Which one???

[cbettis]

I have the opportunity to buy either a meterless Minolta Autocord or

a Rolleicord V. They are in approximately the same condition (good)

and the same price (cheap). I don't use medium format often and

this would be more to have and just use on occasion. Given that

choice, which would you select and why. Yes, I've gone through the

archives on each but would like to hear (or read) your choice

between the two. Whichever one I buy will most likely get a CLA

relatively quickly. Thanks for your opinions, Chuck

[rich815]

Rolleicord. Because of the reputation for the workmanship. Even holding both of them you can just "feel" the Rollei is more solid and feels better made. Less plastic too. I also imagine in 20 years it would have better resale value.

[douglas_green1]

I disagree. The Autocord is closer in quality to a low end Rolleiflex than it is to a Rolleicord. The one caveat with the Autocord is that on many of the used cameras that you will see, the focusing lever, below the taking lens, has been snapped off. I would make sure that the Autocord I bought didn't have any signs of this being repaired, or any noticeable hairline cracks in the bend of this focusing lever. If the Autocord you are considering is fully working and checks out on this particular issue, I'd get that over a Rolleicord. I would also bet on the Autocord having a sharper taking lens that the Rolleicord.

[christopher perez]

A neighbor showed me some photos she took using her Rolleicord Vb. The images look every bit as good as my various Rolleiflex cameras (2.8Planar, 3.5Planar, and 3.5Tessar). I was very pleasantly surprised.

 

If you have the money, buy both. If not, I'd start with the 'cord.

 

I hope this helps.

[christopher perez]

Doh! Sorry. 'cord == Rolleicord in my last post.

[douglas_green1]

BTW, you didn't say how much they were selling for. If it were each $100 or less, and if they were both in working order, I would indeed get both of them.

[douglas_green1]

BTW, in terms of lens quality, I'd rate the imaging quality of the Rokkor on the Autocord as slightly better than a Rollei Zeiss Tessar, and at least the equal of the Rollei Schneider Xenar. You'd need to get a Rollei Zeiss Planar or Schneider Xenotar to get a sharper lens than the Rokkor on the Autocord. Note, it is possible that the reason for this is not the lenses themselves, but that the Autocord actually keeps the film somewhat flatter than does a Rolleicord, due to it being moved in the reverse direction with the bend in the film transport not occurring until AFTER the film is exposed, rather than before.

[jay_.]

No question about it, for the same money get the Rolleicord. When the last roll of 120 film expires some collector will still pay you for the Rolleicord, the Minolta you'll toss in a dumpster.

[Andrew in Austin]

<p>Don't be fooled by the collector value versus practical value equation.</p>

 

<p>My Rolleicord V was purchased from the heirs of the original owner and were willing to let go in immaculate cosmetic condition with a case for a mere $40.  Obviously, the grandchildren saw no earthly use for the camera.   So much for the theory on collector's value.</p>

 

<p>Three things:<br>

 

<ul>The Rolleicord V uses a Synchro-Compur shutter with the LVS interlock, which may take some getting used to.  It's a fine shutter, but the interlock moves the aperture adjustment whenever the shutter speed is changed.   By the way, it's a manually cocked shutter.</ul>

 

<ul>Next, unlike most TLR's the Rolleicord utilizes a wind knob, which works just fine for my work, but isn't as quick in action as a crank   Plus, the focus knob is on the right, which is a curiousity, but works well when using my left handed flash bracket.</ul>

 

<ul>Last, but not least, the focus screen is ground glass and not very bright.   I recommend replacing it with a modern perplex screen.</ul>

 

<p>With regard to the Autocord, you probably can't go wrong, if it is as you say in good condition.   With either the Autocord or Rolleicord, a CLA is a near must do, if for no other reason than to have the shutter speeds measured.</p>

[Andrew in Austin]

The last part of the my first sentence should read "practical side of things."

[douglas_green1]

I should add one more thing. We started with the assumption that these two cameras are in the SAME condition. That's probably an oversimplification. The reality is, I'm sure that if you carefully examined both cameras, you would determine that one might actually be in at least slightly better shape than the other, in terms of the lens, shutter, and the degree to which the various controls were in proper working order. For cameras this old, really the condition is more of an issue than which brand/model is more highly regarded. I would look at them and check them out very carefully, and then I'd get the one that was in better shape. Personally, if they really are in the SAME shape, I'd get the Minolta. They are generally better handling, and higher featured cameras than the Rolleicord. But others disagree, leaning on the rep of Rollei as a brand. I'd personally say that build quality is pretty equivalent between them.

 

But the specific condition of the particular lens, shutter, and winding mechanism in each camera is really more important than these other issues.

[tomwawer]

Chuck,

 

take really close look at the lens - open back, take a cable release and fire at the B setting with 3.5 aperture. Look through to strong light source. You will see if lens are worth it. I got recently cheap Rolleicord from ebay and the lens' coating had many miniscule polishing scrathes. I am sure it was sold in good will because normal inspection shows no marks. The picture are sharp and beautiful, but I started to look for another one;)

 

Best regards,

Tom