Rolleiflex Hy6...One of the last medium format cameras in production

[NortheastPhotographic]

Just how important is it to have the Mod 2 upgrade?

The finish on the Mod-1s get sticky, the Mod 2 has smooth composite plastic type finish. The grip arm was strengthened, and the AF was improved. Now the original firmware Mod 1s have kind of crappy AF. There was a middle firmware that was a factory upgrade which should provide similar AF to the Mod 2. If you get a Mod 1 I highly recommend the latest firmware version.

 

[Dave Krueger]

Well, consider that The Contax 645AF is still an extremely popular camera 2 decades after it's absurdly timed demise. There are many shops still repairing them for professional photographer's the world over. It was a major part of the film resurgence in weddings and portraits thanks to it's glorious 80/2 normal and 35mm AF camera-like operation. They're notorious for shutter issues, but people are still using and fixing them. That camera, like the Hy6, was largely ignored during it's production life.

The folks running the factory in Germany seem to be dedicated to supporting what they and I believe is the best medium format camera ever made. I understand your fears about it, I share them on some level! However, I have a working Hy6 Mod 2 right now, and whatever tomorrow may bring, I'm making beautiful pictures with it today. I guess that counts for something.

I think the difference between the Hy6 and the Contax is that the Hy6 is being produced in very low quantities by a young tiny company that has had to struggle through a maze of legal entanglements in a time when film cameras have disappeared almost entirely. If it doesn't survive, it may not have the resources and spare parts inventory available to arrange for repair services going very far into the future. I don't know. I'm just guessing from what information I've seen, but I think there is a risk worth considering.

 

[GG12]

The finish on the Mod-1s get sticky, the Mod 2 has smooth composite plastic type finish. The grip arm was strengthened, and the AF was improved. Now the original firmware Mod 1s have kind of crappy AF. There was a middle firmware that was a factory upgrade which should provide similar AF to the Mod 2. If you get a Mod 1 I highly recommend the latest firmware version.

Correct. they can upgrade the exterior finish to mod 2 (for about $700), but the firmware upgrade is worth having. I've used my mod 1 for about 10 yrs, and haven't had big issues. That said, it sure is sticky these days!

On the Contax - its more the last of the old metal cameras, solid as a tank, rather conservative in its design. The Hy6 is the first of the more elec/mech'l hybrids, has vast feature set, and works well (if you can find one) with digital backs. As long as there is service available, its all good - but without that, a purely mech'l camera is more easily repaired. That said, there's likely to be someone servicing them. Having replaced a mother-board and repairing the AF, sure am glad DW is there.

 

[Dave Krueger]

Another question for Hy6 owners: The AFD lenses specifically intended for the Hy6 have no aperture ring, but it looks like there are nearly identical AF lenses that do have the aperture ring. I assume the latter are intended for the 6008AF. From what I can tell, the AF lenses with the aperture ring will work in all the same exposure modes as the AFD lenses without the aperture ring so it kinda doesn't matter which ones I buy. Is that correct?

 

[Pieter12]

Another question for Hy6 owners: The AFD lenses specifically intended for the Hy6 have no aperture ring, but it looks like there are nearly identical AF lenses that do have the aperture ring. I assume the latter are intended for the 6008AF. From what I can tell, the AF lenses with the aperture ring will work in all the same exposure modes as the AFD lenses without the aperture ring so it kinda doesn't matter which ones I buy. Is that correct?

The Hy6 will work in all exposure modes with all the lenses for the 6008 series cameras (PQ/PQS).

 

[GG12]

The AF lenses have an aperture ring, the AFD set aperture from a wheel on handle.
Both work fine on Hy6, but the AF ones are compatible with 6008AF.
Manual lenses (non-AF) will work on 6003/8 and Hy6.
There was some discussion that the AFD might be improved for digital; never noticed a difference.

 

[Dave Krueger]

Thanks for the replies.

I've seen some Hy6 Mod1 cameras for sale, but I'm leaning toward buying a new Mod2.

The lenses with the aperture ring are significantly cheaper and would come in handy if my Hy6 ever gets broken and I have to resort to getting a 6008AF body to use the lenses because there is no one around anymore to repair Hy6s. Just tryin' to imagine every scenario, ya know.

I sent an email to Rolleiflex.us asking about the price difference between the full kit and buying the body and lens separately. I'll post what he says if he responds.

I have a feeling that the Netherlands Leica Store doesn't sell new items directly to buyers in the US. They don't post any prices on their webpage and haven't responded to my inquiries (yet).

 

[Dave Krueger]

Eric replied to my message about the Hy6 price and made corrections to the website. The full kit is $500 cheaper than buying the lens and body separately.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

I think I’ve decided to sell my entire Hy6 Mod 2 kit. The money could be better spend on equipment for my lab. It’ll take me a little bit of time to photograph and catalog everything but if anyone is looking, PM me.

 

[ic-racer]

AFD lenses with no aperture ring work in program and shutter priority modes on the 6008 cameras.
SLX lenses won't work in any mode on the Hy6 but work in 'stop down' mode on the 6008.

 

[Dave Krueger]

AFD lenses with no aperture ring work in program and shutter priority modes on the 6008 cameras.
SLX lenses won't work in any mode on the Hy6 but work in 'stop down' mode on the 6008.

Thanks. I'm starting to get a handle on these details very slowly.

And now I have yet another question. I saw a Hy6 Mod2 review on Youtube that compares it to a Hasselblad. He mentions that the viewfinder on the Hy6 is darker than the Hasselblad, presumably because it has a partially transparent mirror to allow for light metering to be done in the camera body rather than in the prism. I don't dispute the logic for metering in the camera body, but I am wondering just how dark the viewfinder is. Earlier in the same review he praises the Rollei lenses for being a full stop faster than the Hassy lenses. Wouldn't that compensate for the transparency of the mirror?

From what I gather, the High D screen is the brightest and comes standard, so any other screen would be darker.

I would appreciate any comments on viewfinder brightness. Is it really a problem?

 

[GG12]

Thanks. I'm starting to get a handle on these details very slowly.

And now I have yet another question. I saw a Hy6 Mod2 review on Youtube that compares it to a Hasselblad. He mentions that the viewfinder on the Hy6 is darker than the Hasselblad, presumably because it has a partially transparent mirror to allow for light metering to be done in the camera body rather than in the prism. I don't dispute the logic for metering in the camera body, but I am wondering just how dark the viewfinder is. Earlier in the same review he praises the Rollei lenses for being a full stop faster than the Hassy lenses. Wouldn't that compensate for the transparency of the mirror?

From what I gather, the High D screen is the brightest and comes standard, so any other screen would be darker.

I would appreciate any comments on viewfinder brightness. Is it really a problem?

Uh no. Not at all. Sometimes tho I use a 45 deg finder to cut out reflections, but the wlf is just fine. Also like using the magnifier Lupe, maybe because it cuts down light.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

I bought a Maxwell screen for my Hy6 and stopped using it because the stock screen is so good, and already had the correct AF and crop lines. No brightness issues at all. It’s incredibly easy to focus manually.

 

[AgX]

The finish on the Mod-1s get sticky.

The sticky-varnish issue even on a Hy6?

 

[GG12]

The sticky-varnish issue even on a Hy6?

Well.... that's an issue on my Mod 1. I think worse in the summer. Should have let DW change the panels.... for about $700.

Mark mentioned the manual focus - its one of the great treats of the Hy6 - that you can use the manual focus lenses with focus confirmation. Compare this to the Hassy V - the Hy6 has ability to confirm for each lens (adjustable focus plane) and meter lens. I tend to prefer the MF lenses as there is less to go wrong. While a bit slower, they are also not so expensive for the quality.

 

[AgX]

If focus is controlled at the image plane, why then has each manual-focus lens to be adjusted to this focus confimation feature?

 

[GG12]

If focus is controlled at the image plane, why then has each manual-focus lens to be adjusted to this focus confimation feature?

Good question. It turns out that digital sensors (and focus) has much tighter tolerances than the film plane. Much less. It takes a while to get one's head around this.... The problem was uncovered c. 2005-2010 when all sorts of efforts to have flexibility (such as Leica DMR, with interchange between digital and film) were found to be difficult to hold tight, and thus Hassy and Phase One went more to closed systems (their own backs on their own cameras) to maintain tolerances. Alpa uses found the need for micro-shims to adjust their backs to their HPF focal rings to get that extra bit of sharpness (there's an essay by Mark Dubovoy on this on LL, and Michael Reichman wrote on it here, under shimming: https://luminous-landscape.com/alpa-stc-review/).

Rollei's answer in the Hy6 was to implement adjustment of the focus plane as each lens (surprisingly) varies. This has been adopted by other manufacturers, as it can be found deep in the sub-menus of Canons, etc. Its largely to correct the AF setting for those lenses, but can also be used to set the focus confirmation for manual lenses. Its like tweaking your camera focus for each lens - although you have to spend the time testing the camera and lens with the digital back to get the proper setting. Just to confuse things, some lenses change their focus posture (called focus shift) as they go from near to far (the 300APO is the big offender here, as are early Leica Summilux), as the offset setting for near and far is different - but in general, most are just fine once they are set up.

 

[AgX]

If it is about variation in longitudinal distance, there is no b´need for calibration. One just twists the focusing barrel until the confirmation signal comes.

If it is about angular tolerances (tilted lens), it becomes mechanically difficult to adjust.

I guess what you are talking about is focal plane curvature. And finding an intermediate focal plane.

 

[GG12]

Not quite. The variation is in longitudinal. That is, the camera might say that two lenses are focusing at the same place (and give a confirmation signal) but they aren't. Their focusing (convergence of rays at the sensor plane) varies slightly. Thus the need to adjust for each lens.

 

[Pieter12]

Good question. It turns out that digital sensors (and focus) has much tighter tolerances than the film plane. Much less. It takes a while to get one's head around this.... The problem was uncovered c. 2005-2010 when all sorts of efforts to have flexibility (such as Leica DMR, with interchange between digital and film) were found to be difficult to hold tight, and thus Hassy and Phase One went more to closed systems (their own backs on their own cameras) to maintain tolerances. Alpa uses found the need for micro-shims to adjust their backs to their HPF focal rings to get that extra bit of sharpness (there's an essay by Mark Dubovoy on this on LL, and Michael Reichman wrote on it here, under shimming: https://luminous-landscape.com/alpa-stc-review/).

Rollei's answer in the Hy6 was to implement adjustment of the focus plane as each lens (surprisingly) varies. This has been adopted by other manufacturers, as it can be found deep in the sub-menus of Canons, etc. Its largely to correct the AF setting for those lenses, but can also be used to set the focus confirmation for manual lenses. Its like tweaking your camera focus for each lens - although you have to spend the time testing the camera and lens with the digital back to get the proper setting. Just to confuse things, some lenses change their focus posture (called focus shift) as they go from near to far (the 300APO is the big offender here, as are early Leica Summilux), as the offset setting for near and far is different - but in general, most are just fine once they are set up.

Does the camera remember/recognize each lens, or does the operator have to re-enter the focus correction each time a lens is changed?

 

[AgX]

Not quite. The variation is in longitudinal. That is, the camera might say that two lenses are focusing at the same place (and give a confirmation signal) but they aren't. Their focusing (convergence of rays at the sensor plane) varies slightly. Thus the need to adjust for each lens.

But those two lenses are hand-focused. There is no right or wrong, only the signal from the electronice that states "highest contrast, telling you to stop moving the lens.

That highest contrast may even be different for the two lenses, but that does not bother the electronics and there is nothing to adjust at the camera on this matter.
(Aside of what I said above on curvature of focal plane.Here one might tell the electronics to signal a tiny bit off "highest contrast" to yield nonetheless an overall better focussed image.)

 

[GG12]

But those two lenses are hand-focused. There is no right or wrong, only the signal from the electronice that states "highest contrast, telling you to stop moving the lens.

That highest contrast may even be different for the two lenses, but that does not bother the electronics and there is nothing to adjust at the camera on this matter.
(Aside of what I said above on curvature of focal plane.Here one might tell the electronics to signal a tiny bit off "highest contrast" to yield nonetheless an overall better focussed image.)

I understand what you are saying, but somehow it seems to matter (my experience, YMMV).

As to the camera remembering - I think this was one of the big differences with the Mod2 (or possibly just the later software), as it does remember each lens, but (maybe) only for the AF lenses; manual lenses still had to be separately input.

 

[reddesert]

But those two lenses are hand-focused. There is no right or wrong, only the signal from the electronice that states "highest contrast, telling you to stop moving the lens.

That highest contrast may even be different for the two lenses, but that does not bother the electronics and there is nothing to adjust at the camera on this matter.
(Aside of what I said above on curvature of focal plane.Here one might tell the electronics to signal a tiny bit off "highest contrast" to yield nonetheless an overall better focussed image.)

I don't believe I fully understand why AF systems sometimes need to be calibrated for individual lenses. But AF systems for SLRs tend to be phase detection, not contrast detection. This means they are comparing a positional offset between light traveling through different parts of the lens like a rangefinder or split-image focusing screen does, using a separate AF sensor, not the main imaging sensor (or film for a film camera obviously). But they are still working on a slightly out of focus image on the AF sensor, unlike your eye which focuses on the aerial image through a rangefinder. That out of focus image will be blurred slightly, and the blur function depends on the pupil and the aberrations of the lens. My guess is that variations in the pupil illumination or field curvature between lenses cause a small offset between what the AF sensor computes as best focus, versus the actual best focus on the imaging sensor or film plane. See the diagram at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofocus#Phase_detection

 

[AgX]

Good point.
Well, the phase-correlation focusing systems I got in mind are indeed contrast detecting systems. But I admit I am that much retrominded camerawise that I even do not use a 35mm AF camera. So a lot of further development slipped my attention.

 

[ic-racer]

If focus is controlled at the image plane, why then has each manual-focus lens to be adjusted to this focus confimation feature?

I believe focus calibration is a feature to account for the way different focal length lenses project to a sensor. I don't think it has anything to do with film.