Rolleiflex GX.

G

Guest

Guest
Well I am considering on buying one of these, obviously used but I want one in excellent condition. Now looking at those on offer, I have noticed that the coverings of both leather and what ever kind of paint they used on these models has not stood up to time like the models from the 1950’s have.
Is it just me or are they mechanically inferior as well. The glass is top notch of that fact there is no argument but I am suspicious of this model now.
So can someone please enlighten me.
I had honestly thought that these models would look a lot better than they seemingly do in used condition. I have a bunch of high end cameras and my three Rolleiflex TLR’s at 60 years of age look a lot better than the used GX’s I have been looking at………..
 
I am not surprised. The golden years of TLR's were long passed and I suspect they knew production would be short lived and that the main customer wouldn't be pros.
Everthing was cheapened in 80's, I'd say go for the F models of the 60's.
 
I once read that the dies for the F-series Rolleiflex models had worn out by the time these cameras were discontinued. In order to continue manufacture of the same models, new dies would have had to be made. This would have been cost-prohibitive.

The source went on to say that the GX was based on the Rolleicord chassis.

I don't know where I read this, so I can't provide a source.

I haven't ever heard or read anything about the GX being mechanically inferior to the F models, nor have I heard or read anything about GX models having an inferior finish. My lack of information, however, doesn't preclude these from being true.

- Murray
 
The chassis is Rolleicord, hence no auto load, require arrow on film to begin.
Sure other cost cutting but lenses are said to be stellar. See if true.
Personally I use very occasionally my Rollei Automat 1954*.
I love film loading, the Tessar lens more than adequate.
If good enough for Irving Penn, good enough for me.
I had a new screen fitted decades ago. Super camera when I use it..
Save a lot of money and buy older.
 
CMur12 said:
I once read that the dies for the F-series Rolleiflex models had worn out by the time these cameras were discontinued. In order to continue manufacture of the same models, new dies would have had to be made. This would have been cost-prohibitive.

The source went on to say that the GX was based on the Rolleicord chassis.

I don't know where I read this, so I can't provide a source.

I haven't ever heard or read anything about the GX being mechanically inferior to the F models, nor have I heard or read anything about GX models having an inferior finish. My lack of information, however, doesn't preclude these from being true.

- Murray
Click to expand...

The GX models don’t have the autoload feature, so they have a number of similarities to the Rolleicords. But I have no idea if this is because the Rolleiflex machinery was worn out.

The GX I had was definitely mechanically inferior to my E and F cameras.

Marty
 
I’ve been using a GX alongside a T for about 20 years. Compared to the T, yes, the GX is a bit clunkier. The wind-on is rougher. The shutter release was quite rough initially, so I had it replaced by a trusty repairman...it’s better but still not as smooth as the T. The paint on the GX around the wind-on crank has also worn significantly. Optically it’s marvellous though (as is the T, and I understand pretty much all Rollei TLR’s).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top