Good deal or not? Rolleiflex TLR

[Kristopher]

Hi everyone,

I know its a rangefinder forum, but I am sure that a lot of members are using TLR too. I had an offer for a near mint Rolleiflex, 1951, 3.5 Tessar serviced 2 weeks ago by one of the best. I don't know the seller, but I do now the reputaion of the guy who serviced the camera. 500$ Sound good? Since I am a student, I am d'ont have a lot of money so I just want to make sure its a good deal.

I really flet in love with medium format as I currently using my friend's Yashicaflex. I am supposing that I will more pleased with the Rollei?

Thx

Kristopher

 

[bmicklea]

I'm not an expert but to add another data point I paid about the same for my Rolleiflex 2.8d and it's definitely a user. If it's in very good shape, you know the history and you want a great TLR then I'd go for it if I were you.

 

[Pherdinand]

the rolleiflex is somewhat better built, but the yashinon lens (i think that's what the yashicaflex has) is very similar (and as good as) the tessar.
I find 500$ for a 50 y old tessar3.5 flex a bit much. Even with the fresh service. If it has a maxwell bright screen installed, maybe then yes it is a good price (the screen costs $150-ish).
But if you can afford it, you will certainly like it.

 

[Rhoyle]

I have the same camera, given to me by my father in law. There are easier cameras to use but if properly handled, not many that will give you a better image. Spend the $500 and you'll love it for many years.

Bob

 

[JohnM]

I don't know who the technician was and you can take my advice with a grain of salt, but that is well beyond what I would pay for a 1951 Tessar. I don't think that model is one of the more valued versions.

I spent that for a 2.8E in 9+ condition.

 

[BillBingham2]

That feels high for a 3.5. Can you confirm that it was serviced by the best (drop them a note checking the serial number perhaps)?

Is it that much better than a Y-Mat 128e? When you stop down to 3.5?

I loved using a TLR when I had access to them, even thought of getting one, but have stuck with 135mm.

If this is going to be YOUR camera, what you develop our style with, then it may not be too much. I would say look for a 2.8, that half stop is handy. While the leaf shutter allows you to go a lot slower than a focal plain.

Does she handle as well as the 2.8? Wind, focus, cocking the shutter, are all things that could become VERY important when you use her a lot.

Hope this helps.

B2 (;->

 

[FrankS]

You can surely find a similar camera for less, but not in as good a condition and not jsut recently serviced. If you can afford it, then go for it. If this purchase will cause you difficulties, then be patient and keep looking. I've had a Yashicamat with Yashinon lens, several Rolleicords with Xenons, and still have a Rolleiflex with f3.5 Planar that I will never sell.

 

[Pherdinand]

Look, i had a rolleicord with a 3.5 Xenar lens that i bought for...fifty euro. Yes,fifty. The shutter needed service which together with a general check and adjust cost me 100 e more.
For about 200 $ i had a very good user grade camera that was able of producing exactly the same quality photos as a 3.5Tessar rolleiflex is.What i did not have in it? Auto frame counter from first frame (no big deal) and it had the knob wind (no big deal,again). A perfect compromise for a student i'd say.

Now i have a pre-ww2 rolleiflex with an uncoated tessar. Very battered looking but good working, although the selftimer is coughing once in a while. I bought this to replace the rolleicord i was talking about (that got stolen).
The quality i get is the same (minus the coating on the lens that helped the rolleicord a bit,actually).

 

[photogdave]

I paid $400 CDN for the same camera in good user condition with no recent CLA. I'm thinking $350-$400 U.S. would seem to be a reasonable price.

 

[rover]

The one agreement here is that a Rolleiflex is a great camera. I too think the price is a bit much by the way.

 

[Pablito]

too expensive, IMO. For the same money you could get a Mamiya C330 in excellent condition with 2.8 normal AND another lens, I'm guessing. Bigger camera, and not a rollei, but I've seen the 3.5 Rollei sell for a lot less than $500. The CLA brings up the value, but $500???

 

[rxmd]

Way too much. What model is this? I've seen "T" models sell for $250 to $350, and the non-"T"s about $400 in excellent shape.

 

[Ash]

In the UK that's a fair price. But then again I bought a Rolleiflex automat in poor but working condition for £50. That's $100.

I'd try and haggle to $300-ish if I were you, but $400 would be fair if it really is JUST out of the door of the CLA guy.

 

[tedwhite]

I agree with Ash and others. Too much money. Haggle. Bit of advice: If you do get a Rolleiflex or Rolleicord, regardless of model, do have the Maxwell Hi-Lux Brilliant Matte screen installed. World of difference.

As for the Mamiya c330, fine camera. I had one. I sold it only because it was too heavy and bulky. It's best as a studio camera as you don't have to lug it about.

 

[Meleica]

This can only really be a Rolleiflex X ( Automat III ) or MX ( Automat IV ) if the date and lens is correct. check the serial #..but I have this model on my Rolleiflex Price Guide at

http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/rolleitlr.htm

for $ 125 - $ 250 for excellent condition ( these sell all day long on ebay )... for a MINT one...I'd say $ 350 tops.


Dan

 

[rich815]

That's WAY too high for that model, even serviced.

 

[Ben Z]

I have two Rolleis, one of them is an MX (75mm Zeiss-Option Tessar) Type 1 (the Type 2 can be dsitinguished because it has the groove around the tripod plate for attaching a Rolleifix or Pistol Grip). I got it about 2 years ago (before the bottom completely fell out of the film camera market) from a now-defunct local camera shop, after it had just returned from an overhaul by Harry Fleenor (it has the Oceanside Camera repair sticker inside). It's an easy 9+ condition and I paid $325 for it. But then I paid another $130 for a Beatty Intenscreen. You might get one for half the asking price on fleabay but then you'll need to get it serviced and wait. Harry is pretty expensive (like $200 for a complete shutter and film transport overhaul) and has always been backed up several months.

 

[rich815]

Get a Rolleiflex that has glass in decent shape* and is not in pieces. Then have it CLA'd by Paul Ebel for about $125-150 or so.

Two weeks I just got a hold of a 3.5E3 Xenotar for $125, needing a CLA, and after Paul's done I'm in for less than $300. I also got an ugly beater 2.8E Planar a few years back for $150 that had stuck slow speeds. Again, after Paul and about $145, it's perfect. Got a 2.8C Xenotar in mint aesthetic condition for $275 couple months ago. Paul did a needed small focus adjustment for $45 and now it's also perfect. The 2.8E Planar was from an old camera shop in Beijing (of all places!) and the latter two I got off FS listings on the Rollei User's Group forum list.

My point is have patience and you can get something really good for $150-200, assume about $150 for a CLA from someone reputable like Paul Ebel and you'll be good to go. All three of my model's have lenses considered much better performers than the Tessar models (and are typically priced accordingly).

Not that the Tessar is any slouch of a lens, it's not! BUt $500 for that Tessar model, even in great shape, is simply too much moola.

*The 2.8 Planar I mention above does have a very visbile scratch on the taking lens element and the coating appears to be gone. You'd never know it from some of the great images I get):

http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=38698047@N00&q=2-8EPlanar&m=text

Paul's latest contact info:

Paul Ebel Lens Services
420 21st Street North Suite #2
PO Box 141
Menomonie WI 54751
Tel. (651) 335-8759
email paulebel44@yahoo.com