kknox
kknox
I am thinking about a Rollei 3.5e, who has one & do you like it? I have a Yashica 124G & always wanted a Rollei. What should I expect to pay. Thanks in advance.
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
I recently upgraded from a 124G to a 3.5G because the lens on the Yasica was in poor condition.
I like it. The main differences I found are that it's heavier, the winding lever is quieter and it doesn't open itself an expose the film. You can feel the quality.
Using the lightmeter is a little more complicated than the Yash and not as intuitive. if you want a simple line up the needles system then the 3.5F is probably a better choice. In time I may go for the 2.8F as the meter is simpler and the screen the brightest of the lot. However it's quite a bit more costly.
All in all I'm pretty happy, though I have only run about three films through is so far.
I paid £499 for mine from a shop in the UK.
I like it. The main differences I found are that it's heavier, the winding lever is quieter and it doesn't open itself an expose the film. You can feel the quality.
Using the lightmeter is a little more complicated than the Yash and not as intuitive. if you want a simple line up the needles system then the 3.5F is probably a better choice. In time I may go for the 2.8F as the meter is simpler and the screen the brightest of the lot. However it's quite a bit more costly.
All in all I'm pretty happy, though I have only run about three films through is so far.
I paid £499 for mine from a shop in the UK.
Mablo
Well-known
I've had a selection of Bay-1 TLR cameras including Yashicas, a Ricoh Diacord, a Rolleicord V and a Minolta Autocord. Yesterday I received a Rolleiflex 3.5F which is quite similar to 3.5E. My first impression is that the camera just oozes technical quality. It's much heavier than any of the 'cords I've had. Btw. I bought a Rolleiflex buyer's guide from Harry Fleenor's web site for a tenner. I can recommend that. Harry even sent me an email afterwards explaining his thoughts about the current price level and what he thinks is a recommended buy at the moment.
FrankS
Registered User
It's the best camera I own.
back alley
IMAGES
why is this in the image processing forum?
andredossantos
Well-known
I have a 3.5E model that is without a meter. I would recommend finding one of these because the meters are unreliable and IMO its not worth paying a premium and then having the meter break down.
That being said, a E model is similar to an F (one difference is non interchangeable finders) but sell for less money. Go for it, they are excellent cameras. My Rollei is by far the favorite camera I own.
That being said, a E model is similar to an F (one difference is non interchangeable finders) but sell for less money. Go for it, they are excellent cameras. My Rollei is by far the favorite camera I own.
kknox
kknox
Sorry back alley. I thought I put it under camera hardware. My mistake.
Steve M.
Veteran
An E-3 w/ Planar is capable of taking some of the best photos in photography. The challenge is living up to the camera's potential.
maddoc
... likes film again.
That and getting the camera proper serviced. My went two times to Harry Fleenor until it was fixed. Using a Rolleiflex 3.5E with Planar lens is rewarding.
Field
Well-known
Expect to pay? A lot of money that is what... Prices have gone up $400-600 recently.
VictorM.
Well-known
A 3.5E is just about my favourite camera. Although sometimes I wish I hadn't sold my MX-EVS...
andredossantos
Well-known
Same here. My first Rollei was a MX-EVS and I definitely miss it even though my 3.5E is an upgrade.
PMCC
Late adopter.
Missing MX-EVS?
Missing MX-EVS?
For ages I've been considering whether it's worth it to 'upgrade' from the MX-EVS to a model with a 3.5 Planar or Xenotar. Could you each elaborate a bit on why you are missing the MX-EVS? As always, agonizing a bit on whether to restrain myself or let the GAS rip and take an advance on birthday and Chrismas.
Missing MX-EVS?
For ages I've been considering whether it's worth it to 'upgrade' from the MX-EVS to a model with a 3.5 Planar or Xenotar. Could you each elaborate a bit on why you are missing the MX-EVS? As always, agonizing a bit on whether to restrain myself or let the GAS rip and take an advance on birthday and Chrismas.
Krosya
Konicaze
I had one, just sold it, actually a few weeks back. Mine had well working meter and a Planar lens. Very good camera that I didnt have time for. It sold for $500, so prices are not that crazy. I had Autocord, which I sold here recently as well and I think it's as good as Rollei. Lenses do have different look/rendering, but IMO Minolta is just as good and for my tatse handles better.
I still have a couple of TLRs (gotta have at least one, you know) - but since TLRs are not my most used cameras I kept ones that are more unusual over ones that are workhorses.
I still have a couple of TLRs (gotta have at least one, you know) - but since TLRs are not my most used cameras I kept ones that are more unusual over ones that are workhorses.
hans voralberg
Veteran
I had a 3.5E and replaced the stock screen with Rick Oleson's one. Best thing I've ever done to it, beside that a great camera.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
I recently had my 3.5E serviced by Krikor Maralian and its picture quality is outstanding. He couldn't repair the meter (no cells available). Mine has the Planar, but I also have a 3.5F with the Xenotar and it's a tossup which lens is better.
I like the 3.5 Rolleis overall better than the 2.8s, since they're lighter in weight. Only drawback might be that Bayonet II accessories are harder to come by than either Bay I or Bay III.
I don't have much of an idea about the pricing of these cameras currently, but I suggest you factor in a CLA (Krikor is terrific, and really fast -- only a few days every time I've used his services). Expect to pay $250 or so.
I like the 3.5 Rolleis overall better than the 2.8s, since they're lighter in weight. Only drawback might be that Bayonet II accessories are harder to come by than either Bay I or Bay III.
I don't have much of an idea about the pricing of these cameras currently, but I suggest you factor in a CLA (Krikor is terrific, and really fast -- only a few days every time I've used his services). Expect to pay $250 or so.
bigeye
Well-known
A friend came to me with a very nice one. "My neighbor gave me this. It was her husband's." Fantastic camera.
.
.
thompsonks
Well-known
Hi PMCC,
The practical difference between MX-EVS & 3.5E-F depends mostly on the lenses, & then on what you shoot. I've checked out the resolution on mine, & they differ at wider apertures but are the same by f8. My 3.5 Planar resolves almost as well wide open as at middle apertures (repair person said it was one of the sharpest he'd measured). MX-EVS starts out softer but catches up at f8. Within the accuracies of measurement, they're the same at f8 - 11, & beyond that you get diffraction effects.
So if you mostly shoot stopped down a bit, then you probably wouldn't notice an IQ difference. But if you want to do candid-camera work like the classic Rollei shooters of the 50s & 60s, you'd notice a difference at wide apertures.
As to handling, fondling, & appearance, IMO no Rollei embodies 'Bauhaus perfection' better than your Automat.
Kirk
The practical difference between MX-EVS & 3.5E-F depends mostly on the lenses, & then on what you shoot. I've checked out the resolution on mine, & they differ at wider apertures but are the same by f8. My 3.5 Planar resolves almost as well wide open as at middle apertures (repair person said it was one of the sharpest he'd measured). MX-EVS starts out softer but catches up at f8. Within the accuracies of measurement, they're the same at f8 - 11, & beyond that you get diffraction effects.
So if you mostly shoot stopped down a bit, then you probably wouldn't notice an IQ difference. But if you want to do candid-camera work like the classic Rollei shooters of the 50s & 60s, you'd notice a difference at wide apertures.
As to handling, fondling, & appearance, IMO no Rollei embodies 'Bauhaus perfection' better than your Automat.
Kirk
Last edited:
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
The E1 did not have interchangeable viewfinders. From E2 on, they did.
PMCC
Late adopter.
Kirk - Thanks for the helpful input. I'm definitely attached to my MX-EVS, but also have my eye on a 3.5 E or F -- precisely for the vaunted wide aperture IQ characteristics of the Planar and Xenotar lenses. But now that you've pointed out that it's the apotheosis of form-follows-function articulated design, I'm more devoted than ever to my sleek "Bauhaus" Automat.
cheers
Peter.