As they settled in to enjoy an English delicacy, the 35 Flex asked the Singlex if the battle wounds were real or self-inflicted.
Camera Models: Ricoh Singlex TLS (1967) and Ricoh 35 Flex (1963)
Similarities: Both are 1960's Ricoh SLR cameras under their own brand name.
Differences: The Singlex is a conventional focal plane shutter SLR with interchangeable lenses, while the 35 Flex is a leaf shutter SLR with a fixed lens.
Film Shared: Ilford FP4+, Fresh Dated
The 1960's might be considered to be the prime period for Ricoh's camera models. Though the Japanese camera maker certainly had a pretty lengthy run of producing some very capable, and often quite unique film cameras, the Sixties seem to be when Ricoh made a name for itself in a pretty crowded industry. Though the maker continued creating some excellent cameras in the decades to follow, it seemed to be increasingly marginalized, at least in the US, as Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Minolta, and Olympus took the top spots in the remaining field.
Two cameras from the Ricoh-rich 60's are the Singlex TLS and the 35 Flex. The Singlex reprised a badge from earlier in the decade of an SLR camera designed to use Nikon mount lenses. Call this camera a "reboot" from a time when such a term was literally unheard of in the wider world. This later version uses an M42 mount instead. The 35 Flex was a more short lived variant from earlier in the decade, released amid other leaf-shutter SLR cameras of various makes, and offering a basic set of controls on a fixed lens body.
Both of these cameras had been sort of spontaneous pickups on my part, costing little, but giving me no benefit by simply collecting dust. I had some concerns on the overall functionality of both cameras, and both briefly made it out to nearly taking a maiden roll, only to be shelved again. Finally, I figured it high time to dedicate a roll of good film shared between the two to see how I liked the shooting experience and results from each, making this approach a perfect avenue to see results without too much effort.
The Ricoh Singlex TLS reflects the basic "final product" of most SLR products of the late 1960's, including interchangeable lenses, battery powered metering, selectable apertures on the lens ring, and selectable shutter speeds as fast as 1/1000 on the camera body itself. The actuation of the shutter itself is mechanical, allowing the camera to be operated without batteries.
By comparison, the Ricoh 35 Flex represents a more embryonic version of an SLR camera, with a fixed 4-element f/2.8 lens, leaf shutter, and selenium powered cell metering. Shutter speeds on this camera only go as fast as 1/300 of a second, representing the limitations and complexity of leaf shutter SLR models to a large degree.
Today, the Singlex TLS has maintained a respectable, and still somewhat well known reputation for being a well built mechanical SLR that has aged quite gracefully. The 35 Flex on the other hand has become an obscure footnote in the Ricoh history, carrying with it the general tendency of leaf shutter SLR cameras to be problematic as the years pass, and all but impossible to fix. Views of the typical sales outlets of the time of this writing show dozens of TLS models available, but only three of the 35 Flex models.
Ricoh Singlex TLS
The broken lugs would likely rate it at something less than "Minty" for any reputable seller, but given that this $3 as/is truly does function, I'm fine with its somewhat worn appearance.
I first stumbled across the Ricoh Singlex TLS as a possible acquisition as I explored a possible upgrade to my Mamiya MSX-500, whose shutter speed topped at 1/500. I wanted a cheap pickup that offered a faster top shutter speed, making it easier to shoot lenses like the Helios 44-2 at wider apertures for fun bokeh. My browsing for such an upgrade was pretty casual, until I came across an auction listing for one for $3. I figured it worth a try to see if I could score it, and was surprised when the morning expiration time of the auction came and went with no other bidders. I was the new owner of a $3 SLR, complete with a Vivitar 50mm f/1.9 lens. I only hoped that it worked!
And work it did! Well... mostly - more on that in a minute. I was pleased to see that this camera was a hefty solid build with a pretty clear and easy to focus viewfinder. All the basic elements that one might ask for in a camera were well represented by this sharp Ricoh camera. Focusing, shooting, and winding all felt like they should.
Metering? Not so much on this camera. The Singlex TLS offers it, but this meter gave no response. I certainly couldn't find room to complain given what I had paid. Less specific to my specimen however was the shutter speed dial, front mounted, similar to the Ricoh 126-C Flex. With more shutter speed choices on this ring than the 126, it seemed that the dial might easily be jostled to another setting.
Using standard M42 lenses, such as the Vivitar 50mm f/1.9 used for the photos below, the Ricoh Singlex is nicely minimalist in its design, but is a well built camera to say the least. The viewfinder of the camera is fairly ordinary, and typical of its era, but is still very easy to focus.
Sure enough this would happen in practice. I would take a shot at 1/500 and pick up the camera moments later to find the ring had been moved over to 1/125. As there are no indicators of shutter speed in the viewfinder, it quickly became apparent that I'd have to check the camera each time I picked it up. Another odd quirk to this particular camera was one that tended to waste film. It seemed that every time the camera would sit for an extended period, the first shot taken would have a much longer shutter speed than marked. Perhaps the shutter lost tension as it sat after winding. I meant to test to see if waiting to wind until just before shooting made a difference after the camera sat, but never could seem to modify my ingrained habits of winding directly after shooting.
Peeking at the negatives from the Singlex TLS, I was greeted with sharp and well exposed negatives for the most part, but always could tell the "throwaway" frames that started off a series of shots after a pause. Of about 18 photos taken, 4 fell into this category. The rest however showed great contrast and sharpness from the unremarked Vivitar lens that came with this camera. It seemed that once "warmed up," the Singlex was well worth the $3 purchase price.
Gallery:
The Nation's smallest train station? I doubt it, but Harmony Grove is certainly among the more spartan "stations" I have seen. After firing off the warm up shot, the Singlex took to action and competently performed.
Knowing this camera's issue, I found myself wanting to shoot more images while the shutter "was still warm" to minimize waste. Fortunately in this case, I didn't simply reallocate that waste. Striking tonality makes for a good second effort.
Under a bit more direct light, the Singlex and the FP4 combined to create some sharp images through the Vivitar lens. Some grain is evident, but it is of the pleasant variety.
Subject isolation, even in marginal lighting was actually pretty good on the Singlex, with the husks being clearly defined from the details in the distance.
Close focusing in windy conditions is a challenge, and results in very little of this image being in focus, particularly the leaves near center.
The somewhat friendly neighborhood cows weren't entirely resistant to having their photos taken by the intrepid quirky guy and his 1960's SLR camera on Thanksgiving.
Stopped down, the Vivitar lens gives off about the expected look from a "normal" SLR lens.
Contrast heavy scenes tended to be render a bit harshly through the Vivitar lens.
Softer scenes however, really worked well for the Singlex and Vivitar combination.
Backlight was quite well tamed by the twosome. Though some details wash out in the process, there is no flare to obscure the details of the close leaves.
Though I largely bought this camera to use the Helios on, I have to admit I'm pleasantly surprised by the painterly bokeh that the Vivitar 50mm f/1.9 offers, as seen here.
Another example of a "sun in shot" scene that the Singlex handled admirably with its supplied lens. In cases like this, it may be better that I guessed exposure rather than trust a meter.
Scratch off the handful of losses from this set from the flaky shutter, and the Singlex delivers some very good results with each well thought out composition.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Ricoh 35 Flex
With the pentaprism carrying the array of selenium cells, the Ricoh badge of the 35 Flex sits off to the side on this fairly uncommon leaf shutter SLR camera.
Around the same time as I picked up the Singlex TLS, I have having a bit of an infatuation with leaf shutter SLR models, particularly after I managed some good results with the Mamiya Autolux 35. The 35 Flex is a close contemporary of that camera, and offers up much of the same type of features, along with its own version of the distinctive shutter sound that only a leaf shutter SLR can offer. Given that the camera cost under $20, it was not a huge gamble, that happened to pay off when the camera arrived in working condition.
The top deck of this camera is very spartan compared to the "cluster-fork" that comprises most modern SLR cameras. To a degree, this is quite refreshing. All settings are done on the lens barrel itself, leaving a frame counter as the only indicator on the top of the camera. I had little issue using the camera in this fashion, I did occasionally grumble at trying to find the nubs that changed these settings under the small window in which they were seen.
While I certainly expected little to nothing from the selenium meter that was now more than 50 years old, I did find that this camera's settings tended to slip into "A" modes a bit too readily. Given that there seemed no response from the meter, I tried to shoot the entire roll manually, but it seems the last couple shots were accidentally taken in auto exposure mode. Surprisingly, they seemed to turn out OK. Disengaging the automatic modes could be a bit cumbersome - if both aperture and shutter were set to "A," one could only disengage the shutter speed first, then the aperture to move back to full manual control.
Aperture, shutter speed, and focal distance are all set on the lens barrel, resulting in a very lightly populated top deck to the Ricoh 35 Flex. The settings for aperture especially close together, but stepless. The viewfinder of this fixed lens leaf SLR is hugely impractical to clean, and shows the signs of its age, but was bright in spite of the dust. Though the meter on this version is busted, I did love the little arm with the small red "lantern" that would raise upward to alert of improper lighting.
Aside from the quirks mentioned above, the only other pain point on the Ricoh 35 Flex was the film advance, which on this example was particularly tight. Though manageable, I did worry it might tear the film. Fortunately, that concern was not well founded. Focusing and firing the 35 Flex seemed to work just as planned, though the long multi-layered noise of the shutter release gave me some concern that the shutter was firing slow, as guesstimating the performance of a leaf shutter by sound is a bit a challenge.
And fortunately that concern was not well founded as well! As I developed four rolls of film at once, I found myself continually drawn to the negatives shot by none other than the Ricoh 35 Flex, astonished to a large degree that a camera that I had only modest confidence in, had delivered such sharp, clear, and contrasty negatives.
Gallery:
It didn't take me too long to realize that the f/2.8 wide aperture was actually pretty adequate to isolate subjects, and that this camera was a bit better than expected.
I had only limited hope for this photo taken at close focus wide open, given the comparatively slow lens, but the 35 Flex shattered my expectations in an amazing way and won me over with this image.
On occasion, when trying to focus in narrow scenes, I was a bit off. Focus on the near tree is imperfect, and something to keep an eye on for future use.
Largely though, the 35 Flex did about what I hoped, if not more. This however, may have been focused at too far a distance to really blur the backdrop.
Scene shots all seemed to give some great results on the 35 Flex, with sharp details and pleasing contrast.
The poshest looking abandoned "Snack Shop" I've ever seen.
Great fine line details and crisp edges combine with pleasing tonality to create some wonderfully sharp images on the Ricoh 35 Flex.
With my point of focus being the letter "M" here, the Ricoh 35 Flex did exactly as I'd hoped, and put forth a nicely muted backdrop in the distance.
Yet again, good separation of a sharp subject and a progressively muted backdrop. I really had my modest expectations exceeded by this camera.
I don't typically do "texture" shots, but couldn't resist this one. The 35 Flex focused where desired and gave me this result.
The sharpness of the 4 element Rikenon lens is quite good for most subjects and worked quite well with the FP4 film.
Contrasty scenes were all very well contained by the 35 Flex and the FP4 film combination.
A lot of iron and brick captured by a camera that evokes an era of heavy build quality itself.
A little bit of banding on one side of this frame offers a bit of mystery to an otherwise well exposed frame.
Thoughts:
As if almost by deliberate design, a pair of cameras from which I expected little, both came through with some very consistently commendable, and occasionally stellar results. There were times during the shooting in which I wondered if I was wasting my time and energy in attempting to photograph with this pair of old cameras, and I'm pleased to discover the answer to that query is a distinct "NO!"
While both cameras had their kludgy points, and metering had to be done manually, both came through with solid results that did make me interested in using both again this Winter. Both have some limitations, and a few challenges, but seem to be fine for taking out for a pleasant afternoon on the town as a dependable tool for shooting negative films.
Of the two, the Ricoh 35 Flex tended to offer me the best feeling while shooting, despite the somewhat stiff film advance. Looking back at the results, it is nice to know that I can pick this camera up any time and fire away for a good result, without wasting a frame as I would ultimately have to do with this particular Singlex. And with a fairly modest wide aperture of f/2.8, the lens of the 35 Flex does a great job of subject separation at closer distances. That said, the Singlex does offer the advantage of interchangeable lenses, and a faster top shutter speed, so if a frame or two is expendable, the Singlex is likely to be a good choice when shooting through a roll of film on a single outing.
Despite some skepticism in their performance, I am very glad I put the effort into using both of these cameras, and largely made sure to put effort into my composition and shooting with both of these cameras to really see what they might be able to do, rather than half-heartedly shoot a bulk of scene shots at near infinity focus. While neither is anything near a dependable professional grade machine, both are great pickups that I will welcome to tag along in the not too distant future!
No comments:
Post a Comment