Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > TLR Forum - Twin Lens Reflex

TLR Forum - Twin Lens Reflex another alternative to the dreaded SLR way of seeing, this forum for all format TLR cameras

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Serious Rollieflex help needed here.....
Old 12-19-2015   #1
jmpgino
Registered User
 
jmpgino is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ga U.S.A now, England before.
Posts: 342
Serious Rollieflex help needed here.....

Right, Suppose i have these two cameras being offered to me, both in the condition I am posting.
So which one is my best bet for Black and White photography only and best value.

2.8 D PLANAR (BAY III) W/ROLLEIKIN COUNTER; W/"E" EVS DIAL EX $950

3.5 MX XENAR (BAY I) EX $415


Cheers for knowledgeable advice in advance.

James.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #2
Gerry M
Gerry
 
Gerry M is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Medford, Oregon, U. S.
Posts: 908
I'm sure the most will jump on the Planar. For b&w and the $$ difference, the MX/Xenar does a super job.
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #3
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 51
Posts: 6,258
If you want a 2.8 model than nothing else will do.
The D is my favorite... other will agree
That price is honestly a bit rich unless it's had recent service and possibly a new Screen installed.

The Xenar lens is a nice model as well. A bit lighter in weight.

Edit.
Looking at prices quickly both seem a bit on the rich side.
__________________
Andy

Last edited by f16sunshine : 12-19-2015 at 14:05. Reason: edit
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #4
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 1,875
The Xenar is a great lens. $415 seems a bit steep for a MX. Have either been CLA'd?
$950 is on the high end for a 2.8D, especially if it hasn't been serviced. It's not an unresonable price, just on the high end.
Do either have accessories?
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #5
NY_Dan
Registered User
 
NY_Dan's Avatar
 
NY_Dan is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: New York City area
Posts: 1,205
As a dedicated Rolleiflex shooter, my preference is for a 2.8f with a bright screen or a 3.5f. I use f/2.8 pretty often and wouldn't want to be without it. I believe that the f models are newer and will have fewer issues. And being able to easily remove the finder and swap with other is a huge bonus. If you're contemplating spending 950, then why not go to 1250 and get a nice 2.8f?

And check out my book to see how well the f models have served me. Good luck.
__________________
Never Seeing Nothing, published by inkBooks.
Schmendrick, published by PoliwagBooks.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #6
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 65
Posts: 3,112
My 3.5 MX uses a Tessar. The Xenar is so similar as to be no real difference. Great camera, great images, much easier for me to pack on a regular basis.

However, I do not like the stock screen. If yours still has that screen then you will definitely want to replace it.

The 2.8D is heavier but it will visibly snap in and out of focus far more visibly. I don't think that lens will give you any advantage over the 3.5 Xenar for B&W.

I paid a tad over $400 for my 3.5 but it had been overhauled by Mr. Fleenor so this should be in your mind.
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

It is almost as good as a fast horse!
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #7
jmpgino
Registered User
 
jmpgino is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ga U.S.A now, England before.
Posts: 342
They arrive Tuesday, was in Paris three months ago and found a store with a bunch in the window, however they were closed for the day and we were leaving the next morning early.
Have been a Hasselblad boy for thirty five years, want to see if one of these would be a fun addition. Have way more stuff than I need.
No stuff with them, no service either, not even sure if one would be a decent idea. I have three hasselblads and a bunch of glass.
Just fancy a TLR....JOHN WAYNE SAID " YOU CAN NOT RIDE TWO HORSES WITH ONE ASS "
No glass addition, no extra backs. So many models during their production period.......and Hasselblad produced less than a dozen models and none rubbish. I am just maybe wasting my time on a Rolleiflex with the limited system and it's enormous quantity of models. Rather like the constant re inventing of a wheel, if one was any good, why so many changes every few years.
Anyhow I will take a look at them and decide if my thoughts are justified.
Thanks for the info though chaps.......
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #8
Greyscale
Registered User
 
Greyscale's Avatar
 
Greyscale is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Dodge Iowa
Age: 59
Posts: 4,617
$415 might be a good price for an MX if it is in exceptional condition, but I think that you can do much better. I paid not much more than that recently for a very nice 3.5f, and much, much less for an excellent MX.

$950 is not far out of line for an excellent 2.8D. But unless you really believe that extra stop will make all the difference, I would be patient and look for a good deal on a 3.5 Planar or Xenotar, or on an exceptional, recently serviced Tessar or Xenotar MX-EVS. You could probably find a very nice user K4/50 for $200 or so if you can live without the PC sync.

So, to answer your original question, at thoses prices, neither camera could really be said to be a bargain.
__________________
my flickr

My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #9
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,591
Both cameras are overpriced unless each has been very recently totally overhauled and adjusted professionally and all optics are very clean. I like my 2,8D a lot. It is a user's camera.
__________________
- Raid

________________


http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #10
Sarcophilus Harrisii
Brett Rogers
 
Sarcophilus Harrisii is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpgino View Post
They arrive Tuesday, was in Paris three months ago and found a store with a bunch in the window, however they were closed for the day and we were leaving the next morning early.
Have been a Hasselblad boy for thirty five years, want to see if one of these would be a fun addition. Have way more stuff than I need.
No stuff with them, no service either, not even sure if one would be a decent idea. I have three hasselblads and a bunch of glass.
Just fancy a TLR....JOHN WAYNE SAID " YOU CAN NOT RIDE TWO HORSES WITH ONE ASS "
No glass addition, no extra backs. So many models during their production period.......and Hasselblad produced less than a dozen models and none rubbish. I am just maybe wasting my time on a Rolleiflex with the limited system and it's enormous quantity of models. Rather like the constant re inventing of a wheel, if one was any good, why so many changes every few years.
Anyhow I will take a look at them and decide if my thoughts are justified.
Thanks for the info though chaps.......
Hasselblad and Rollei have both made some of the finest, if not the finest, medium format cameras ever available. Image quality they are able to provide is beyond reproach. But although their abilities, naturally, cross over to a great extent, there are, nevertheless, certain things each type of camera can do better than the other. If you're not seeking to acquire a Rollei just because you are drawn to one (and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that) then, first, you need to think about why you're considering one and what sort of photography you might do with it, before you can work out whether or not you need one.
Cheers
Brett
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #11
Bisakok
Registered User
 
Bisakok is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 88
What Brett said.
Wasting your time on a Rolleiflex because of its limited system? You may find it liberating.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #12
jmpgino
Registered User
 
jmpgino is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ga U.S.A now, England before.
Posts: 342
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post
Hasselblad and Rollei have both made some of the finest, if not the finest, medium format cameras ever available. Image quality they are able to provide is beyond reproach. But although their abilities, naturally, cross over to a great extent, there are, nevertheless, certain things each type of camera can do better than the other. If you're not seeking to acquire a Rollei just because you are drawn to one (and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that) then, first, you need to think about why you're considering one and what sort of photography you might do with it, before you can work out whether or not you need one.
Cheers
Brett
Hello Brett, it is definitely more desire than need. In Hasselblad alone I have spent over$25,000 adding Leica and the waste of around $3,000 on Nikon rubbish. It is desire from reading about the system but I just keep thinking

"WHY SO MANY DIFFERENT BODIES, I CAN SEE THE GLASS CHANGES AND OPTIONS BUT EVERY YEAR OR SO THEY BROUGHT OUT ANOTHER MODEL"

It is as though the engineers were saying........

OH THIS MIGHT HAVE BEEN A GOOD THING WE COULD HAVE PUT IN IT, AND THEN ANOTHER ENGINEER SAID " BRILLIANT IDEA, WE WILL CALL THAT THE MXMSMZ MODEL, WHAT GLASS AND HOW MANY MODELS CAN WE ADD INTO THE LONG LINE WE ALREADY HAVE..........

I know this is rather sarcastic but after all it is just a box with glass, just like a Hasselblad but both are made better than anything else in its time.

I just wanted something of quality in my hands that had been made just before I was born....1957.........I have my fathers BEAUTIFUL SUPER IKONTA 6x9 OPTON glass and a folder. I serviced it after his death a few years ago, made 1953, it is bloody incredible, black and white prints of superb quality.

Wife wanted a bigger Airstream and we needed a Mercedes Bluetec Diesel for pulling it...........this purchase is peanuts but I just wanted an old Rolleiflex Cracker Jack.........





ADDEDhttp://www.rolleirepairs.com/rollei4sale.htm
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #13
KM-25
Registered User
 
KM-25's Avatar
 
KM-25 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,681
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpgino View Post
Hello Brett, it is definitely more desire than need. In Hasselblad alone I have spent over$25,000 adding Leica and the waste of around $3,000 on Nikon rubbish. It is desire from reading about the system but I just keep thinking

LOL, Nikon rubbish huh...I have used that system for my entire career and it is damn near peerless, not sure why you would call it "rubbish".

I have had my near mint condition 2.8D for almost a month and I happen to love it, shot a few frames of Mariah Carey having a candid conversation with Katie Couric today. I also sometimes ski with it in a small pack with my Leica M and a few lenses.

But...there is no way in heck it will ever replace or even better my use of the Hasselblad V system, just my preference. In the same small pack mentioned above, I put a 501CM, 60mm, 100mm lenses and two film backs and a digital back.

I know some on here are rather fanatical about their Rolleiflex cameras, it's not an undeserved distinction of fanfare. But for me, even though the lens ( 2.8 Planar ) is as sharp as anything I have ever seen, the Rolleiflex will always accompany another camera or system as a second camera, not a only camera. It's a damn nice camera though, I make great images with it and I am very glad I have the 2.8 version, a half a stop is a lot of light when it gets low.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #14
Greyscale
Registered User
 
Greyscale's Avatar
 
Greyscale is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Dodge Iowa
Age: 59
Posts: 4,617
A lot of the changes over the years to the Rolleiflex cameras were purely related to flash synchronization, as the technology for flash improved, improvements were made to the cameras to deal with it. Aside from coated lenses on the postwar models, the basic design of the Rolleiflex Automat changed very little from the first model until the last. And the post-Automat models reflected changes in lens design and on-camera metering, Hasselblad has followed a similar evolution.
__________________
my flickr

My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #15
jmpgino
Registered User
 
jmpgino is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ga U.S.A now, England before.
Posts: 342
Looks like I have fired up some of you chaps.......and that is good for us all.

So regarding Nikon, I have a 35TI, THAT EXPENSIVE PIECE OF CRAP BROKE DOWN NOT LONG AFTER WARRANTY AND NIKONS DOOR SHUT ON REPAIRING IT, ABOUT 6 ROLLS ONLY......THEN I HAVE A COOLPIX FROM AROUND 2002, THAT PLASTIC ANCOR CRAPPED OUT SHORTLY AFTER WARRANTY..........D70S MY LAST PIECE OF NIKON CRAP CRAPPED OUT AGAIN AFTER SURVIVING WARRANTY...........8000ED SCANNER NO LONGER SERVICED......

My two Rolexes are still serviced, as are fifteen Hasselblad items, eight Leica items, and all way older than the Nikon crap I have purchased. So you like it, it must be old and mechanical, from when they were quality.........

Never again will I put cash into NIKONS coffers
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #16
leicapixie
Registered User
 
leicapixie is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto.Canada
Posts: 1,600
I am stunned at comment "rubbish Nikon"!
My best time as a pro, using them Nikons.
In that case Hasselblad would not fare well with my experiences..
You have a huge selection of Hassie equipment, the Rollei would be silly.
I use a Rollei MX, Tessar , a fine but limited box.
It's fractionally lighter and way easier to load.(than Hasselblad).
I would buy with warranty and closer to home!

Rolex does NOT service older models.

Last edited by leicapixie : 12-19-2015 at 19:34. Reason: added a bit about Rolex.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #17
jmpgino
Registered User
 
jmpgino is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ga U.S.A now, England before.
Posts: 342
The Rolex comment was not a spelling error, my watches...........just like my hasselblads and your rollei stuff they, were built for quality and mercanical perfection......and all still serviceable.

Nikon is a cash cow, they are not long term quality serviced.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #18
farlymac
PF McFarland
 
farlymac's Avatar
 
farlymac is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Roanoke, VA
Posts: 6,206
Well, James, you will find the Rolleiflex to be a well built camera. And it will probably force you into a different mode of photography than you're used to. I've used several TLR brands over the years, and once I got my 'flex, I didn't have a desire for any other one. It just feels so natural to use. Yes, there is a wide variety of models, but then that makes it easier to get the one that fits what you will use it for. Even if the one you get doesn't fit your needs, at least you'll be closer to understanding what you want in a TLR, and can make a more informed decision the second time around.

PF
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #19
Sarcophilus Harrisii
Brett Rogers
 
Sarcophilus Harrisii is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpgino View Post
Hello Brett, it is definitely more desire than need. In Hasselblad alone I have spent over$25,000 adding Leica and the waste of around $3,000 on Nikon rubbish. It is desire from reading about the system but I just keep thinking

"WHY SO MANY DIFFERENT BODIES, I CAN SEE THE GLASS CHANGES AND OPTIONS BUT EVERY YEAR OR SO THEY BROUGHT OUT ANOTHER MODEL"

It is as though the engineers were saying........

OH THIS MIGHT HAVE BEEN A GOOD THING WE COULD HAVE PUT IN IT, AND THEN ANOTHER ENGINEER SAID " BRILLIANT IDEA, WE WILL CALL THAT THE MXMSMZ MODEL, WHAT GLASS AND HOW MANY MODELS CAN WE ADD INTO THE LONG LINE WE ALREADY HAVE..........

I know this is rather sarcastic but after all it is just a box with glass, just like a Hasselblad but both are made better than anything else in its time.

I just wanted something of quality in my hands that had been made just before I was born....1957.........I have my fathers BEAUTIFUL SUPER IKONTA 6x9 OPTON glass and a folder. I serviced it after his death a few years ago, made 1953, it is bloody incredible, black and white prints of superb quality.

Wife wanted a bigger Airstream and we needed a Mercedes Bluetec Diesel for pulling it...........this purchase is peanuts but I just wanted an old Rolleiflex Cracker Jack.........





ADDEDhttp://www.rolleirepairs.com/rollei4sale.htm
Well, as far as model changes and the like go, they were definitely evolutionary rather than change for change sake (although the use of EV coupling is perhaps debatable). Personally, I think that reflects an ongoing commitment to quality, by seeking continuously to improve their product.

As for lenses, there really weren't all that many different types used from the 1940s to the 1980s when production of the last classic F models ceased. There were a few different iterations of the Zeiss Tessar at various speeds in the early days, but for well over a decade the standard Rolleiflex lens was a 75mm f/3.5 Tessar and for the Rolleicords the Zeiss Triotar. The Rolleicords changed to a Schneider Xenar from the III onwards and stayed with that. The Rolleiflexes could have a 75mm f/3.5 Tessar or Xenar with the same spec for a while, they are essentially the same design. Apart from brief dalliances with an 80mm f/2.8 version of the Tessar, and the (post-war) Carl Zeiss Jena 80mm f/2.8 Biometar (for supply reasons I think) the Rolleiwerke then added the Schneider Xenotar and Zeiss Planar to the line up in their premium models (ultimately in both 80mm f/2.8 or 75mm f/3.5 versions) and stayed with those right until the end.

Apart from the special purpose Rollei Wide and Tele Rolleiflex models, which had their own Zeiss Distagon and Sonnar optics, no other lenses were used on a series production Rollei TLR not already mentioned (the 75mm f/3.5 Tessar was updated for the T series, which also scored a few Xenars near the very end, but again, these were not new lenses as such, rather well known and trustworthy optics from first quality manufacturers).

There's been much written about the pros and cons of the various Rollei models over the years (not least right here at RFF). Some things to mull over as to their relative importance include: weight; ability to interchange prisms or waist level finders; the 80mm v 75mm angle of view/maximum aperture; lens performance at larger apertures; lens coating/no lens coating; built in light meter/no light meter; 220 capability v 120 only. There's plenty of good, solid information available to assist. Don't neglect the Rolleicords, either: they're better than you might expect.
Cheers
Brett
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #20
Bisakok
Registered User
 
Bisakok is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 88
"after all it is just a box with glass, just like a Hasselblad"
Utter rubbish. The HassleVlad is just a box.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #21
KM-25
Registered User
 
KM-25's Avatar
 
KM-25 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,681
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpgino View Post
Looks like I have fired up some of you chaps.......and that is good for us all.

So regarding Nikon, I have a 35TI, THAT EXPENSIVE PIECE OF CRAP BROKE DOWN NOT LONG AFTER WARRANTY AND NIKONS DOOR SHUT ON REPAIRING IT, ABOUT 6 ROLLS ONLY......THEN I HAVE A COOLPIX FROM AROUND 2002, THAT PLASTIC ANCOR CRAPPED OUT SHORTLY AFTER WARRANTY..........D70S MY LAST PIECE OF NIKON CRAP CRAPPED OUT AGAIN AFTER SURVIVING WARRANTY...........8000ED SCANNER NO LONGER SERVICED......

My two Rolexes are still serviced, as are fifteen Hasselblad items, eight Leica items, and all way older than the Nikon crap I have purchased. So you like it, it must be old and mechanical, from when they were quality.........

Never again will I put cash into NIKONS coffers
Wow, the yelling above, thinking we are all "Chaps" that like to be fired up, if you say so. You want a Rolleiflex, get a Rolleiflex, it's a fine tool with a fine history and ability to make fine images.

Sorry you had a rough go of it with the Nikon gear, been using them since 1989 and while not totally faultless, they have been incredibly dependable. I did a fun advertising shoot at dusk last night, I brought my Leica M240 with a 35 1.4 FLE, Nikon D750 with a 20mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8 and had a blast.

I have all kinds of tools to convey my vision in all kinds of challenging situations but the Nikons and the Hasselblads are the mule teams of my arsenal. The rest, the Leicas, the Rolleiflex, Xpan and 4x5 kits are "special teams".

I take it that like most on here, photography is a hobby for you, so don't yell, stomp your feet and cause a fuss, just get a camera in your hands and get off of here and use it....yes?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2015   #22
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
I will confuse you a bit. I have several Rolleiflexes and there are subtle differences in what they do best.
Out of the 2.8 models, there are 4 sensible options in my opinion:
-2.8 C - the only 2.8 model with 10 aperture blades - gives you circular bokeh in OOF highlights at any aperture BUT it has a fixed WLF and is old
- 2.8E2 - the first 2.8 with interchangeable finder and easily swappable screen, cheaper than F or later models
- 2.8F - the last "all metal" 2.8 Rollei, and reputed to be the most classic, professional and reliable, particularly sought after are the "white face", latest cameras
Out of 3.5 models, I like the following:
- Old Standard with a 3.5 Triotar - almost a collection piece, but the triplet lens has it's own signature that can be desirable for certain portraits - low contrast and very prone to flare
- Automat from 1954 - probably the last 3.5 version with a 10 blade aperture, I have one with a Xenar which draws very nicely, esp. for portraiture, low contrast, quite a bit of flare
- 3.5 T - it is equipped with a somewhat refreshed version of the 3.5 Tessar, a reasonably bright and snappy screen and has interchangeable WLF and swappable screen. Flare reasonably controlled. Somewhat less sturdy construction. I have one in a good shape and it is a joy to use.
- 3.5 F - it has wonderfully sharp lenses, interchangeable WLF and swappable screen and is the last classic "all metal" Rollei version. Includes "white face" versions as above.

An important consideration is the interchangeable finder. I use both the original Rolleiflex pentaprism finder, which is somewhat heavy and almost forces you to use the pistol grip, thus making the whole package a bit clumsy to lug around, AND a host of Hasselblad finders ( particularly the NC2 Hassy or Kiev 45deg finder). In order to mount these, you need to get this adapter: http://www.baierfoto.de/tlr_engl.html. It works like a charm.

Given that you are a Hassy user ( like me), I will give you a rationale for getting a Rolleiflex:
- it is great if you need to shoot handheld at lower speeds, thus particularly useful for stuff like interior portraits - here the 2.8 versions are more desirable
- it is great if you like to walk around and take some landscape/travel/street shots, here the 3.5 versions are more useful as they are lighter - 3.5 Planar/Xenotar if you prefer colour and maybe the T if you like B&W.

A 2.8 F / Tri X

MF20151409 by marek fogiel, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #23
jmpgino
Registered User
 
jmpgino is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ga U.S.A now, England before.
Posts: 342
Well they both arrived and in what I would describe as beautiful condition, two lovely pieces of engineering. However they both have issues that I suspect are a result in age and lack of use. The 2.8 D will not move higher than a 1/30 of a second, all of the speeds otherwise sound in line with one of my hasselblads. Then the 3.5 has an aperture problem, it will not move, so that part has frozen up. Initially the shutter on it had deployed but frozen shut, when I activated the delay timer, a clever always pre loaded part, the timer went through its motion and after the shutter release popped out. After that issue all of the shutter speeds sounded on the money.
So even though I rather wanted the 3.5 to be a full worker as I would have kept it, they are both going back. A service charge would make both cameras over priced.
One thing I was surprised about, there was little difference in the viewfinder brightness between the two, both very poor although terrible light here today but still the old screens are way behind the times.
The 3.5 is a sweet little TLR..........
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #24
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,603
A shame but often those immaculate cosmetic condition cameras are worthless as shooters, as machines need to be used, not dusted.
I too found this out with a cosmetically perfect Minolta XM that was kaput. But the user condition one that I already had works perfectly.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #25
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
 
KoNickon is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hartford, CT USA
Age: 61
Posts: 3,107
Ugh -- I would say punt on both of these, since they need a fair amount of work and the prices are much too high, in my view, for cameras in need of servicing. Can you negotiate like $250 off the price of each? Personally I'd lean toward the MX (though maybe not this particular example) -- I think the Tessar/Xenar Rolleis of the mid-50s are real classics. Nothing wrong with the 2.8 models! But they're bigger and heavier. If this is to be a "secondary" camera, then the interchangeable finders are not a critical consideration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpgino View Post
Well they both arrived and in what I would describe as beautiful condition, two lovely pieces of engineering. However they both have issues that I suspect are a result in age and lack of use. The 2.8 D will not move higher than a 1/30 of a second, all of the speeds otherwise sound in line with one of my hasselblads. Then the 3.5 has an aperture problem, it will not move, so that part has frozen up. Initially the shutter on it had deployed but frozen shut, when I activated the delay timer, a clever always pre loaded part, the timer went through its motion and after the shutter release popped out. After that issue all of the shutter speeds sounded on the money.
So even though I rather wanted the 3.5 to be a full worker as I would have kept it, they are both going back. A service charge would make both cameras over priced.
One thing I was surprised about, there was little difference in the viewfinder brightness between the two, both very poor although terrible light here today but still the old screens are way behind the times.
The 3.5 is a sweet little TLR..........
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #26
johannielscom
Ich bin ein Barnacker
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Universitas Terre Threntiae
Posts: 7,363
Price wise: I recently bought a 2.8C (or maybe it's a D?) Xenotar off eBay for EUR 400 + shipping.


Mr by Johan Niels Kuiper, on Flickr
__________________
Gegroet,
Johan Niels

I write vintage gear reviews on www.johanniels.com |

flickr | instagram |
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #27
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,647
unless you buy one from a reputable store/dealer i would always factor an overhaul/cla in. a well maintained Rollei can be significantly different in operation than one that's been sitting too long. the shutter action alone is worth the CLA.

in the past i have used (extensively) a 2.8D, 2.8F, 3.5E, Rollei Wide, Tele and a late model 3.5F. of the models listed the model i like most, in use and in the negatives produced, is the 3.5F. i added a split prism bright screen, had it totally overhauled and a yellow filter. it is still my go to camera to this day. the 3.5F is, in my opinion, the right balance of lens, size and interface for a daily carry.

i also shot a few 'Blads and i would take the 3.5F over a V camera any day of the week. all of this remains dependant on what sort of work you do with them.
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #28
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,647
Tri-x in a 3.5F
Attached Images
File Type: jpg pharma153.jpg (14.0 KB, 5 views)
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #29
jmpgino
Registered User
 
jmpgino is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ga U.S.A now, England before.
Posts: 342
Well I went back and looked at them both again, 3.5 definitely got a stuck aperture ring. The 2.8 however I got moving, so all parts work and it truly has hardly a mark on it, does not even look like filters or a hood have ever been put on it. With that said I am not won over with the way you have to hold and operate the camera. I am used to holding the Hasselblads with my left hand and firing it with that hand, then my right hand controls the aperture, shutter and film advance. Holding the rollei with the left hand, does not work for me, since the focus is on that side, holding with the right hand does not work either.
So I am not interested in one, they are however beautifully made cameras. I love the Hasselblad system, I can hold the body against myself and have never had a blurry image taking hand held at a 1/15 the in thirty three years since buying my first model in London. The additional backs are a must for me as we'll. It was nice holding and looking at them but they are not for me..........
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #30
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,603
The closest in form I have to a Hasselblad is a Mamiya 645 Pro TL. Not sure how loud the Hassel is, but the Mam is crazy loud with it's slapping mirror and shutter mechanism. The Rolleiflex is the quietest film camera I have ever used. Just a faint 'snick' sound.
For some that is a huge advantage.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #31
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,647
the 'blad is definitely not quiet. even the wind on/shutter charge seems loud to me.
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #32
Sarcophilus Harrisii
Brett Rogers
 
Sarcophilus Harrisii is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,636
The D would not move past 1/30 if the EV coupling is engaged and you had the aperture at f/2.8. I doubt there's anything wrong with that. Even a shutter with various speeds sticking and non-functional can usually select them—they just won't complete. Check the manual.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #33
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 51
Posts: 6,258
Wait..... do you know how to use them?
Are the aperture and shutter linked?
The EV link will keep you from using all speeds at the extreme ends of aperture settings.
It's a little dial with a slot in it on the D on the rh side of the camera as you look at it.
Twist with your thumb to disengage.


^^ Brett Beat me to it. Yes, check the manual.
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #34
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
 
KoNickon is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hartford, CT USA
Age: 61
Posts: 3,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpgino View Post
Well I went back and looked at them both again, 3.5 definitely got a stuck aperture ring. The 2.8 however I got moving, so all parts work and it truly has hardly a mark on it, does not even look like filters or a hood have ever been put on it. With that said I am not won over with the way you have to hold and operate the camera. I am used to holding the Hasselblads with my left hand and firing it with that hand, then my right hand controls the aperture, shutter and film advance. Holding the rollei with the left hand, does not work for me, since the focus is on that side, holding with the right hand does not work either.
So I am not interested in one, they are however beautifully made cameras. I love the Hasselblad system, I can hold the body against myself and have never had a blurry image taking hand held at a 1/15 the in thirty three years since buying my first model in London. The additional backs are a must for me as we'll. It was nice holding and looking at them but they are not for me..........
Yes, they handle very differently from the Hasselblads, certainly. But the shutter release for the Hasselblads is also on the right side, correct? Sounds like your handling of the Hassy is a little unorthodox, but no matter. If using the Rolleis is too different from what you're used to, then there's no reason to get something you believe you won't get comfortable with.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2015   #35
johannielscom
Ich bin ein Barnacker
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Universitas Terre Threntiae
Posts: 7,363
Th Rolleiflexes are cameras that are to be used with a neck strap. Or you will be tossing them around from hand to hand.
__________________
Gegroet,
Johan Niels

I write vintage gear reviews on www.johanniels.com |

flickr | instagram |
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-23-2015   #36
aoresteen
Registered User
 
aoresteen's Avatar
 
aoresteen is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Newnan, GA USA
Posts: 471
I have a 2.8C that I bought in 2010 for $200. I had it serviced by Harry Fleenor and he installed a Maxwell screen. The screen makes it a completely different camera! Highly recommended.

I took it on my last tour in Iraq and left the Leica gear behind



Since I use a handheld meter I like the 2.8C clean looks sans-meter.
__________________
Tony
______________________________________
If RD, IIIf RD M3-Mot M4-P Contax IIa BD Nikon SP 2005
Cambo 23F 6x9, Olympus OM, Pentax M42, 6x6 & 6x7

De Oppresso Liber
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 17:01.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.