Considering a Rollei - Which One Though?

[dcsang]

I've been looking at getting back into some medium format work for my own personal pleasure and use.

There are so many to choose from - I've used Hassy in the past and I loved it but I want something a little different and, I guess, more "portable" per se.

I'm considering TLR's and mainly Rollei's but I know SQUAT about them 🙂

Are there any particular models to avoid?
Any to really pick up?
Any "gotchas" or such?

Any and all help is welcomed 🙂

Cheers,
Dave

 

[valdas]

probably any rollei (if serviced) will be a nice camera, but the later model, the more chances it's in better shape. i prefer 3.5F. have two of those babies and i know i will never sell any them...

 

[chikarin]

rolleicords and type T are the lower end models that are much cheaper. this also makes the related accessories cheaper as well (macro lens, color filters, etc.). they are also relatively younger so easier to find in a good condition.

 

[Al Kaplan]

Right now I'm using a Rolleiflex T, a slightly simplified model with a 75/3.5 Tessar, or occasionally a Xenar. A lot of the fancier models require the more expensive and harder to find Bayonet II and III hoods and filters, but not the T. The Minolta Autocord is also a great camera, with Rollei build quality. The Yashicas aren't quite up to the same standards.

 

[leica M2 fan]

Dave, just a post to let you know that I got my 3.5F about 3 years ago and love the cam so much. it's a pleasure in every respect you can think of. I checked out all the models and came to the conclusion that ANY Rollei TLR would be fine and decided to go with the 3.5F so that I could change the screen easily and use a prism if I chose to. I liked the WLF so the prism was moot point - anyway the one I tried was so very dark! You can't go wrong with any of the Rolleis. I'm looking for an old model with a Tessar lens but can't seem to find what I want in good condition.
Edit: Just saw Al's post and I'm thinking maybe the T would be a perfect fit for me.

 

[tedwhite]

I have the Rolleiflex 2.8E (Schneider Xenotar) and, as aperture64 states, it's a great lens. I had the camera CLA'd and a Maxwell brighter screen installed and now it's a real joy to use.

Back in the 60s and 70s I had a Rolleicord with the 3.5 Tessar and it, too, was a fine camera with a great lens. Rolleicords are less money but just as well built and just as reliable.

 

[Gerry M]

Dave,
I think you might want to stay away from the Rollei "Magic". In Rollei's, I have owned Rolleicord V/3.5 Xenar, Rollei 2.8e/ Planar and presently, MX-EVS/3.5 Xenar. I am probably weird (no doubt, actually), but I prefer the smaller body 3.5's to the 2.8's. I also think that in everyday use, the 3.5 Xenar is a super lens. One advantage a Rolleiflex has over the 'Cord is the 2.8 viewing lens. Anyway, if you get a good Rollei, they are great.
Gerry

MX-EVS 3.5 Xenar
No name ASA 100

 

[Wahoo]

Extremely good cameras those Rolleis, I have several 3.5f's planars, 2.8e, a Magic 1 (not recommended) and a baby in a box.

My problem is using them, the last 3.5 I used was in 1991 and it still has film in 🙂 a familiar story.

PS I bought one of those thingies to convert the TLR's into 6 x 6 projectors, are these worth keeping/anything.

Here's an '80's 3.5 photo taken one handed whist riding my Martrac 😛

 

[D.O'K.]

I've had a Rolleicord Vb and 'flexs T and 3.5F (Planar) for years. All are excellent, but the Vb gets most work as it's smaller, lighter and easier to carry around for extended periods. It's build quality however is very high and contains no compromises.

Although it's a little slower in use than the other two I don't find that significant; and although the Planar lens of the 3.5f is a little better at the larger apertures the difference is pretty marginal (although I don't enlarge over about 10" x 10"). Its Xenar lens has a similar recipe to the Tessar of the T, and it tends to produce generally comparable pictures.

A Vb should also be much cheaper than a 3.5F, and somewhat cheaper than a T.

Condition counts for a lot, however: all these cameras are now (very) old. If I were buying from scratch, I'd probably be more influenced by condition than by model type...

Best of luck,
D.

 

[D.O'K.]

Very nice picture Wahoo.

Regards,
D.

 

[kermaier]

I have a Rolleiflex 3.5E2 Planar with non-interchangeable screen -- but the camera was CLAed by Harry Fleenor and the screen replaced with a Maxwell at the time.

Things to look out for:

If you get an E2 or earlier model, you'll need to have the screen professionally replaced (the original vintage screens are pretty dark, IMO). E3 and F models have user-replaceable screens.

If you buy from someone who has not been using it regularly, assume it will need a CLA to be usable: shutters on these cameras grow sticky and inaccurate with disuse, and the automatic frame-stop/counter feature of the film transport often malfunctions if not clean. Also, if it is not in regular use, or you're buying from an unreliable source (e.g., eBay), check carefully for lens element separation (particularly a problem with Xenotar lenses), haze and fungus. Also check that the lens stage is not out of parallel with the camera body (due to being dropped or manhandled by someone not familiar with the camera).

When buying accessories, make sure you get the right Bayonet version for your camera. For example, the 3.5E and 3.5F use Bay II but the 2.8E/F use Bay III. (And for the hinged double lens caps, the 3.5E and 3.5F have slightly different spacing between the lenses, so their caps, while nominally both Bay II, are not interchangeable.)

Definitely buy a Rolleifix accessory -- kind of a dedicated quick-release adapter, which is very helpful even if you use a tripod with its own quick-release plate.

If you can't find a vintage Rollie strap with the alligator clips (or don't want to pay Luigi to make one for you), there's an OpTech neoprene strap that has simple loops at the ends that can easily be attached to the strap lugs on the camera.

The LowePro Nova Mini AW is an inexpensive bag that's a perfect fit for a Rolleiflex with a few accessories and some film.

Enjoy!
::Ari

 

[Matus]

I have a Rolleiflex T that does a great service, but sometimes I wish the lens was a bit sharper wide open. But at the same time the look wide open is a very distinctive.

The solution could be Rolleiflex T for portraits (or stopped down ladnscapes) and 3.5F (or even 2.8f) for strong OOF stuff - but for the second there are more options (what about the new Bessa III or Mamiya 6 ?)

 

[monochromejrnl]

I've used both the 3.5 and the 2.8 and prefer the 3.5s. Lighter, smaller, cheaper to find bayonet hoods, filters and other accessories. Spend the extra money you save by getting the 3.5 on an upgraded screen - which will make the camera easier to focus and compose with.

IMO the 2.8Cs,Ds and Fs are expensive and f2.8 is difficult to focus wide open unless you're using a tripod.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

Planars and Xenotars work well just get one man, get one!
2.8E2 Planar

Todd

 

[Wahoo]

Very nice picture Wahoo.

Regards,
D.

Why, thank you very much.

I've used both the 3.5 and the 2.8 and prefer the 3.5s. Lighter, smaller, cheaper to find bayonet hoods, filters and other accessories.

I've got to agree with that completely.

Here's another 3.5f photo taken on the 1st of January 1980.

 

[kino eye]

I have a 2.8E and love it. My advice would be to buy from someone like Harry Fleenor so you know you are going to get a good one at a fair price.
http://www.rolleirepairs.com/rollei4sale.htm

 

[kermaier]

Two more things to note:

1. Some of the E and F models have a built-in meter, with the sensor above the viewing lens and the display/needle on the focus knob. Most of these are no longer working, and are no longer feasible to repair. I hate having gear with non-working bits, so I made sure to get one without the meter (has a basic film reminder dial on the focus knob instead).

2. Some models have a Synchro-Compur MXV shutter, which uses an early EV-type system to couple the aperture and shutter speed settings, such that changing one changes the other to compensate. Some people like this, but it drives me bonkers -- so I made sure to get a model with the MX shutter instead.

::Ari

 

[kermaier]

I have a 2.8E and love it. My advice would be to buy from someone like Harry Fleenor so you know you are going to get a good one at a fair price.
http://www.rolleirepairs.com/rollei4sale.htm

Yes, Harry is the best for Rolleiflex service and repair.

There's also Krikor Maralian at Krimar Photo, who is also well regarded, but more expensive than Harry Fleenor.

::Ari

 

[nksyoon]

AFAIK, Rolleiflexes from F (2.8F, 3.5F) series onwards had optional 220 capability. Many earlier F cameras did not have this fitted as standard but could be modified.

http://www.rolleirepairs.com/220mod.html

Price guide: http://www.antiquecameras.net/rolleiflex.html

 

[Wahoo]

Two more things to note:

1. Some of the E and F models have a built-in meter, with the sensor above the viewing lens and the display/needle on the focus knob. Most of these are no longer working, and are no longer feasible to repair.

Yep, I've just checked and all my 3'5f meters are operational, mind since they haven't been used for 18, 31 and 34 years respectively this should be so.

2. Some models have a Synchro-Compur MXV shutter, which uses an early EV-type system to couple the aperture and shutter speed settings, such that changing one changes the other to compensate. Some people like this, but it drives me bonkers -- so I made sure to get a model with the MX shutter instead.

::Ari

One of these Rolleis is like you describe, maybe this why it has been in it's box for so long.


1967 MK. 111 3000 healey taken in the dales (yorkshire)