[WPRESTO]

(Pardon the cross-post, those of you who read RFF.)




Mamiya C330 Professional S + Mamiya-Sekor 135mm f/4.5; MiNT InstantFlex (+ fixed MiNT 61mm f/5.6); Beautyflex Super D (+ fixed Biokor 80mm f/3.5); Rolleiflex 2.8E (+ fixed Carl Zeiss Planar 80mm f/2.8). The MiNT is new, full stop; and the Beautyflex is new to me.

Photographed with the Sony a7 + adapted MC Rokkor-PF 58 mm f/1.4. Lit with a dim reading lamp; 30sec exposure at ISO 400.

--Dave

I'll comment that the Rollei is a fine walk-about camera that takes superb B&W from that waste-level "Rollei perspective." The Mamiya, IMHO, is a beast that is happiest atop a sturdy tripod. It's as heavy as some 4X5 press cameras, and somewhat clumsier to use hand-held.

[womble]

(Pardon the cross-post, those of you who read RFF.)




Mamiya C330 Professional S + Mamiya-Sekor 135mm f/4.5; MiNT InstantFlex (+ fixed MiNT 61mm f/5.6); Beautyflex Super D (+ fixed Biokor 80mm f/3.5); Rolleiflex 2.8E (+ fixed Carl Zeiss Planar 80mm f/2.8). The MiNT is new, full stop; and the Beautyflex is new to me.

Photographed with the Sony a7 + adapted MC Rokkor-PF 58 mm f/1.4. Lit with a dim reading lamp; 30sec exposure at ISO 400.

--Dave

I'd never heard of a Beautyflex. Entertaining choice of name! One day I'll treat myself to a Rolleiflex but it is hard to justify, really. I have a Yashicamat 124G and rarely use it.

K.

[Jonathan Mac]

I'd never heard of a Beautyflex. Entertaining choice of name! One day I'll treat myself to a Rolleiflex but it is hard to justify, really. I have a Yashicamat 124G and rarely use it.

K.

I hadn't heard of the Beautyflex until I saw one for sale locally a couple of months ago and looked it up. Alas, this one had some kind of problem so I didn't buy it.

[g026r]

I had heard of a Beautyflex before, but I can't recall why. Perhaps because it was rebadged for other brands occasionally? (Or am I thinking of another TLR?)

[Swift1]

(Pardon the cross-post, those of you who read RFF.)


Mamiya C330 Professional S + Mamiya-Sekor 135mm f/4.5; MiNT InstantFlex (+ fixed MiNT 61mm f/5.6); Beautyflex Super D (+ fixed Biokor 80mm f/3.5); Rolleiflex 2.8E (+ fixed Carl Zeiss Planar 80mm f/2.8). The MiNT is new, full stop; and the Beautyflex is new to me.

Photographed with the Sony a7 + adapted MC Rokkor-PF 58 mm f/1.4. Lit with a dim reading lamp; 30sec exposure at ISO 400.

--Dave

Your Beautyflex is probably very similar to my Toyocaflex.
Different shutters. Does your Beautyflex have a Tri-Lausar viewing lens?

[malinku]

my Kodak Reflex II. Don't know how different the Anastar 80mm f3.5 is from the Anastigmat 80mm f3.5 on my original Kodak Reflex

[edmundrt]

Here's mine: Yashica-A. Takes lovely photos - there's something about triplet lenses that does it for me. Also worth mentioning is the Lubitel-2, which is a much smaller and lighter package, and gives much nicer results than its humble nature would suggest.

[womble]

Here's mine: Yashica-A. Takes lovely photos - there's something about triplet lenses that does it for me. Also worth mentioning is the Lubitel-2, which is a much smaller and lighter package, and gives much nicer results than its humble nature would suggest.

Some of my favourite photos were taken with my Lubitel 2. Huge guess-work involved in focussing etc., but I rather like the slightly random element involved in using it.

K.

[Argenticien]

I'd never heard of a Beautyflex. Entertaining choice of name! One day I'll treat myself to a Rolleiflex but it is hard to justify, really. I have a Yashicamat 124G and rarely use it.
K.

Funny thing and complicated story ... so, the Rolleiflex came from my now-ex-wife's family. Upon the divorce, her father very kindly said I should keep it, since I'm the only one among anyone they know who would actually use it. Fast forward a couple of years ... I have a girlfriend and she is now getting into film photography because of me (!!!). She wanted to try a TLR, but was both afraid of the Rolleiflex (for fear of breaking/misusing it, as it is somewhat valuable) and I think she also didn't like its origin much. So I was forming an idea to get her a TLR of her own -- a knockabout, affordable one, maybe a Ricohflex or Yashica. Now the funny part: Last summer, in a Victoria's Secret catalog that came in our mail, she saw a Beautyflex used as a prop in a picture -- being held by one of the busty babes in naughty knickers. She immediately said she wanted one of those cameras, because of its name! (As she likes to be a bit glamorous.) I didn't like the rationale much, but if it meant she would have a TLR that she was really keen on, that worked for me. After trawling eBay for a few months, I found a suitable one, and in fact I like it well enough that I invested in a CLA for it. (It arrived with all shutter speed settings yielding the same speed, about 1/60; now they all run properly.) I'm in it about US$200 altogether now, so yes I realize that with patience I could have had a Rolleicord for less; these are the things we do for our significant others.

I had heard of a Beautyflex before, but I can't recall why. Perhaps because it was rebadged for other brands occasionally? (Or am I thinking of another TLR?)

Yes, as Wardflex at least (for US retailer Montgomery Ward) and I'm not sure what else. I have not found an instruction book for exactly this model of Beautyflex, but have found one for a Wardflex that appears to be precisely it (other than the nameplate).

Your Beautyflex is probably very similar to my Toyocaflex.
Different shutters. Does your Beautyflex have a Tri-Lausar viewing lens?

Colton, the viewing lens is indeed a Tri-Lausar. This is among the worst lens names ever ... my immediate mental association with it is "three-time loser." It's right up there with Steinheil's Cassar (think: "broken" based on French) or the Lentar (think: "Slow"). And it gets worse: the shutter is a Rectus. They were probably thinking as in "rectilinear" or something, but I'm not sure it has that association. Yes, I have a Tri-Lausar above my Rectus. Beautyflexen alternatively came with "Synchro-MX" shutters (sounds rather generic) or Copal (now there's one we all know).

The taking lens is a Biokor, which I've read is a Tessar-like formula. It's actually good. (First pic from first pre-CLA test roll here: https://flic.kr/p/DBUYP2). The camera has an auto-advance system, more basic than the Rolleiflex's but serviceable. For a first-time TLR user, I thought it would simplify things to avoid futzing with a red window system.

--Dave

[Swift1]

Colton, the viewing lens is indeed a Tri-Lausar. This is among the worst lens names ever ... my immediate mental association with it is "three-time loser." It's right up there with Steinheil's Cassar (think: "broken" based on French) or the Lentar (think: "Slow"). And it gets worse: the shutter is a Rectus. They were probably thinking as in "rectilinear" or something, but I'm not sure it has that association. Yes, I have a Tri-Lausar above my Rectus. Beautyflexen alternatively came with "Synchro-MX" shutters (sounds rather generic) or Copal (now there's one we all know).

The taking lens is a Biokor, which I've read is a Tessar-like formula. It's actually good. (First pic from first pre-CLA test roll here: https://flic.kr/p/DBUYP2). The camera has an auto-advance system, more basic than the Rolleiflex's but serviceable. For a first-time TLR user, I thought it would simplify things to avoid futzing with a red window system.

--Dave

Is there anyway you could check if the Biokor is a 4 element design or a triplet?
Most of the off brand Japanese TLRs usually had triplets for viewing and taking lenses. My Toyocaflex has Tri-Lausar for both lenses.
Many of the lenses for these Japanese TLRs were made by Tomioka. The Tri-Lausar was definitely made by Tomioka, but I can't find much info on the Biokor.
My Toyocaflex also has the auto stop film advance with automatic frame counter. I would guess it operates the same as your Beautyflex. Does yours have a advance lock release button located at the center of the advance knob?
FWIW, the Tri-Lausar is a very good lens.

Toyocaflex TLR Type Ib
Tri-Lausar Anastigmat 8cm/3.5
Expired Fujicolor Reala 100 @iso 25
Epson V500

[malinku]

Showing off my cool used Kodak Retina IIa. It is the less common version with a Rodenstock Heligon 50mm f2 lens





Two of the photos I took with it.

[Cuthbert]

My current take away kit:

[Argenticien]

Is there anyway you could check if the Biokor is a 4 element design or a triplet?
Most of the off brand Japanese TLRs usually had triplets for viewing and taking lenses. My Toyocaflex has Tri-Lausar for both lenses.
Many of the lenses for these Japanese TLRs were made by Tomioka. The Tri-Lausar was definitely made by Tomioka, but I can't find much info on the Biokor.
My Toyocaflex also has the auto stop film advance with automatic frame counter. I would guess it operates the same as your Beautyflex. Does yours have a advance lock release button located at the center of the advance knob?
FWIW, the Tri-Lausar is a very good lens.

Very interesting, Colton; these similarities are awfully fishy. The Beautyflex indeed has the advance lock button in the film wind knob. Meanwhile: I thought I had read somewhere online that the Biokor was a Tessar forumula, but if so, I can no longer find wherever that was. So I tried doing the "count the light reflections" test, with the shutter held open on Bulb setting, to figure out whether the Biokor is a triplet or four elements. I could only readily see three reflections, but read this fascinating piece from the eminent Rick Oleson: that fourth reflection can be hard to find. In fact when I tried the same on my Rolleiflex with Planar, I saw four, when there should be, I think, five. (It's a 2.8E, so Planars hadn't gone to six yet if I've got that right.) Now I don't know what to think!

--Dave

[Boris_Akunin]

My current take away kit:

That's a nice kit, I wouldn't mind taking it away from you (especially the K50/1.2 and the LX).

My usual kit looks quite similar but, alas, it will never fit on a K-1:

(Before you hang me as a traitor: There is one piece of Pentax gear in there!)



On occasion, I'll swap out the 85 & 200 for this little trinket:

[Cuthbert]

The hood I assume.

Sometimes I fancy about getting a Minolta XK or XD7, but then I wonder why I should start another system again.