Autocord vs Tessar Rolleiflex (now that they cost about the same)

[Dan Daniel]

xxxxxxxxxx

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Thank you for all the replies! Lots to think about...



I actually own a C220! It’s what I ended up replacing my Rolleiflex with, and while I do like it and love the results I get, it’s just too cumbersome to lug around sometimes, and I miss having a compact fixed lens medium format camera I can throw in a tote. My budget and love for WLFs means another TLR (considered folders, and I can’t afford a Fuji rangefinder).

It sounds like the lenses are much of a muchness. So it comes down to handling and reliability. I’ve already ordered a new brightscreen from Rick Oleson in anticipation (the same screen fits the Automat/Autocord/Rolleicord). It sounds like most people prefer the handling of the Autocord.

I just can’t get over the Rollei name, it’s like being able to buy a Leica for the same price as a Japanese rangefinder and choosing the Japanese version. Which I know is really silly. Is there any rationality to that? I assume the Autocord will keep kicking for years if I treat it well, same as a Rolleiflex/cord. And is the handling of the rolleicord really that bad? I only have my old Rolleiflex and C220 to go on.

The Rolleicords are a delight to use, Madeleine. Particularly the V, it's laid out the best and has a self timer, a useful feature at times.

Something to bear in mind about this forum's members and photographers, in general, is that some are very inflexible about the control arrangement of the cameras they use, and others, not so much. If you believe some of the hype on the internet, many spectacularly good cameras, are virtually unusable—Contax II, Alpa 4–8 series, Exakta Varex, Voigtländer Prominent—all, ergonomic nightmares, ostensibly, nigh on impossible to photograph with. I own and use all these and they're some of my favourite cameras with superlative lenses. I have no superhuman abilities or hands with six fingers. But I do have an open mind, and a modicum of patience.

Given you can support the Rolleicord V in your left palm, while the right hand can do most of the work—as opposed to tossing a Rolleiflex from side to side in between focusing and winding on—you can make a case that it handles more efficiently. Apart from supporting the camera under your palm the left hand only has to release the shutter lever. You can get a button release if that bothers you, it's never worried me.

Now that the borders have opened if you want to take a trip to Tassie I'll lend you a V: I have a schmicko one sitting here (not for sale, sorry, I love it).

*These subtle, or even not so subtle, ergonomic differences between different models, are all relative. I just got a Leica IIIf last month. Is its bottom loading film wind as easy to load, as a Contax? No. But it's no more a nightmare than focusing a Contax.*

Get a Rollei, they're wonderful, and in your heart you know you want one. If it gives you any grief, Chris Sherlock can sort it. If he's too busy, I'll do it. 😉
Cheers
Brett

 

[randy stewart]

Cords v. inolta

Cords v. inolta

It's unlikely you would see any difference in lens quality between the Tessar-type lenses. Handling and ergonomics might be more important. I've had the T, various Rolleicords, and an Autocord. The Autocord was my favourite (the lens focus lever works amazingly well)- though I quite liked the Rolleicords. The Rolleicords seem very compact and well made. Always wanted a Diacord but never found one...

Years ago I assembled and made a nerdy tests of optics of various TLRs, using the old Modern Photography lens test kit. The Autocord did test out a bit better overall than the Tessar in a Rollei MX and in an Ikoflex, but the differences were so modest that no one would see a difference in photo circumstances. I also tested my Diacord, which followed that group with a modest reduction in resolution, but still very good. The Yashicamat 124G, newly acquired by a friend in NOS condition, was an optical disaster by comparison. (For this purpose, "disaster" is defined as half the resolution of the Autocord.)

I would choose from this group based on how well you adapt to the features and controls of a particular model, in which case the Autocord seems IMO to offer the best balance.

 

[benlees]

Years ago I assembled and made a nerdy tests of optics of various TLRs, using the old Modern Photography lens test kit. The Autocord did test out a bit better overall than the Tessar in a Rollei MX and in an Ikoflex, but the differences were so modest that no one would see a difference in photo circumstances. I also tested my Diacord, which followed that group with a modest reduction in resolution, but still very good. The Yashicamat 124G, newly acquired by a friend in NOS condition, was an optical disaster by comparison. (For this purpose, "disaster" is defined as half the resolution of the Autocord.)

I would choose from this group based on how well you adapt to the features and controls of a particular model, in which case the Autocord seems IMO to offer the best balance.

I forgot I also had a 124- which is strange because it was my first TLR- and my experience matches yours. The lens was mediocre: any kind of back light was to be avoided. It may have had some slight amount of haze. The 124 also felt a bit cheap compared to other marques. I also thought the Autocord was the best performer of my troupe but will concede that may have been biased by its superior handling!

 

[retinax]

Hmmm... I have not seen any wear in the Autocord helical system and I've been inside dozens. I'd consider the helical basically bombproof. So much material, so many thick precisely cut threads. I've seen loose screws in the system leading to wobble, but very rarely.

I've only seen the one and it is a heavily used one, so I have an outlier. I thought it would be more common as the lens board is a lever - the helical is rather small and the lens board rather large - that magnifies slop in the focusing helical and perhaps could also contribute to wear in the helical in the first place.

(Pure annoying opinion ahead): The focus mechanism on the Ikoflex TLRs is a pathetic joke. I feel bad for the engineers who had to release such a thing as they tried to avoid Rollei's patents.

You mean the early ones with the lever, yes?

 

[Robert Lai]

I have several Rolleiflexes, all fully serviced: 3.5 F, 2.8 F, and a Tele-Rolleiflex.

I have a Minolta Autocord with the Optiper MXV shutter. The seller of this one had tried to overhaul it himself, with the result that focus was off. I had Karl Bryan collimate this camera for proper focus.

Then, there are the Mamiyaflex C2, C220 and C330F. The interchangeable lenses (and the cameras themselves) have been serviced recently.

Out of all of these, the Minolta Autocord has the easiest handling. It looks cute and tidy. People don't view it as a threat of any kind. It looks quirky and old fashioned. The Minolta lens is quite contrasty and it has high resolution. I don't think that it really suffers in comparison to the Planar 3.5F or 2.8 F. So, the Minolta is the one that usually goes out with me if I'm shooting medium format. It is usually accompanied by a bulb flash unit to complete that old fashioned ambiance.

 

[astrosecret]

Given you can support the Rolleicord V in your left palm, while the right hand can do most of the work—as opposed to tossing a Rolleiflex from side to side in between focusing and winding on—you can make a case that it handles more efficiently. Apart from supporting the camera under your palm the left hand only has to release the shutter lever. You can get a button release if that bothers you, it's never worried me.

totally agree. have used virtually every rollei and the cord v is my favorite handling. i can often use it with a release button makes it even better. the xenar renders color film better than my 3rd gen tessar and every planar i’ve used. is equal in quality to the xenotar to my eye but everyone has tested the latter as sharper. imo the schneider glass is superior and the cord handling is the best of the bunch.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I've only seen the one and it is a heavily used one, so I have an outlier. I thought it would be more common as the lens board is a lever - the helical is rather small and the lens board rather large - that magnifies slop in the focusing helical and perhaps could also contribute to wear in the helical in the first place.

You mean the early ones with the lever, yes?

The helical may be small but not smaller than, say, a Canon or Jupiter or Leitz helical of the same period. Here's a photo of the three parts. The inner brass helical is about 1.5mm thick in its side walls and over 2mm where the lens board attaches. The aluminum part is the outer helical to which the focus lever is attached. The flat flange captures the outer helical. The two brass parts are upside down in relation to the aluminum piece. The threads are precise and plentiful. The capture flange and the pocket in the body casting where the helical is captured are both very precise, and the focus lever assembly provides another level of capture on the top edge.

That thing ain't going anywhere, and I doubt there is enough time in one life for anyone to wear down those threads.

And I meant the knob focus Ikoflexes. Joke of a design. Small axle, cams captured by mickey mouse followers, etc. I spit on it!!! 🙄

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51166987244_e06edcd34f_b.jpg


OK, I've forgotten how to embed photos in 199s web sites, so go to the link above to see the quick snap.

 

[madeleineostoja]

totally agree. have used virtually every rollei and the cord v is my favorite handling. i can often use it with a release button makes it even better. the xenar renders color film better than my 3rd gen tessar and every planar i’ve used. is equal in quality to the xenotar to my eye but everyone has tested the latter as sharper. imo the schneider glass is superior and the cord handling is the best of the bunch.

This is really promising then! The Rolleicords are a lot cheaper than the Autocords for me, purely because there’s a few available locally, whereas I’d be buying an autocord from Japan (with shipping and 15% import tax). So maybe the V is the one for me after all.

I don’t mind the knob advance vs crank at all (my C220 has a fold out crank and I only ever use it when winding on a new roll), and manually cocking the shutter is annoying but again I’m used to it with my C220. Sounds like the Autocord is still a little sharper than the Xenar, but not enough to make a practical difference that couldn’t just be recovered in post if needed?

Thanks again for all the advice! This form is so helpful 🙂

 

[madeleineostoja]

Also does anyone know which models of the Rolleicord didn’t have the EV interlocked shutter/aperture controls? That’s a pet peeve of mine and I disable it whenever I can on my 50s era cameras (it made my Konica IIIA so frustrating to use until I got it disabled, now it’s my favourite 35mm camera).

I tried googling but couldn’t find any concrete info on it. I’m particularly interested in the IV, there’s one going really cheaply on my local classifieds site (~$230 usd), though the seller doesn’t seem to know much about its condition so it’s a bit of a risk.

 

[astrosecret]

remember V does not have interchangeable screen. i put an oleson in mine and it didnt require any shimming. i got very lucky with an excellent copy for $200. vb likely even better considering its newer and you can easily change focus screens, but the v i got was in the best condition make sure the lens board is properly aligned with the body (visually as well as infinity focus)

 

[DownUnder]

Also does anyone know which models of the Rolleicord didn’t have the EV interlocked shutter/aperture controls? That’s a pet peeve of mine and I disable it whenever I can on my 50s era cameras (it made my Konica IIIA so frustrating to use until I got it disabled, now it’s my favourite 35mm camera).

I tried googling but couldn’t find any concrete info on it. I’m particularly interested in the IV, there’s one going really cheaply on my local classifieds site (~$230 usd), though the seller doesn’t seem to know much about its condition so it’s a bit of a risk.

When sellers say "I don't know anything about..." it usually means they are clueless or covering up something. Or both.

US$230 is a bargain price for a 'cord, of course depending on its condition. Here in Australia they go for about 75% of the price of a Rolleiflex of the same vintage (Ebay prices, so highly inflated altho' the buyers seem to line up to pay them).

I cannot comment on which Rolleicords do not have the locking EVS system so I will leave this to others.

I use my Vb with a hand grip I bought in the '80s, which has an inbuilt cable release. The left-right lever to cock the camera shutter is annoying and slows down my shooting (which isn't a bad thing), but I am now used to it.

Do keep in mind however, that older Rolleicords while a simpler camera than the equivalent Rolleiflexes, do break down and when they go kaput the cost of repairing them is as high as for the more 'upmarket' models.

The IV range of 'cords also lacks the facility to use 16 and 24 exposure kits. AFAIK, only the Va and Vb range can do this.

So it may be best for you to wait until a good Vb comes along and cough up the extra money for it.

 

[Dan Daniel]

xxxxxxxxxx

 

[Dan Daniel]

xxxxxxxxxx

 

[madeleineostoja]

Thank you! It sounds like the IV would be the best model for me — no EV interlock, and focusing on the right side which I prefer (my C220 has wheels on both sides and I don’t think I’ve ever reached for the left one). I’m not fussed about 16/24 exposure kits or removable viewfinders.

 

[CMur12]

It sounds like you have made a good choice. A Rolleicord with an upgraded focusing screen and that nice Schneider Xenar lens should serve you well.

If you can find it, get a camera that includes the little plunger/button that screws into the cable release port, next to the shutter cocking lever. That plunger is the best shutter release.

I normally shoot my TLRs on a tripod and the Mamiya is well suited to such use. If I were carrying the camera around my neck, I, like you, would choose a lighter TLR.

Good luck in your search!

- Murray

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Thank you! It sounds like the IV would be the best model for me — no EV interlock, and focusing on the right side which I prefer (my C220 has wheels on both sides and I don’t think I’ve ever reached for the left one). I’m not fussed about 16/24 exposure kits or removable viewfinders.

Madeleine, one of the reasons I specifically suggested the Rolleicord V is because it was the last model before Franke & Heidecke moved the focus knob to the left in the Va. It has a self timer; if you use a tripod, at all, that's a good thing. A cable does the job as well obviously. But if you opt for the accessory release plunger you can't use a cable without removing it first. Sadly I lost my plunger button doing exactly this years ago. Should have been more careful. Self timers are really useful in my view. The V was the first model to feature one.

It does have an EV interlock true. Like you, I'm not a particular fan of that idea either. But it's the best one I've ever used (short of any that can be completely disengaged, Eg Rolleiflex 2.8D). You actually get the best of both worlds the way it is implemented. Yes, shutter and aperture are coupled together. But it is a "gentle" or soft, coupling. Once you have set exposure it's coupled. But if you wish to change the Exposure Value, all you need to do is hold a finger to each lever and gently slide them. It's not a rigid coupling and easily yields.

With the Va and VB EV coupling was retained. But the rings beneath the front cover were altered. The coupling became a ratchet type. To disengage shutter and aperture you have to depress the shutter lever in towards the lens to release the aperture lever. I used a lovely Va a lot, and it was a great camera. But after the seamless couple/uncouple of the V implementation it was not as convenient to set quickly.

On the other hand the Va and Vb give you the ability to shoot image sizes other than 35mm and 6x6. If 16 on 120 is really appealing, for instance, it might sway you to the later Va. From memory there was a less common 24-on counter too.

I believe I still have a Rolleicord II here, as well as the V, and my 2.8D and Tele project. Had Va and Vb, and loved them all. It's hard to go wrong, really. I've previously mentioned how too much can be made of pros and cons of different cameras, this is true. But the way everything comes together when you use it, I loved the V. If you can live without a timer, and multiple exposure capability, a IV would be fine as well, it is essentially a V without those features—but don't let the EV system of the V put you off. Instead of getting in the way all the time, it gets out of the way simply, when you need it to. The V is an underrated Rollei (not by me).

These cameras have few problems with their shutters that cannot be readily sorted with servicing. And they are, essentially, very reliable. But if they have been used roughly for an extended period, they can have abnormal wear in their film advance system leading to haphazard or skipping frame spacing. As a result of wear in the counter and the ratchet that locks the wind gear, particularly. Depending on how bad this wear is sometimes it can be adjusted, ratchet tip carefully filed back to the correct profile and gears re-profiled if they're not stripped out. But if one has been badly abused parts might be needed. So do not be worried about an example with a sticky shutter if the price is fair for condition. This is purely age-related. The things to critically examine are issues such as: the fit of back to body and of lens board to body, finder condition (does the finder erect well, is it out of plumb, does it jam opening or closing, missing parts etc). Is the focus smooth and even? Lay the camera on its back. Bend down to get your eye level. Does the focus rock left to right or top to bottom? Is it even or does it stick as you rotate the knob?

The best candidates have a back and hood that are plumb and tight shut lines. Pay particular attention to the bottom corners of the back that curve into the body. If there's a gap the back was bent and straightened. Such backs can work fine but it's indicative of how a camera has been treated. Price should reflect the fit of an examples parts.

The other deal breaker is a film wind that has a skipping ratchet (you can feel it trying to catch but it skips gears teeth). Frames that don't make the knob stop. Exposure lockout that is inconsistent. You should not be able to wind on without first cocking and firing the shutter.

You can run a scrap film through a Cord to test the wind. But unlike an Automat Rolleiflex, an empty spool with a couple of turns of tape around it will usually be enough to contact the film sensor and run the film advance through its paces.

I would personally suggest passing on a Rolleicord with malfunctioning film wind unless you get return privileges. It's very possible cleaning and lubrication of the advance might see one working OK again. But if the aforementioned advance parts have been abused badly enough it may not be possible to restore as-new operation without replacement parts, and, short of cannibalising them out of another example with trashed lenses, for instance, these are not very easy to get. So if the wind system is erratic either ensure you can return/exchange or pay very little for one. It's a solid bargaining point!

It is easy to take the excess play out of the strut rails of a Cord. Replacement fibre glide pad material is available from Rollei specialists (I have a bit). Lens boards can be shimmed back to true. It takes time to get that well within factory spec (they advise 0.05mm parallelism, I try to get to half that, if I can). But it means you need to get somebody to sort that. Pay accordingly. Dodgy film wind, however, unless an example is ridiculously cheap, is a deal breaker.

So, to sum up:

• Parts fit to body;
• Film wind condition;
• Focusing smooth and even without play.

If you do a search on the topic of Rollei inspection and repair, members with some great skill sets such as Dan (Daniel) have written about how to inspect a TLR, what goes wrong, how to fix and so on. There's quite a trove of information on this site on the topic. If you find a decent prospect, feel free to ask questions here; we'll try to help.
Cheers,
Brett

 

[raid]

Both cameras are excellent if the lenses are clean and the mechanical parts function as they should. I have an Automat in addition to a Rolleiflex 2.8D and a Tele Rolleiflex. I also added at one stage a Rolleiflex 3.5F. All have Zeiss lenses. Then I got curious about the Schneider lens, so I got a 2.8C with a Xenotar. This camera needs a thorough CLA as the aperture ring can barely be turned.

These are wonderful cameras. The key is to use them.

 

[KoNickon]

Among the TLRs that have been discussed in this thread, I think it's fair to say the lenses are all very similar in performance, assuming we're talking about Tessar-type designs -- and notwithstanding one of the comments above, I think the 4-element Yashinons of the Yashicas are right up there too.

Really what it comes down to, assuming the cameras are mechanically sound and the optics are in good shape, is the ergonomic factor.

I love the Autocord but I find myself having to grope for the focus lever, way down there below the lensboard. And while lever wind/cocking is great, I find that where the wind motion starts at 10:00, it's not as easy to use as cameras like the Rolleiflexes and Yashicamats, where the crank rest position is at 2:00. (I'm also not crazy about the hinged crank tip; I find it slips out of my fingers when I start to wind the crank.) So the Autocord loses points for me there -- though I am sure others don't even notice this.

You need to think about things like the location of the shutter release. Most TLRs have it on the lower right of the lens board (as you hold the camera). The Rolleicords, unusually, have a lever on the bottom of the lens board that you push to your right to charge the shutter, and then pull gently back to the left to trip the shutter. It's easy to get used to, but it's well-nigh unique, and you may not like it.

One terrific camera that hasn't been mentioned here, the Kalloflex, has the shutter release on the left, and the focus knob and wind crank are coaxial, on the right. Works really well. That setup is different from every other TLR I've used.

The location of the focus knob (for cameras other than the Autocord, or the Meopta Flexaret, or Ricoh Diacord) may be on the right side of the camera or the left. Which side feels better to you? Do you prefer winding film by means of a knob (like the Rolleicords) or by using a lever? The Diacord has maybe the best focusing of all -- diagonally opposed levers on either side of the lens mount, like a see-saw. Very nice in use.

Someone mentioned multiple exposure capability -- the inverse of that is more important to me, namely, making sure you can't inadvertently make a double exposure. The Rolleicords and Autocords have that capability, but other cameras I like a lot, such as the Diacord and Yashica D, do not.

How about setting shutter speed and aperture? The Rolleiflexes (copied by the Yashicamats) have the two small wheels between the lenses. If these are stiff, like when they are coupled by means of an exposure value system, they can be a PITA to change. (The Yashicamats are very easy to turn compared to the Rolleis, in my experience.) Levers on either side of the taking lens, as with the Autocord, Rolleicord, Diacord and Rolleiflex T, are often easier to use. Again, a matter of personal preference, and you can get used to either.

So -- if you get a chance to handle several of these cameras, you should. You may find some of them just feel better in your hands.

 

[campy]

I bought an Autocord with a frozen focus lever cheap and watched a video on how to fix it and after I took some test shots I was blown away how sharp and contrasty the lenses are. I have since bought 2 more with stuck levers and have fixed those. I also have a 2.8E with a Planar lens that's not as sharp as the Autocord but produces pleasing images of people.