Rollei 2.8E

Discussion in 'Classic Manual Cameras' started by tony_lockerbie, Jun 17, 2013.

  1. Ok, last one for a while..I promise!
    Something about a Rollei, any Rollei, that just makes you want to pick them up and shoot some film. The things are just so darn nice, nothing oozes quality like a good Rolleiflex...or Rolleicord for that matter.
    Like all hopeless collectors I have many Rolleis, some new, some really old...all take great pictures.The 2.8 Series are at the top of the heap, well price wise anyway, and come with either the Zeiss Planar or like mine...the Schneider Xenotar.
    Many aficionados claim that the Planar is superior to the Xenotar...it's not, end of story. A lot of 2.8's and 3.5's that come with a Xenotar seemed to have gone to the US, don't know why, might just have been the policy of the importer...maybe slightly cheaper..not that I'm saying that Americans are cheap :)
    The original owner of my 2.8E was cheap though, he opted for the meter-less version to save a few bucks, can't understand why, because they were not much cheaper on a camera that cost a fortune in it's day. Doesn't matter to me as these meters have mostly passed on by now, and that clear meter window on the side is nearly always cracked.
    Anyway, here is the camera and a few pics.
    00bkat-540849784.jpg
     
  2. First pic.
    00bkau-540849884.jpg
     
  3. Great, got through this one without a single stuff up...practice makes perfect!
     
  4. I have got my Rolleiflex. Not 2.8 like I planned but 3.5E. Ran through 3 films already. It is almost a sort of physical pleasure to handle this camera. Viewfinder a bit dark for me but I planned to contact Rick Olesson for his replacement glass.
     
  5. Kozma, glad you got your Rollei, nothing wrong with the 3.5, I have a 3.5F also, and it is rumored that the 3.5 Planar or Xenotar is the best of them all. I quite like the VF brightness, but I believe that the Maxwell screens make a big difference. Sometimes the mirror needs to be cleaned, you can check that when the screen is replaced.
     
  6. Lovely pictures all; "Back of the lake" is superb. Thanks Tony. You have been very productive of late! Keep up the good work. We are enjoying all of it. sp.
     
  7. Wow, these just keep coming and I'm running out of superlatives. Fine work from the Rollei, Tony; I really like the Alana and Toby pic, while the lake images are excellent. It looks like a very well-kept example of the Rollei, and I much prefer both the concept and appearance of the meter-less version. Thanks for the weather, BTW; feels like snow tomorrow....
     
  8. Thanks Rick, SP, glad I'm not boring you too much. Finally nailed the new scanner, computer etc. which is why the backlog is finally clearing.
    ...and Rick, you are welcome with the weather :)
     
  9. The images are so smooth and almost grain free. What film did you use and the aperture?
     
  10. Tony,
    Great shots just like you had with the Contax IIA. Unlike the Contax IIA I got rid of this one (Rollei 2.8E) I kept. Although your camera is in about 99% better cosmetic condition than mine. That's one of the reasons I kept it 'cause I wouldn't get a very good price for it in the condition it's in anyway. The other reason I kept it is because its 2.8 Xenotar is totally out of this world. A couple of weeks ago I decided to install a Mamiya RZ67 (cut down) screen in it for better and brighter focus. After I was done I decided to do a focus test and used a ruler at 45 degrees with a jello box as the focus point and shot at f2.8. I was absolutely amazed (again) at how sharp this lens is even wide open and those OOF highlights are all round and dreamy. If that's what you like? I have both the 2.8E (Xenotar) and the 3.5E (Planar) and if I had to keep just one it would be the 2.8E. The 3.5E is in excellent condition and has the meter that's spot on, but I'd still keep the beater 2.8E. I have no better roll film picture taker. I'm a little lazy about posting my cameras and pictures here, but I'm going to have to just buckle down and do it I guess. Still, I enjoy post like this and like seeing the results of many of the cameras I've owned or used. JohnW
     
  11. This is timely. My 2.8E just arrived yesterday. Unlike yours, mine is a beater, the magnifier glass is mising on top, and its Xenotar taking lens is scratched to kingdom come from cleaning and has lots of little spots all over it. Seems these have a history of coating issues, so I'm just going to use it as it is, after seeing if I can bolt my Rolleicord hood assy on top so I'll have a magnifier to focus it easier. You might be better off w/o a metered camera, as their meters are pretty questionable these days and the ergonomics are not as good as the un metered cameras.
    My earlier 2.8 Xenotar made fantastic photos, but I prefer the 3.5 Planar versions because they're lighter. I see no difference between the Planar and Xenotar lenses in real life.
    You have several shots here that are outstanding here. You could probably ditch all of your other cameras and just keep this one w/o any regrets.
     
  12. Sunovabitch ! Wonderful all around. You're an inspiration.
     
  13. Excellent work again Tony. They're all nice, but I really like that Abandoned Tractor shot and I'm impressed with how well the camera handled the flare in Two Fishers.
     
  14. My 2.8E (Xenotar) has been my favorite camera since I bought it used in 1962 (for $125). Mine too came without a meter, but I had one installed in 1965; it works fine, but I seldom use it, preferring a hand-held meter. IIRC my Rollei has been CLAed four times over the years, the last two times by Krikor Maralian.
    I don't think people who bought this model new without a meter were cheap; there was a great deal of prejudice against built-in meters in the late '50s, when the camera was new--they seemed amateurish. I reluctantly had one installed before a major trip, when I thought it would come in handy (which it did).
     
  15. When we had a bushfire evacuation earlier this year, the first two cameras I reached for were my 2.8C & my Tele Rolleiflex. Closely followed by my 2.8D, Hassy and (literally) a handful of Contaflexes.
    Lovely images Tony. I love the 80mm Xenotar on my own Rolleis. It's a lens capable of magical results, as you've shown.
     
  16. Nice work.
    I'm afraid that I have lots of cameras, but not lots of Rolleis lying about the place.
     
  17. What a beautiful example of a beautiful camera. I tend to like the non-metered versions for aesthetic purposes. I imagine though how important the meter was to the user and suspect even now if I was out shooting and the emter worked... I'd use it so Mustn't be so stuck up about nopn-metered versions. ...The Xenotar is now superior to the Planar .. Oh really.. Knocking Zeiss lenses...again!! are we eh? Justkidding of course. I've never had the üpleasure. I suspect they re both excellent of Rollei would not of offered them. I truly love these Rolleiflexes the later E series are the cats meow and you see it in the price!! I liked the lake shots alot especially the one with boat centered . I like the Pano and the train station too. This was a good mix of subject all around. I end up with too many landscapes and nothing in between. You didn't name the film/developer this time around Was this Ilford 50? The blacks were so nice, I'm leaning towards Acros. Do tell!
     
  18. Great looking camera and superb results. Thanks for posting.
     
  19. Tony you are so busy these days, have you got ants in your pants or something? You make me feel so lazy. I particularly like "Back of the Lake" and "Two Fishers". Do keep them coming. I'm hoping to make a new post very soon.
     
  20. Thanks all round again! Many questions here, first the film that I forgot to mention was Fuji Across developed in Pyrocat HD. As for apertures used I don't keep any record but the one of my wife and son was around F4, the first one of Robert was wide open at 2.8.
    Mostly I don't stop down much, usually around 5.6, but the one of the boat and jetty was more likely around F11 for dof.
    Agree about the meterless version, I was just being tongue in cheek about being cheap, and like the Contax the camera looks better without it.
    Don't worry Chuck, I wouldn't knock Zeiss lenses, just saying that those from Mr. Jos Schneider are just as good.
    I do have a Tele-Rollei but unfortunately the lens is full of fungus and separation..and they are just sooo expensive now.
     
  21. Thanks for whetting my appetite Tony. I'll be picking up my Rolleicord later this week. I've already got a roll of film picked out for the christening. I have no intention of growing a family of them. I'll be more than happy with the one I'm getting. Cheers.
     
  22. Beautiful shots! What film/ chemistry was used? Were these developed in a commercial lab or by yourself? How were
    they scanned, and at what mb or resolution?

    Thanks, and keep up the great work.
     
  23. Thanks Robert, film was Fuji Across developed in Sandy Kings' Pyrocat HD diluted 1:1;100. I scan using an Epsom V750 at 750Dpi.
    I'm not much of a digital person, but I do really basic work in Photoshop to make the scanned image look like the prints, ie, brightness and contrast and occasionally some curves.
     
  24. Your images look very nice, Tony.
    I used to have at one stage three 2.8 Rollei models (D,E,F), and I sold the E and the F but I kept the 2.8D with the Planar lens. I also have a 3.5F and a Tele Rollei (with a Sonnar) and also an Automat with a Tessar. They are all great cameras for use.
     

Share This Page