jeanba3000
squareLover
Baby Rolleiflex is a great little camera, very cute. There's two lines of Babies from two era : before WWII, very small, uncoated lenses, more a collector than a camera for use, but you may like the render of the old optics; and after WWII : the grey Baby from 1957, very common, and the rare Black Baby from 1963, very expensive. The last one is also the most difficult to repair or CLA (as a friend of mine told me, he's the Rollei cameras best repairman in Paris since 1972).
A few different 127 films are available, you may order them on internet, the main concern is the developpment of color films. I think most labs won't accept color 127 films and may accept black 127 films. If you do it all by yourself, no problem with Paterson spirals (I don't know if it's the correct name, excuse my poor english) and black films, a Jobo processor with Tetenal chemicals might be good for color films but I don't know if the spirals are compatible with 127 films.
A few different 127 films are available, you may order them on internet, the main concern is the developpment of color films. I think most labs won't accept color 127 films and may accept black 127 films. If you do it all by yourself, no problem with Paterson spirals (I don't know if it's the correct name, excuse my poor english) and black films, a Jobo processor with Tetenal chemicals might be good for color films but I don't know if the spirals are compatible with 127 films.
Phantomas
Well-known
Rolleiflex Baby might be a nice camera (and all that I've seen were cute and clean, probably due to less use), but the type of film makes it limiting. You're on a budget and 127 is not as widely available thus less chance of sweat deals.
I'm by no means an expert, far from it (just after this post I'm going downstairs to develop the first three rolls from this Rollei) but I took little time searching around for mine and from what I've seen and read the 'flex model T or model C seem most attractive. They're both real Rolleiflexes without much compromises (and some say benefits) and in my quest I've seen a few clean and very nicely priced ones. I actually was aiming for one when this 3.5F suddenly appeared.
One advice - if you can stretch it a bit with $, try to get a deal with accessories. These do not seem to be pure luxuries and I see they'll have good use on mine. Buying in sets is MUCH cheaper than buying accessories separately. Rolleikin - for 35mm shooting, a couple of Rolleinars for closeups, maybe some filters thrown in (and a hood!) - these are probably the most useful (give or take Rolleikin). There are usually plenty of sets around and I sometimese see they are added at extra 20% of the cost, while separatelly they're over 50% at least.
I know you're in Jersey and I'm in Amsterdam, but I suppose market's similar what with internets and all.
I'm by no means an expert, far from it (just after this post I'm going downstairs to develop the first three rolls from this Rollei) but I took little time searching around for mine and from what I've seen and read the 'flex model T or model C seem most attractive. They're both real Rolleiflexes without much compromises (and some say benefits) and in my quest I've seen a few clean and very nicely priced ones. I actually was aiming for one when this 3.5F suddenly appeared.
One advice - if you can stretch it a bit with $, try to get a deal with accessories. These do not seem to be pure luxuries and I see they'll have good use on mine. Buying in sets is MUCH cheaper than buying accessories separately. Rolleikin - for 35mm shooting, a couple of Rolleinars for closeups, maybe some filters thrown in (and a hood!) - these are probably the most useful (give or take Rolleikin). There are usually plenty of sets around and I sometimese see they are added at extra 20% of the cost, while separatelly they're over 50% at least.
I know you're in Jersey and I'm in Amsterdam, but I suppose market's similar what with internets and all.
robklurfield
eclipse
thanks every for the advice.
lngu81
Established
I just recieved a Rolleiflex 2.8E version 1 for $350, so I'm joining the Rollei gang as well. Yay!I can't wait to take it to Vietnam for a trip.
morback
Martin N. Hinze
Hi,
I'm a recent user too (3.5 E Xenotar, way too sharp...). Still trying to figure out exposure without a meter...
Rob, I know someone in NYC who wants to sell his Rolleiflex T. I believe it to be in perfect cosmetic and mechanical condition and it has a beattie screen in it (very bright). PM me if you're interested and I could put both of you in touch. I don't know what his asking price is.
I'm a recent user too (3.5 E Xenotar, way too sharp...). Still trying to figure out exposure without a meter...
Rob, I know someone in NYC who wants to sell his Rolleiflex T. I believe it to be in perfect cosmetic and mechanical condition and it has a beattie screen in it (very bright). PM me if you're interested and I could put both of you in touch. I don't know what his asking price is.
Steve M.
Veteran
I briefly had a 2.8F (had to send it back as the focus locked up) and the build quality is better than the other Rolleiflex models, which are no slouches in that department anyway. I keep my eyes open for them now, but they ain't cheap. Just great cameras.
edodo
Well-known
Build quality on 2.8F is lower than on the 2.8E. I don't remember all differences but the leather is plastic on the F.
Phantomas
Well-known
The first film is developed and scanned. Well......................
......................................
I won't even start ranting like a little school girl here. I'll just post some photos. They might not be much by high art standards or the camera capabilities standards, but it certainly fits my low expectations. Fits and exceeds but that was expected.
These all are off the first roll, Fomapan 100, film that I don't even particularly like, so I shot it as a test-roll. Developed in Microphen. Also shot two rolls of Neopan and a roll of old TMax the same afternoon. Can't wait to develop those!
Photos are shot in docs in the North side of Amsterdam.
Shot with Rolleinar 2 or 3. I'll obviously need to watch my focusing through it at 3.5 coz the cream is washing over.
I'm happy to have found my Rolleiflex.
......................................
I won't even start ranting like a little school girl here. I'll just post some photos. They might not be much by high art standards or the camera capabilities standards, but it certainly fits my low expectations. Fits and exceeds
but that was expected.These all are off the first roll, Fomapan 100, film that I don't even particularly like, so I shot it as a test-roll. Developed in Microphen. Also shot two rolls of Neopan and a roll of old TMax the same afternoon. Can't wait to develop those!
Photos are shot in docs in the North side of Amsterdam.
Shot with Rolleinar 2 or 3. I'll obviously need to watch my focusing through it at 3.5 coz the cream is washing over.
I'm happy to have found my Rolleiflex.
longleef
Newbie
Can anyone identify the model of this one?
Can anyone identify the model of this one?
Thanks in advance, if the serial is the number on top of the roleiflex name it is #1207919. It has one lense marked heidosmat 1: 2.8/75. The other says schneider-kreuznach xenar 1:3.5/75.
Can anyone identify the model of this one?
Thanks in advance, if the serial is the number on top of the roleiflex name it is #1207919. It has one lense marked heidosmat 1: 2.8/75. The other says schneider-kreuznach xenar 1:3.5/75.
filmfan
Well-known
Nice shots. I use the 'Flex 3.5 Xenotar. I think your 3rd shot (with piano) is a great one. Classic 6x6 composition.
Phantomas
Well-known
That would be a Rolleiflex 3,5A.
God, interweb makes everyone sound like an expert, heh.
Have a look for yourself here on the Rolleiclub.
jeanba3000
squareLover
Longleef, it's probably a Rolleicord, the Xenar is Schneider's equivalent to Zeiss' Tessar.
Edodo, I think you confuse F and GX… F is the state of the art of Rolleiflex, same quality than the E, with some improvements (coupled lightmeter, first view automatic detection) and I confirm : it's leather covered.
Later models (GX and FX) are cheaper built, the back is simplier, no first view automatic detection, plastic covering on the GX (same as the SLX/6000), and some other simplifications, except the TTL lightmeter which is of course better than the old selenium (a little simplier than the 6008's lightmeter).
Edodo, I think you confuse F and GX… F is the state of the art of Rolleiflex, same quality than the E, with some improvements (coupled lightmeter, first view automatic detection) and I confirm : it's leather covered.
Later models (GX and FX) are cheaper built, the back is simplier, no first view automatic detection, plastic covering on the GX (same as the SLX/6000), and some other simplifications, except the TTL lightmeter which is of course better than the old selenium (a little simplier than the 6008's lightmeter).
Phantomas
Well-known
What's a "first view automatic detection"?
longleef
Newbie
Here is a picture if this helps. I really appreciate any input as I do not know a thing about this camera.
jeanba3000
squareLover
Phantomas, excuse my poor english, I'm french, maybe it's not the correct name, it's a roller that feels the difference of thickness between the rollfilm's backpaper alone and the backpaper + film, so it can automaticaly stop at the first photo, then the automatic counter can count the next photos.
Longleef, could you make a larger view of the camera ? I don't think It's a Rolleicord because I believe Rolleicord have a knob for film advance instead of the crank.
Longleef, could you make a larger view of the camera ? I don't think It's a Rolleicord because I believe Rolleicord have a knob for film advance instead of the crank.
Jerevan
Recycled User
Longleef,
as has been said earlier, it is a Rolleiflex Automat (designation K4A) made between 1951 and 54. Judging from the serial number you gave, it is from the earlier part of the production run. A greatt camera!
Here's a short introduction on how to load film and use the camera: http://www.butkus.org/chinon/rollei/rolleiflex_automat/rolleiflex_automat.htm
Phantomas,
the photos are looking good! Inspiring stuff. I need to put a roll through mine...
as has been said earlier, it is a Rolleiflex Automat (designation K4A) made between 1951 and 54. Judging from the serial number you gave, it is from the earlier part of the production run. A greatt camera!
Here's a short introduction on how to load film and use the camera: http://www.butkus.org/chinon/rollei/rolleiflex_automat/rolleiflex_automat.htm
Phantomas,
the photos are looking good! Inspiring stuff. I need to put a roll through mine...
longleef
Newbie
Thanks for the info!!!!!
Mudman
Well-known
Congrats! I have its younger brother, the k4b, with a zeiss tessar f3.5. Great camera.
robklurfield
eclipse
I am waiting for my first one to arrive. A IV A Rolleicord. What film should I put through it first? Any suggestions?
Phantomas
Well-known
B&W!
Seriously though, not sure. What's your favorite? I'll post some results with Neopan and (old) TMax soon. Probably some classic emulsion will look nice. As you can see Rollei does photos with classic look (at least to me). Fomapan is some old emulsion, no?
Seriously though, not sure. What's your favorite? I'll post some results with Neopan and (old) TMax soon. Probably some classic emulsion will look nice. As you can see Rollei does photos with classic look (at least to me). Fomapan is some old emulsion, no?