMO it is the best minimalist camera. Has everything you
would normally use, no extras like self timer or light meter, is
light and I think ergonomically excellent. Both my original and
my current one have Xenar lenses which seem to be excellent. I
used a borrowed 'Cord III for a time, another good camera but the
semi-auto loading of the IV is handy.
On 7/8/2020 4:46 PM, Les Myers wrote:
I used a Rolleicord when I worked for a newspaper several lifetimes ago.--
My eyes were sharp then (and they're not bad now!), and I had no trouble
focusing the ground glass. But as age marched on, and if I were trying
to photograph in dim light, I really missed the split-image ground
glass.
Richard Knoppow
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
WB6KBL
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
==========================================================================================================To
unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account
(the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and
unsubscribe from there.
