TLR Hunting: Source for CLA

wlewisiii said:
And they are the most hassle free for returns I've ever dealt with. Between that and their conservative grading, I go there first.

I got my used D810 from them last summer for that reason.
Click to expand...
Perhaps but all the ones I looked at tonight on their site were labeled “Inoperative” except for 1 Rolleiflex selling for $2500.
 
x-ray said:
My dad bought a Rolleicord V new in 1955 if I remember correctly. I went with him to Loveman’s department store when he bought it new. He used it for many years and I used it while in high school along with his 4x5 Crown Graphic until I bought a used Rolleiflex MX EVS 2. My brother owns the Cord and has used it a bunch too and after nearly 70 years it needs a cla.

I was in a little antique store and found a Rolleicord Va with a sticky shutter but otherwise pristine. It also had a near new case and I talked the dealer down to $50 due to the sticky shutter. There was also some trash between the cells but was easy to clean out by unscrewing the front cell from the shutter. After exercising the shutter for an evening it started functioning perfectly and was accurate. I used it for a few years and sold it but wish I’d kept it.

The Rolleicord is often overlooked but they produce beautiful images. They’re simpler mechanically and considerably lighter than the Flexes particularly the 2.8’s. I highly recommend a nice clean cord especially one of the V, Va or Vb ones. These are really nice cameras and the A&B have easily removable hoods and quick change screens. The a & b take format change kits for 645 or was it 4x4 super slides.

Also don’t overlook the MX EVS cameras. My MX EVS was one of my favorites.

I’ve also owned a couple of 2.8 D models, a 3.5 E 1 and now have a 3.5 F with a Planar which is my favorite. Really any of the C, D, E and F are great cameras. Both Zeiss and Schneider lenses, Planar, Xenotar, Xenar and Tessar are excellent.
Click to expand...
Ok. Found this at Koh‘s. Reputable shop. I can pick it up in person according to description. Main concerns I have about fungus etc appear to be addressed. Seems like an okay starting point for TLR. Thoughts…?

Will I need to be a neurosurgeon to swap the screen if I find it to be too dim?
 
Looks like a good one. Grab it and run :)

The CLA is a plus. Look for a a Bay 1 hood, UV filter for color film & yellow filter for your b&w film. You'll want them. The case is nice if it's trust-able - check it carefully. Mine is really good but I bought it separately. You can leave a filter mounted but the hood has to come off to close it.

The Rick Oleson Screen is a 10 minute job. Easy-peasy. Rick Oleson BrightScreen – Focusing screens for medium format TLR and SLR cameras

Buy some film and have fun. I'd start with some HP5+ given winter light but I can't wait for next summer's bright sun and some PanF again.
 
That Rolleicord looks good. It doesn't have the plunger for the shutter release, so you'll need to use a cable release or give a smart shove to the under-lens cocking lever. The latter is hard to do when hand-holding the camera without inducing camera shake.

- Murray
 
Ah, I never saw anything like that before :) Would be neat I agree but I don't find I have that much trouble with my 'cord III. OTOH, if I ever break down and get a newer one, I'll have to remember that gadget (y)
 
re KEH: second that. Unqualified endorsement. Their users are really nice. Once i had a problem with an item....no problem...prompt full refund. Needless to say, bought from them again after that.
 
JSteed#2 said:
re KEH: second that. Unqualified endorsement. Their users are really nice. Once i had a problem with an item....no problem...prompt full refund. Needless to say, bought from them again after that.
Click to expand...
Dear JSteed,

I've been buying from KEH since the early 2000's. I have had an issue or two over the years but all were promptly resolved.

That said, I have also bought many times from Used Photo Pro and MPB here in the US. Again, I had the occasional issue at both places. And again, the issues were promptly resolved.

I pine for the old days when you could walk into a physical store and shop and haggle and shoot the breeze and make a deal. But at the same time I am very grateful for the excellent on-line retailers we have here in the US, especially since actual camera stores are nearly non-existent with 100 miles of my home.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Harrisburg PA :)
 
I recommend either the Rolleiflex 3.5F Planar or 2.8F Xenotar. The E, E2 and E3 models will be much cheaper and they are essentially the same camera. People look for F models because that’s what photo forums talk about. The amount of money you will need to get a 60 year old camera in reliable shape will not be cheap. Might as well get the best camera you can afford good for another life time of use.
 
Last edited:
Camera arrived Friday. It's in excellent condition, even the case although the strap was mostly worn through and broke as I was taking the case off. Thank you to those who suggested the 'Cord. Everything I need and nothing I don't as a 1st time TLR.


IMG_7724.jpg
 
Bobonli said:
Camera arrived Friday. It's in excellent condition, even the case although the strap was mostly worn through and broke as I was taking the case off. Thank you to those who suggested the 'Cord. Everything I need and nothing I don't as a 1st time TLR.


View attachment 4829829
Click to expand...
Looks beautiful! Have fun :) We'll look forward to your photos.
 
Tim Murphy said:
Dear JSteed,

I've been buying from KEH since the early 2000's. I have had an issue or two over the years but all were promptly resolved.

That said, I have also bought many times from Used Photo Pro and MPB here in the US. Again, I had the occasional issue at both places. And again, the issues were promptly resolved.

I pine for the old days when you could walk into a physical store and shop and haggle and shoot the breeze and make a deal. But at the same time I am very grateful for the excellent on-line retailers we have here in the US, especially since actual camera stores are nearly non-existent with 100 miles of my home.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Harrisburg PA :)
Click to expand...
Thanks for the leads. I will check them out.
 
Bobonli said:
Nah. I went through the bag of lenses phase years ago. Not going back.
Click to expand...

I have lenses in five focal lengths for my Mamiya TLRs. They offered seven, but I got the ones I wanted. My other TLRs all have fixed lenses.

I have Rolleiflexes, among others, but my favorite TLRs are the Minolta Autocords and the Mamiyas. I think the Mamiya professional system TLRs were brilliant. People often compare them to Rolleis and complain that they don't have the same "jewel-like" quality. As I see it, Mamiya took more inspiration from LF view cameras in the design of their TLRs, and from that perspective I find them very pragmatically designed and exceptionally well executed. The Tele-Rolleis didn't have enough focusing extension. Mamiya built a bellows into their TLRs so that there would be adequate extension for normal focusing of lenses up to 250mm. It also allowed extreme close-up focusing with shorter focal lengths (almost 1:1 with the 55mm lens and approximately 1:2 with the 80mm.

- Murray
 
Retro-Grouch said:
I suppose this is the time for the inevitable Rollei vs. Yashica post. My $0.02: go for a Yashica, with a four-element Yashinon. I have both, and I really think the Rollei will only give you nicer finish (machined castings vs. stampings, but in places where they don't matter) and a nicer feel in the hand. The Yashica will give you a better stock screen, performance equal to a Tessar or Xenar, and enough of a savings to buy another Yashica as a backup, or pay for that CLA.
I'm glad to have my Rollei; it's an exquisite piece of photo history. But really, a Yashica will always "git 'er done".
Click to expand...
I had both Yashicamat 124G and Rolleiflex TLRs (several of the latter, various different models from a 1949 Rolleiflex Automat to a 1978 Rolleiflex 3.5F Whiteface).

I agree that the Yashicamat 124G with the four element Yashinon was roughly the equivalent of a Rolleiflex with Zeiss Tessar aside from build qualities and feel, but do be aware that the last series of the Yashicamat changed out the four element Yashinon lens for a three element version (in essence, in Zeiss terms, changing the Tessar for a Triotar) and performance suffered. Rolleiflex models with a Zeiss Planar or Schneider Xenotar, however, were substantively better performers than the models with Tessar (and by extension, Yashicamats with Yashinon) lenses.

Regards Rolleiflex TLR services, I've always used Harry Fleenor (Oceanside Camera Repair (310) 374-6506) in Manhattan Beach, CA. He's always done an excellent job with anything Rollei.

G
 
Godfrey said:
I had both Yashicamat 124G and Rolleiflex TLRs (several of the latter, various different models from a 1949 Rolleiflex Automat to a 1978 Rolleiflex 3.5F Whiteface).

I agree that the Yashicamat 124G with the four element Yashinon was roughly the equivalent of a Rolleiflex with Zeiss Tessar aside from build qualities and feel, but do be aware that the last series of the Yashicamat changed out the four element Yashinon lens for a three element version (in essence, in Zeiss terms, changing the Tessar for a Triotar) and performance suffered. Rolleiflex models with a Zeiss Planar or Schneider Xenotar, however, were substantively better performers than the models with Tessar (and by extension, Yashicamats with Yashinon) lenses.

Regards Rolleiflex TLR services, I've always used Harry Fleenor (Oceanside Camera Repair (310) 374-6506) in Manhattan Beach, CA. He's always done an excellent job with anything Rollei.

G
Click to expand...

Hi Godfrey -

The three-element Yashica lens was the Yashikor. I never heard that the last of the Yashica-Mats got the lesser lens. That would be something to watch for.

Regarding the Planar and Xenotar lenses compared to the Tessars, I believe Modern Photography did a comparison test of the Rolleiflex Tessar vs the new Planar and Xenotar, finding that the main difference was at wide apertures. At smaller apertures, they found the difference to be negligible. I'm guessing your experience isn't consistent with that.

- Murray
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top