Behind the picture

Some images are so much of their time that, as years pass, they acquire an air of genuine authority — about an event, a person, a place — and even, perhaps, of inevitability. This is what it was like, these pictures tell us. This is what happened. This is the moment. This must be remembered.
Of the indispensable photographs taken during the Second World War, Margaret Bourke-White’s image of survivors at Buchenwald in April 1945 — “staring out at their Allied rescuers,” as LIFE magazine put it, “like so many living corpses” — remains among the most haunting. The faces of the men, young and old, staring from behind the wire, “barely able to believe that they would be delivered from a Nazi camp where the only deliverance had been death,” attest with an awful eloquence to the depths of human depravity and, maybe even more powerfully, to the measureless lineaments of human endurance.
What few people recall about Bourke-White’s survivors-at-the-wire image, however, is that it did not even appear in LIFE until 15 years after it was made, when it was published alongside other photographic touchstones in the magazine’s December 26, 1960, special double-issue, “25 Years of LIFE.”
Pictures from Buchenwald, Belsen and other camps that LIFE did publish — made when Bourke-White and her colleagues accompanied Gen. George Patton’s Third Army on its legendary march through a collapsing Germany in the spring of 1945 — were among the very first that documented for a disbelieving American public the wholly murderous nature of the camps. (At the end of this gallery, see how the original story on the liberation of the camps appeared in the May 7, 1945, issue of LIFE, when the magazine published a series of brutal photographs by Bourke-White, William Vandivert and other LIFE staffers.)
LIFE photographer Margaret Bourke-White
Here, on the anniversary of the April 11, 1945, liberation of Buchenwald, LIFE.com presents a series of Bourke-White photographs, the majority of which never ran in the magazine, from that notorious camp located a mere five miles outside the ancient, picturesque town of Weimar, Germany. Her justifiably iconic picture of men at the Buchenwald fence suggests the horrors made manifest by the Nazi push for a “final solution”: the Bourke-White photographs here, on the other hand, do not suggest, or hint at, the Third Reich’s horrors; instead, they force the Holocaust’s nightmares into the unblinking light.
In Dear Fatherland, Rest Quietly — her devastating 1946 memoir, subtitled “A Report on the Collapse of Hitler’s ‘Thousand Years’” — Bourke-White recalls the ghastly landscape that confronted the Allied troops who liberated Buchenwald, and her own tortured response to what she, the troops from the Third Army and her journalist peers witnessed and recorded there:
There was an air of unreality about that April day in Weimar, a feeling to which I found myself stubbornly clinging. I kept telling myself that I would believe the indescribably horrible sight in the courtyard before me only when I had a chance to look at my own photographs. Using the camera was almost a relief; it interposed a slight barrier between myself and the white horror in front of me.
This whiteness had the fragile translucence of snow, and I wished that under the bright April sun which shone from a clean blue sky it would all simply melt away. I longed for it to disappear, because while it was there I was reminded that men actually had done this thing — men with arms and legs and eyes and hearts not so very unlike our own. And it made me ashamed to be a member of the human race.
The several hundred other spectators who filed through the Buchenwald courtyard on that sunny April afternoon were equally unwilling to admit association with the human beings who had perpetrated these horrors. But their reluctance had a certain tinge of self-interest; for these were the citizens of Weimar, eager to plead their ignorance of the outrages.
In one of the signal moments of his long career and, indeed, of the entire war, an enraged General Patton refused to recognize that the Weimar citizens’ ignorance might be genuine — or, if it was genuine, that it was somehow, in any moral sense, pardonable. With Olympian wrath, Patton ordered the townspeople to bear witness to what their countrymen had done, and what they themselves had allowed to be done, in their name.
Margaret Bourke-White’s pictures of these terribly ordinary men and women — appalled, frightened, ashamed amid the endless evidence of the terrors that their compatriots had long unleashed — Bourke-White’s pictures remain among the most unsettling she, or any photographer, ever made. Long before the political theorist Hannah Arendt introduced her notion of the “banality of evil” to the world in her 1963 book, Eichmann in Jerusalem, Margaret Bourke-White had already captured its face, for all time, in her photographs of “good Germans” forced to confront their own complicity in an unfathomably barbarous age.
— Ben Cosgrove is the Editor of LIFE.com
Tele Rolleiflex
Pacific Rim Camera : Photographica Pages: Rolleiflex.

The Tele-Rollei Type 1 with exposure meter added.
The Tele Rolleiflex, known to most collectors as the Tele-Rollei, was introduced in 1961. The Tele-Rollei, and it抯 companion, the Rolleiwide were marketed in response to those wishing for Rolleiflex cameras with interchangeable lenses. Rollei had been pursuing a design with an interchangeable lens board, but the cost was so high that it was simpler to offer cameras with fixed wide and telephoto lenses.
The Tele-Rollei is based on the same body as the Rolleiflex E series. It is fitted with a 135/4 Zeiss Sonnar taking lens, and a 1355/4 Heidosmat viewing lens. The viewing hood is removable, and is unique. The sportsfinder in the hood has a field of view matching that of the 135 Sonnar.
The Tele-Rollei uses Bayonet III size accessories, but requires a different set of Rolleinars unique to this model. There is a Rolleinar 0.35x which allows focusing from 4′ 5″ (1.33m) to 9′ (2.74m), and swings out of the way allowing you to leave it on the camera when focusing beyond 9′. This Rolleinar is particularly useful for portraiture work as the camera does not quite focus close enough without it for a head shot. There is also a Rolleinar 0.7x which allows focus from 3′ (0.91m) to 4′ 6.5″. As there would be a gap in focus distance with the Rolleinar mounted and removed, it was not built in the swinging style like the 0.35x.
There are two distinct types of Tele-Rollei, the type 1 and type 2. The type 2 does not replace the type 1, but was sold concurrently with the type 1 after 1970. The type 2 accepts 220 film, while the type 1 does not. The finder is also supposed to be different between the two models, the type 2 having an open area around the frame allowing you to see what is happening outside the image area. I suspect that type 1 cameras built after 1970 have the later style finder. The camera pictured is a type 1 with a late serial number, and it has the later style finder. Finders do get switched over the years (they are removable), so it’s possible that the finder on this camera was replaced with one off of a type 2.
Serial numbers run from 2,300,000 through 2,304,999 for the type 1, and 2,305,000 through 2,308,377 for the type 2. This would indicate a production run of 8377 units. The serial number list from Rollei doesn’t always seem to be as accurate as it seems. We’ve had many cameras that were outside the serial number range indicated. The example shown is serial number 2305265, which would indicate it was a type 2. I would not be surprised if type 1 cameras were assembled in small batches using type 2 serial numbers after 1970. Production was ended in 1975. Cost in 1961 was $399.50, compared with $336 or $349 for the Rolleiflex 2.8F with Xenotar or Planar respectively. By 1975 the cost had risen to $940 for the type 1 and $988 for the type 2. I suspect not too many type 1 cameras were sold after the introduction of the type 2 as the difference in price was relatively slight.


The later style viewing hood, with the sportsfinder open.

The special Rolleinars for the Tele-Rollei, the 0.35x (left) and the 0.7x (right).

The 0.7x Rolleinar mounted on the camera.

The 0.35x Rolleinar mounted on the camera.

Another picture of the 0.35x, swung out of the way, allowing focus from 4′ 5″ to infinity without removing the Rolleinar from the camera.

The 03.5x Rolleinar with it’s soft plastic case.
