Used Rollei Specific Issues

[zpeckler]

Hello once again,

Thanks for all your help in the past, guys. I'm interested in buying a

Rollei TLR (the 3.5 model, my budget's not quite up to a 2.8), and I

was wondering if there are any mechanical/optical issues spececific to

the 3.5's that I need to look out for. You know, things like a certain

widget having a tendancy to wear out easily or something. These

cameras are, of course, pretty old and I'm sure spare parts aren't the

easiest things to find.

 

Thanks again,

Zac

[paul_neuthaler]

If you buy a 3.5F, then you want the Model Three or later -- since Rollei had some trouble adjusting gears re: exposure meter wheels until this model.

[john_layton]

A 3.5F, type 3, from the early to mid sixties (serial number above 2,250,000 but well

below 2,815,050 is, in my opinion, the cats pajamas of Rollei's - with my further personal

bias being towards the Planar lens, although the Xenotar is great also.

 

Make sure to test the shutter at all speeds, not just for accuracy but evenness of sound at

slow speeds - a shutter with a healthy mainspring sounds very "even" over the course of,

say, a one second setting. If the camera has been sitting around for years with its shutter

wound, then it might need a new mainspring, which someone like Harry Fleenor will

replace with a CLA.

 

I could say lots more, but I'll let others chime in - although I will check back to make sure

they have! My only other advice with the F model is to just go ahead and buy a Maxwell

focussing screen - either gridded or plain - which you can install yourself. I've got a plain

Maxwell in my 3.5F, and the balance of sharpness and contrast of this screen is perfect.

 

Other really useful accessories are one or more of the closeup lens sets, with a #2

probably being the most useful, and a pentaprism, although these are a little heavy. You

are going to LOVE this camera! Have fun!!

[richard_laepple]

You should make clear what 3.5 model you mean. Rolleiflexes with 3.5 lens are made since the 30ties. Are you interested in a Tessar/Xenar (cheaper) or Planar/Xenotar (more expensive) model?

[vincent_frazzetta]

I spent almost as much in upgrades for my 3.5 Rolleiflex as I spent for the camera itself, and you might consider the same. The upgrades were a full blown CLA (or "overhaul", as Harry Fleenor calls it)and a Maxwell viewing screen. My camera is now a true gem. Other considerations: as for 2.8 vs 3.5, I shoot at 400, so the extra money for the 2.8 is irrelevant for me, so consider faster film. As for the various lenses (Planar, and all that), it truly doesn't make a bit difference to us ordinary shooters, and probably not to many pros. They are ALL terrific. However, what I would do with any Rollei that I were to purchase is to open the back, set the speed at B, set the aperture wide open, trip the shutter and hold it open while taking a good look at the taking lens with a flashlight. Now you know the condition of your lens--the heart of the camera. If all is well there, just twist knobs and rotate the crank, and expect smooth function of all components.

[john_layton]

Richard has a good point. While the F series is more recent and therefore its a little easier

to find parts, "better" (more convenient to interchange screens/hoods/prisms, etc.) you

can get lots of "bang for the buck" by choosing an earlier 3.5 model. The 3.5 X and MX

models from the fifties, with serial numbers ranging from 1,100,000 to 1,737,911, with

the 3.5 Tessar lenses, are wonderful cameras for landscapes with the (Tessar) lens

stopped to between 8 and 16. Very simple and lightweight, and if the Tessar is clean and

clear, it will, with only four elements, flare less than any Planar, perhaps with the

exception of the latest multicoated example on the latest GX and FX series. But these

(multicoated examples) are 80mm 2.8 Planars, and the GX, from my brief experience with

one of these cameras, is a far cry from the older models in terms of fit, finish, and feel -

not to mention the unequalled quiet smoothness of the Franke and Heideke shutters of

the older models. At any rate, I sold a mint example of an MX with a Tessar a couple of

years ago, and still lament this, although I love my 3.5F.

[kelly_flanigan1]

One of my Rollei's with a f 3.5 lens was made in 1937. It is a Rolleiflex standard, with a 1/500 second top speed, and a 75mm F3.5 Tessar. The usage of the phrase <i>3.5's that I need to look out</i> and <i>the 3.5 model</i> could mean a Tessar/Xenar F3.5, or a Xenotar/Planar with a F3.5 lens. To somebody who has used Rolleis for many decades, I sure wouldnt assume I really know what TLR you are talking about. Normally in post WW2 Rollei's one mentions the series of camera, like the A, B, C, D E, E2, E3, F, GX etc. Buying a TLR then having to get a CLA is abit of a fools game. Factor in a CLA cost if the deal seems too good. You really want one that has not been butchered, or a mixed set of parts. If the taking an viewing lens set is mss matched, there is no fix. A used aligned 3 element Yashica TLR will outgun a mixed up Rollei TLR that missfocuses.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Most Rolleis die due to lack of usage, being cemented to collectors shelves. Some die due to being dropped, flooded, or dunked. A common failure is just the camera gets little exercise. The uncle' archival dresser drawer is perfect to grow fungus, via dark, still air, and damp conditions. Folks who are nuts about a speck of dirt or dust tend to scrub the front element. The auto film counter sense roller's tend to get slugish with a non used/collectors camera. This roller "senses" the film. Self timers are often sluggish or about stuck. A camera that has beend not used much may have a flakey synch on M or X too. Like buying a used car one should worry about the useablity of the machine. A camera that has been dropped may have a warped frame or bent sissors on a cord model. The 3.5 F stop is found on cords and flexes. Later models have more stuff on them and they more. An odd thing is that the Rollei was marketed and used in the late 1930's for shooting sports. Today folks who use them are mostly older folks, who still have problems with focusing the TLR with static objects using a tripod, with cameras with radically brighter stock screens.

[cpj]

Both Harry Fleenor in California and Krikor Maralian in New Jersey--probably the two top

Rollei-trained repair people in the country--have a substantial supply of Rollei parts. I have

several Rolleis and I never had trouble getting parts and repairs done the few times that has

been necessary over the last 40 years. (Addresses for both can be found in this forum's

archives.)

 

I would agree that you should look for a F model of the 3rd type and you can find the serial

number range on the web. If you need it and can't find it, write me offline. You won't go

wrong with a Rollei F in any case.

[michael_bach2]

The Rollieflex T with the 3,5 75mm Tessar, is a wery nice, ceap and light

camera. If the slow speeds dont work probely I think it is from 30 and down it

dosent mean that the top speed not are accurate.

 

www.micbach.dk "Photography workshops in Spain"

[bruce_appel]

If I were looking at a used rollei- any model, there are a few specific things I would look for.First, rack the lens in and out, and watch to be sure the lens panel is moving in and out straight. Worn rolleis can have problems with the lens panel getting out of alignment.Put a roll of film in it to be sure the counter works. The roller that senses the film thickness can get out of whack and need repair. Otherwise look at all the stuff you would with any camera-shutter, lens, etc.

[fwstutterheim]

As was mentioned before the F has the advantage is the removable finder hood. It will be

easy to replace the viewing screen. This counts when the camera is in tip-top shape but has a

screen to dim for your taste (better: eyes!). I do not want to spoil the party but there is a

good chance that the "new" Rollei will need a CLA right-away or shortly. In case serious

photography is planned, send it to Harry Fleenor or Krikor Maralian for a CLA anyway. Budget

for a CLA and do not buy a camera so expensive that you cannot afford a CLA. During a CLA

a brighter screen can be properly installed in older cameras with the non-removable finder

hood.

[gordon_mcgowan]

Hi Zac - don't neglect the Rolleiflex T! I have a Type 1 with grey leather finish and it has a really nice 75mm f3.5 Tessar. There is much talked about bokeh, but this quality was apparent from the first roll of Delta 100 shot, and I'm very happy using this camera.

 

One practical factor to consider is that the T is the only one of the Rolleiflex's to take a 645 adapter giving 16 frames on 120 film. OK, it's 5.5x4mm but read the specs on modern 645 systems, and you'll find none of them are exactly the advertised size. Any lab capable of printing 645 will have no trouble with the Rollei T 16-on-120 format.

It takes about 30 seconds to switch before loading film between 6x6 and 645 using the masking set giving you the option of 30 percent more images per roll.

 

Later models of the Rolleiflex T also accepted the Rolleikin 2, so could shoot 35mm as well (the 75mm 'standard' lens on 120 becomes a short telephoto suitable for head and shoulder portraits.)

 

In other words, the T is a true multi-format Rollei and accepts the same accessory range as the 3.5F (pistol grip, prism finder, Rolleifix, etc) with bayonet 1 filter size.

 

Con's: The Rolleflex T doesn't allow multiple exposures on the same frame, so John Blakemore-type seascapes are out. It has a similar aperture/shutter speed control to the Rolleicord Vb - some like it, some don't. Personally I find it fast to set EV's from my Sekonic handheld meter which was the idea behind this layout.

 

The 3.5F's were aimed at the professional market and heavier duty use.

 

However the last 6000 T's were ordered by the British Ministry of Defence and distributed amongst the Army, Royal Air Force, and Royal Navy, all of which are known to give their equipment a real hammering.

 

Reportedly, these Rollei T's proved far more reliable than the Hasselblads which eventually replaced them, a testament to exceptional Rollei engineering.

 

Hope this helps,

Gordon

[caliber_60]

Lens is the most important issue. It's the soul of a camera. A bad lens is not worth to repair. It will cost you at least $400 on the best effort basis. A good lens is a must. Other cosmetic and mechanical issues can be deal with later.