I think we may have over-sold you on the Rollei. I suspect that the Hassy
f/2.8 Planars are better than those on the Rollei.

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html

The above guy finds the Hassy 80/2.8 and the Mamiya 7 80/4.0 to be very
close, but he was not able to get as good results from the Rolleis he
tested.

My bet is that you'd find the Mamiya better than the Rollei: the lens will
be in no way inferior, and the film is a lot larger for rectangular images.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

Go to Robert Monaghan's site on medium format cameras...
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/cameras.html
Tons of information... Days worth of reading... Links up the wazoo... If you
are still able to talk without stuttering after absorbing this load of info,
then come back and we will dis'cuss' it...

Denny

I haven't read the original thread; you appear to have no compelling
reason to spend the big bucks -- my take is that you should not do
it. _Why_ are you considering the purchase?

Ray:

Economists have a trick called "marginal analysis" that can be a huge help
here.  You look at the EXTRA cost of a new camera (a thou or more), and the
EXTRA
benefits it might provide (VERY slight improvement in picture quality, if
visible at all).  These "extras," in econspeak, are the "marginal costs" and
the "marginal benefits."  It's a good way to look at prospective
expenditures.  In this case, it's a no-brainer.  Stick with your beautiful
old Rollei.  (I'm still shooting a Nikon Ftn, for exactly the same reason:
the marginal benefits of a new auto-everything whizbang are NOT worth the
marginal costs.)

Hope this helps.

Dick

It the risk of simply adding to the noise without addressing your specific
question I'd like to comment :-)

I'll start by saying I've never used a Rollei anything and don't
particularly care for the square format.

In medium format I shoot with Mamiya RZ67 Pro II, Mamiya 6 MF and Mamiya 7
II (also got a Fuji GSW670 III but haven used that in over a year -- it's
currently on the other side of the country with my father). Of all the
cameras I own the Mamiya 7 II has become my favorite general purpose,
carry-around just in case camera. It's lighter than my Nikon F5 (as well as
being physically slightly smaller) and gives me a huge negative. The camera
is extremely easy to operate and has a pretty good meter for normal lighting
conditions where you shouldn't need (and may not feel like) to think too
hard about exposure. The images are incredibly sharp and I doubt you find
anything to complain about in them. On the minus side it is a rangefinder
with the inherent limitations of that configuration. There is also a limited
selection of lenses (5 total). I have three of them, the 80mm F:4, 65mm F:4
and 150mm F:4.5 and have found nothing wanting in any of these lenses.

If I was going to an airshow or out to take pictures of the local kids
playing soccer I'd take one of my Nikons (usually the F5 which used to be my
favorite camera to carry around) but both of these instances are where I'd
be wanting a longer lens and shooting in rapidly changing light where an SLR
(especially one with an accurate spot meter) is much better suited.

Jeffery S. Harrison

I don't think the SLR lenses are "The problem" other people sugested and if
you need a focal length other than normal, the rollei TLR isn't a going to
provide it. I've shot with a rollei TLR and my soviet arsat normal lens
looks as good to my eyes. I can't imagine ANY normal lens for any system is
going to be bad!

That said for what you posted your uses are, I was going to sugest a mamiya
7 till I saw your budget.