Rollei SL-35 & Voigtlander VSL series

[fernando_mcsoto]

Yes, I know, I am becoming obsessed with Zeiss lenses... I bought a

Bessaflex to be able to use M42 Carl Zeiss Jena MC lenses and the

experience has been fantastic. Amazing value for money. I am now

hooked with those lenses and I would like to repeat the experience.

 

 

 

 

Yashica/Contax cameras have been discontinued recently, but it is

still a very expensive system. Instead, I have now discovered that

the Zeiss and Rollei QBM lenses for Rollei SL and Voigtlander VSL

series have very reasonable prices in the used market.

 

 

 

Now, the problem I have are not the lenses but the Rollei/Voigtlander

bodies. I have read that the Rollei/Voigtlander SLR bodies were not

great. Can anybody help me to choose the most reliable

Rollei/Voigtlander model?

 

 

 

The only body I have completly discarted is the SL-35, because you

can only use stop-down metering. My first choice would have been the

SL-35E (or Voigtlander VSL-3E) but I have read that it was a new

design with a lot of bugs and that nobody repairs them now.

[ken_jeanette]

I used a SL35M for years, with no trouble, although people I know have had problems with them. I turned down a good deal on the later E stuff because I too had heard it was problematic.

My guess is that the quality will be spotty, so if you can get them cheap it may be worth your while.

I wouldn't put a lot of money in lenses for this system, because although great, it is a dead end.

 

Bottom line, if it's cheap go for it. Otherwise walk away.

[brainbubba_motornapkins]

I owned an SL35 for about thirty years, and the abuse it took was absolutely phenomenal. I did have some initial problems with the ttl metering that had it go back to the shop, then I dunked it in seawater and killed the meter stone dead, bought a hand-held meter (wich worked out much better) and kept on using the body for twenty years (during which time I also dropped it, prism-down on the sidewalk). It finally died a couple of years ago when the film advance lever slipped a cog, and I replaced it with an SP, nearly identical in all respects but slightly heavier build.

 

The SL35 was a compact, elegant design and had some very good lenses (I had the Schneider xenon 50/1.8 that came with it, a tessar 135/4 with HFT multicoating, and a phenomenally sharp rollei-distagon 25/2.8).

 

I did not much care for the later Rollei SL models until the SL2000 design came out. I recently handled an SL35-M and found it was heavy and kludgy, like an older soviet slr.

[pensacolaphoto]

I have a similar experience as Brainbubba Motornapkins. I used the SL35 for a while. It is a very elegant and sleek looking SLR camera, and I found the 35M to be ugly and too loud. Now I have the SL2000 which again is elegant in design, but boxy. ALL SL bodies are prone to fail eventually, and they have become very expensive to repair or impossible. I have a Zeiss 85mm/1.4 Planar lens which is amazing in performance. The aperture suddenly would not change on it, so I sent it to three well-known repair people. All three confirmed that it is impossible to repair since nobody anywhere has the spare parts, except if mailed to Germany [where it is too expensive to repair]. Now I use it wide open for special effects.

[fernando_mcsoto]

And there is something else that comes to my mind now. There are adapters (not optical) to use a Contax/Yashica monut lenses to Canon EOS bodies. Is there any other way to use these wonderful Zeiss and Rollei lenses without what seems to be very unreliable Rollei/Voigtlander bodies?

 

 

 

I cannot believe Cosina/Voigtlander has not seen a market in these Zeiss and Rollei lenses for one of its cameras with discontinued mounts, a Bessaflex QBM.

[davepearman]

<p><i>There are adapters (not optical) to use a Contax/Yashica monut lenses to Canon EOS bodies. Is there any other way to use these wonderful Zeiss and Rollei lenses without what seems to be very unreliable Rollei/Voigtlander bodies?</i></p>

 

<p>There's at least one seller on eBay offering Rollei QBM to EOS adapters - no glass required, and the usual manual diaphragm operation, apparently...</p>

[john_shaeffer1]

http://www.geocities.com/mjtolan/Rollei35Stuff.htm

 

The above is the definitive source on Rolleiflex 35mm cameras on the web. Mike Tolan will also be able to answer any questions about Rollei QBM to Canon adapters as he uses Canon equipment too. Visit that site and I am sure you can contact him through the e-mail address there.

 

I've found that the Rolleiflex line after the original SL 35 are not the most reliable cameras in the world. I had a SL 35 ME that jammed after about a year and a half of use. I got a SL 35 E to replace it, but the meter doesn't work, making the slow speeds useless. It still works OK, without the meter, but the speeds under 1/30th depend on the meter. Some owners who have taken their cameras (Singapore made) apart have complained of plastic film advance gears contributing to the film advance jamming. These seem to wear out easily.

 

In my opinion the best lens is the HFT Planar 50mm f1.8. This is probably the most common lens as most of the cameras were sold with this one, and also the cheapest--it is an outstanding bargain in the camera world--and there really aren't that many left than to the e-casino. Mamiya made a line of Rolleinar lenses that are the equivalent of the SX lenses that they made for their M42 mount cameras and are great and very economical. The 35 mm Flektogon is also a fairly reasonabley price Rollei QBM made lens that is a good performer. The other Rollei lenses tend to be off the charts, in terms of cost as opposed to performance. For the performance..you might be better to check out the Zeiss or Pentacon East German glass.

[david_m]

The Rollei and Voigtlander 35mm SLR's were mostly poor quality cameras. The lenses were nothing special either. They were tested by camera magazines at the time and were not outstanding performers. Also be aware that not everything having the Zeiss name is excellect quality. There was a lot of inferior products put out By East German Zeiss (Zeiss Jena).

[fernando_mcsoto]

John, thanks for the link. I read it before posting my question here and as you say it is the best source of info about the system. From what you people are saying here, the website of the Rollei Club in Beverly Hills and Mike Tolan's website, I have reached the conclusion that the old mechanical models designed together with Zeiss were the most reliable of the series. It seems that everything that Rollei's electronics (meters and shutters) were unreliable and than the cameras with electronic shutters are the least reliable of all.

 

 

Aparently the worst would have been the SL-35E (VSL-3E) which was a fully new Rollei design, with new Rollei's metal shutter in the center, Rollei's electronic shutter and the Rollei's wide-open meter.

 

 

 

If I am right with this statement, the most appropiate camera for me would be the SL-35M which is just an old mechanical SL-35 but with wide-open metering. No electronics apart from the new meter which was the only electronics designed by Rollei in this camera. The risk would be limited to loosing the meter sooner or later.

[fernando_mcsoto]

David, I am surpised you say that Rollei lenses were not good. I wonder if you are talking about the Rolleinars. I read that the Rollei and Zeiss lenses were designed by Zeiss and that they were very good. I have never used them so I have no personal opinion yet.

 

 

 

As for CZJ, I agree there are many bad lenses in the bunch but there are also three or five wonderful lenses that are damp cheap and worth buying. In the case of CZJ the important thing is to know which are those lenses.

[john_shaeffer1]

Fernando:

 

The SL35M is probably the way to go if you want a Rolleiflex with fully open aperture metering--assuming the meter works :). With the original SL 35, there is a button on top that you stop down the lens for metering like the Praktica cameras have the lever just above the shutter release on the front.

 

I have mixed feelings about the Rolleiflex cameras--they are the price ya gotta pay for using the nice lenses and the Rolleinars; contrary to the garbage you read online are excellent bargains for the price, even though they are not true Rollei made lenses.

[fernando_mcsoto]

Thank you John. A dealer in England has mentined in the phone today the SL-350 that I did not know that it existed. He says that it is an SL-35 (100% fully mechanical) with open aperture metering. I wonder what is the difference then with the SL-35M.

[john_shaeffer1]

Make sure it takes the Rollei QBM mount. There were some transition cameras, that West German Zeiss made before they went belly up and Rollei took over the line. The SL 350 may be one--be careful about the mount. I think the SL 350 was also actually made in M42 mount also.

[brainbubba_motornapkins]

I wouldn't set much stock in the ttl metering of the early rollei SL line. They may have been ok in terms of the era, but can't hold a candle to modern, multi-point matrix ttl metering systems of today.

 

You will be 'lucky' to find one with a fully-functional ttl meter, and will probably get much more accurate metering by using a handheld meter. In that case, you may be better off with a 'stop-down' SL35 body, provided it hasn't seen too much use and has been properly cared for. As others have mentioned, just don't pay too much for it. Beware they are being priced as "collector's items" in some circles, for instance.

[nick roberts]

The SL35 is the most reliable of the range. I certainly wouldn't reject it because of stopped-down metering - actually, I think it's a very good thing, as you have compulsory depth of field preview. I have a couple of SL35Es - one is absolutely first-rate, the other isn't so good, although fully working. I also have an SL2000F (a bit temperamental), and the 3003, one of the finest 35mm SLRs ever made. If you really want a QBM Rollei, and won't have the excellent SL35, it's the one. But it's VERY far from cheap! Contaxes (or even more so, Yashicas) are very much cheaper.

I have one of the QBM adaptors for Canon EOS, and use my Zeiss and Rollei (really Mamiya) QBM lenses on my EOS 10D, along with my CZJ M42 lenses and my CY mount CZ lenses via other adaptors.

[fernando_mcsoto]

Nick could you report on the adapters for Canon EOS? How do you use them? Are they stop-down metering? Are they "auto" metering? I mean can you press am "auto" buttom to stop-down or do you need to turn down the aperture ring each time for metering? I know that with M42 adpaters there is no "auto" metering and that you have to turn the aperture ring each time, which is what took me to buy a Bessaflex TM.

[fernando_mcsoto]

I have just tested a mint Rollei SL-35ME and I am shock by the lack of quality of this camera. Too much plastic inside (and even outside!). You get an impression of a very cheap camera. No quality anywhere. In the middle of the test the meter went bananas and the aperture priority stopped working. What a shitty camera! I needed to touch it and see it with my eyes. I wa snot expecting it to be as good as my Nikon FM3a, but even my Bessaflex TM is made of a much higher quality. No wonder Rollei could not compete with Japanese quality at the time.

[nick roberts]

Yes, all the adaptors are stop-down, but I've never found it to be even slightly an issue. Mind you, I started photography with a Zenit E....so I'm used to having a dark finder.

The electronics are highly suspect on many of the QBM Rolleis. As I said, one of my SL35Es functions perfectly, the other one seems to have a mind of it's own - it works OK, but sometimes with a delay - probably just needs a CLA, but it's not worth it.

 

One thing with them is that if you haven't got the right lens, metering is stop-down anyway - if you don't press the DOF preview, everything goes beserk and every LED in the finder lights up. And that is normal behaviour! Don't get me wrong, I rather like my black SL35E, but it is a bit weird. Now the 3003 is solidly weird, but WHAT a camera!

[aidan_piers]

It must not be forgotten that the newest QBM camera that you can buy is already ten years old: the oldest thirty-three.

 

Like outboard motors, cameras rarely fail to perform because of over use. Neglect and improper storage, dirt and trauma are the usual causes of malfunction and/or death.

 

There is a great gulf between what these cameras were like when they were new and what can be expected of them to day, so much depends upon their intervening careers.

 

I have been using 35mm Rolleiflex SLR's since they first came on the market and I have known and used every model from new, so perhaps I can usefully contribute a few words.

 

SL 35 M's, SL 35 ME's, VSL 1 BM's, VSL TM's, Ifbaflex M 102 TM's and VSL 2's are to Rollei what the Edsel was to the Ford Motor company which, if you are too young to remember, is good for you, as they are all best forgotten about: just remember, "Hands-off, they ain't worth the trouble".

 

They were produced after Rollei got involved in the takeover of the Zeiss Ikon company in 1972 and unwisely committed itself to the further developement of the Zeiss Ikon SL 706: compared to the SL 35 and SL 350, this was a big step backwards which contributed to the eventual bankruptcy of Rollei.

 

 

SL 35's, SL 350's, SL 35 E's, SL 2000F's, SL3003's and SL3001's are all excellently constructed, German instrument making at its best. Treat them well and they will last for years.

 

The SL 35 is straightforward, robust, reliable, well balanced, easy to keep up and running: in short, a great little number. Given that they change hands nowadays for peanuts, anyone would be well advised to start off with one.

 

Also, the SL 35 is a good place to start learning maintainance and cleaning! You can save yourself lots of money by doing it yourself. Workshop manuals are easy to find on eBay

 

What should not be forgotten under any cicumstances whatsoever is to buy a Pentax/M-42 lens to QBM body adapter.

 

Rollei has never been so hot in the lens making department prefering to 'buy-in' or manufacture under licence. When the QBM specifications were being worked out, the flange to film plane distance was chosen to be a tad smaller than that of Pentax/M-42 and the inside diameter of the mount a tad larger, thus leaving enough space for a cheap, simple, non-optical adapter to be used to gain access to the zillions of Pentax/M-42 lenses and other bits of kit already out there.

 

Thus I am able to use a whole rake of Pentax/M-42 lenses: Zeiss-West, Zeiss-East, Schacht-Ulm, Voigtlaender, Kilfitt, Astro-Berlin, Enna.

 

The adapter comes in two versions: the more common automatic, which closes the lens aperture to the preselected value when you press the shutter release, and rarer non-automatic, which, er, does not.

 

It would be easy to convert an automatic to a non-automatic by nipping off the inner ring.

 

(Always check that the back of the lens does not interfer with the mirror action: do this by setting the exposure to 'B', with no lens on the camera, press and hold down shutter release, mount lens, open back and carefully observe what happens when the mirror descends.)

 

There were less than 8000 SL 350's so they rarely are seen in the second hand market and Rollei heads pay big bucks for them. They were a further developement of the SL 35's, the same look and feel, the major difference being the addition of open aperture metering.

 

The SL 35 E introduced a new exterior and also the metal shutter that was used in the SL 2000F, 3003 and 3001. I love this camera, as you can choose to use aperture priority automatic exposure, or not, if you wish, and it sits well in the hand. It also could be fitted with a winder or motor drive.

 

Good ones are still easy to find but beware: I have eight of them, which have seen heavy usage, and I have never had one go on strike BUT, I am told that when they go wrong, they go very wrong indeed. Perhaps think about paying a little more and getting one from a more traditional source than the Internet, a local camera shop for example, and maybe some sort of guarantee.....

 

The SL 2000F was, is and will remain revolutionary. Once you have used the magazines, either to reload quickly or to just have more than one type of film available, you never forget the experience. There were indeed some teething troubles though these were sorted out, and the SL 3003 seems to be a tad more reliable.

 

They are expensive to buy and to maintain: Rollei still offers support.

 

Owners of QBM cameras are spoiled for choice when it comes to optics: it is complicated though.

 

Originally lenses were made by Zeiss-West. These were then made under licence by Rollei, first in Germany, then in Singapore and badged as Rollei and Voigtlaender. Zeiss-West produced additional models which were never made by Rollei under licence. In the beginning, Schneider-Kreuznach also supplied some QBM lenses.

 

Later Rollei had Mamiya, Tokina, Sigma and Kiron build the cheaper Rolleinar lenses.

 

As far as quality is concerned, it is a question of horses for courses. While I can think of nothing better for desolate, landscape shots than my Zeiss made Distagon 3.5/15mm, I certainly would not like to be without my Tokina made Zoom Rolleinar MC Makro 3.5-4.3/35-105 when I am trying to flash photograph in smallish spaces. However, second hand the one cost 30 times the price of the other.

 

Oh, the other thing: QBM comes in three flavors, according to how many pins are involved, though the third pin is not on the lens but on the camera:-

 

- 1-pin metal finished lenses for SL 35

- 2-pin metal finished lenses for SL 350

- 2-pin rubber finished lenses for SL 35 M through to SL 35 E

- 3-pin rubber finished lenses for SL 2000 F and onwards

 

Confusing, isn't it ?

 

 

[h_lcio_j._tagliolatto]

Almost 18 years after it was written I found this text that helped me perfectly.

Many thanks to the author!

[rodeo_joe1]

The revival of this thread seems quite fortuitous, since I just dug out an old Rollei SL35 along with Zeiss West-German made, single-pin 50mm Planar f/1.8 lens. 

I acquired it years ago and put it aside since the camera's FP shutter tapes had come unglued and repair was going to be a tedious job. More than the camera was worth at the time. 

However, it's interesting that the lens versus body opinion expressed above has now completely reversed; with nobody wanting a QBM fit body, but plenty of people lusting after the Zeiss Planar and Voigtlander Color-Ultron lenses. 

That old Planar has cleaned up nicely, and I'm looking forward to using it on a Sony body when the adapter I just ordered arrives.