Medium Format On A Budget – A Quick Comparison of Three, Low Priced, 120 format, 6cm x 6cm TLR Cameras – By James Hanes

The Ciro F is good, but the triplet lens in the other models is just as sharp, in my experience. I’ve shot several rolls with both lenses and I have not seen a difference. Definitely get one with the better 1/400 shutter.

These are really cool James! The Circo-flex images are lovely. Your article is not good for my gear acquisition syndrome.

Another good low-priced TLR option is the Lubitel 166, a basic Russian-made camera that is capable of making very nice pictures. A plus for me when I go bicycling, is that its plastic construction makes for a fairly light and durable camera. Lubitels are available for about $70US on eBay. Look for one that has the 6X4 mask that allows you to take 16 6x4 photos on a roll of 120 film.

A most enjoyable article with a lot of useful information. Thanks, James!

A few personal recollections now. To me the Yashica TLRs are the hidden gems of MF. I bought my first, a D, in 1962, for (CDN)$40 from a mail order company in Montreal - my dad was a door to door sales rep for this firm so I may have saved a little on buying it at the dealer's price, after 61 years my memory fails me a little on this. I shot hundred of rolls of 120 Kodak Verichrome Pan with it and sold news images to regional newspapers for a whopping $5 a photo. As a high school student more used to a $2 weekly allowance from my parents...

In 1966 after I had landed my first job as a cadet news reporter, I blew $195 for a new (well, 1960) Rolleiflex 3.5E2 I found gathering dust on a shelf at our pharmacy. The local dentist had ordered it but sadly passed away before it arrived. His widow very kindly gave me the $100 deposit he had put down on it, so its true price was $295, a fortune in those days. I used it for many decades and I still have it, but sadly with the cost of 120 roll film nowadays it sees very little use. But it is a personal token for me and I will keep it to the very end.

Other Rolleiflexes came my way in the ensuing decades. Most came and went, resold as a profit as I tended to luck into many good bargains from those long-vanished second hand camera shops we once upon a time had in Australia. Now down to two in Melbourne but with prices I can't afford as a pensioner. My current collection consists of the 3.5E2, two Ts with full kits including the amazing 16 exposure kits which click into the camera and give you horizontal images, so perfect for landscapes, also a late model Rolleicord Vb, again with a full kit including a 16 exposure and the (so I'm told) now quite rare 24 exposure kit. As I'm now on a pensioner's budget, my film cameras (I have many others but I will spare you the ordeal of a full list) see little use, only when I can pick up recently expired film at heavily discounted prices do I buy up and put all this nice film gear thru its paces. Given that my TLRs are all 1960-1970 models, I'm both happy and relieved to ay they still work almost as new, even when used only one time every year. The important thing with leaf shutter TLRs is to keep the oil flowing in them by using them now and then.

Of the cameras James writes about, many many years ago I used the Ciroflex TLR in its Graflex avatar for news photography at a newspaper I was working in. I found it a basically good camera, built like a tank but not exactly ergonomically well designed, as were most cameras in those bygone times. It was the paper's "second" camera - the first being a 3-1/4 by 4-1/4" (called I believe, quarts rplate, someone please correct me if I'm wrong) Crown Graphic used by the senior photographer in the place, which got stolen in 1965 or 1966 to his great sorrow and had to be replaced with a 2-1/4 by 3-1/4 Speed Graphic, which he swore for many years was not the same at all. Old traditions died hard in those days... By 1970 when I quit the game and moved first to New Mexico and then to Australia, most newspapers had reporter-photographers who were using either 35mm Minoltas or Pentaxes. I had a Nikkormat FTN which made me the envy of everyone on the staff, but I'm getting away from the TLR topic here, so enough.

The Ricoflex (Richoflex?) I've heard of but I cannot recall ever seeing one. The Argus was never popular in Canada or here in Australia where I moved in the mid-70s and have happily stayed since. Rolleis, yes. Yashica also. Now and then an "odd" brand like Sawyer turns up, also the Chinese Seagull, which I've seen but never used. My four Rolleis, whether 'flexes or 'cord, will see me through to the end of my time, that is if I can afford the film.

Suffices to say that many many TLRs were designed and made by camera manufacturers in the 1950s and 1960s until about 1970 when 35mm stepped in and more or less killed off the 120 "genre" overnight. The 620 film cameras as we know are now long gone and no longer usable, but 120 film is still being made (albeit at a hideous cost, at least down here in Oz) and as long as it continues to be sold, the TLRs can go on being used.

And of course Mf is still with us even in digital. The new Fujifilm line with its completely redesigned range of Fujinon lenses, seems quite superb, even if completely unaffordable to old peasants like me.

They are surprisingly good value for money and they deserve more attention than they seem to get these days. writers like James seem to understand this and are keeping on getting the message across. Well done to you, James.

From Dann in Melbourne

Thanks James for your useful article. I too have a Super Richoflex and find a lot to admire about its performance. It is the lightest TLR in my collection and whilst it feels tinny it has never let me down. The triplet gives sharp centre and softer edges with a swirly look wide open. I've found it to be a good creative tool when I'm wanting a different look compared to that that I get from my Rollei etc.

This is great! I am so glad that you have taken the time to compare these cameras. It is often that you see old TLRs like these online or in antique stores being sold pretty cheaply and it is easy to question "Well how good are these really?".

I own a Graflex 22. Mine is not as advanced as your Ciro with only a 1/200th top speed Century shutter and a 85 mm f/3.5 Graftar lens, but this camera is a solid buy. I mean that in terms of performance for the cost and how the camera is made physically. Mine fell from a shelf at over five feet crashing onto my desk and bounding onto the floor. The camera survived without any issue. It is also a super simple camera to use, and for the mechanically inclined, easy to clean and repair.

Cameras like these today provide a fun and inexpensive entry to the world of medium-format film photography. Thank you again for putting this comparison together and sharing it.

Fun article and timely James, made me chuckle to imagine you being stopped by cops after scaring some innocent passer-by with your strange looking boxes dangling ????.

I'm a big fan of the 120 TLR, and manged to buy a cheap Mamiya C3 before as everything, price creep has happened. I'm gonna share this with a Dischord group to check out as a number of them like the idea of 120 but cost of gear stops them.

From the comparisons I really feel the Ricoh has the edge but appreciate factors are varied, but something in the water reflection does it for me.

Hope you write a follow up about using an old TLR as a discrete soy cam around the mariner ????

Very interesting, seeing all these models compared. My first non-Holga medium format camera was an Argoflex. I'm still impressed by how sharp that lens is. I can't imagine lugging around 3 of these things; your sacrifice is appreciated!

Thank you everyone for your kind comments and interesting TLR recollections. I do appreciate you.
Regards to all,
Jim Hanes