Man O man, I was excited

[mharris]

I got my Minox ML from KEH yesterday popped in a new PX28L and bammo, the

shutter didn't work. I had read all of the threads about the Minox shutter but

thought the EX rating would mean mine worked. It didn't.

 

Called KEH and set up a return. While talking to the KEH guy I surfed their

site and saw a Rollei 35TE for a little more than the Minox. I decided to work

a trade. I was going to use the Minox at the fair tonight but I'll use my Leica

CL instead.

 

Anyone have any comparisons of the Minox and Rollei 35? I've seen something

about shutter cocking and extending the lens on the Rollei but can't seen to

find a manual.

[daryl_jorud1]

Michael, Minox 35 mechanical components are perhaps not quite as durable as Rollei 35. Minox Minoxar and Minotar lenses are every bit as fine as Rollei lenses. Top of line Rollei 35S uses Sonnar lens.....some Rollei 35 users prefer the Tessar models. For most use, differences are hair splitting minor. Minox is faster to operate than Rollei. Rollei is somewhat fiddly to use, but one gets used to it in time. Minox has auto exposure, Rollei does not. Minox has virtually silent shutter, Rollei not as quiet. Top of line Minox is GXE, or MDC if you prefer metal body covering. In the hands of a thinking photographer, both Minox 35 and Rollei 35 are capable of producing absolutely superb images.

[john_robison3]

A cheap but good alternative is an Olympus XA-2. Programed only exposure , gives up aperture before shutter speed, shutter will stay open up to 4 seconds in dim light. Zone focus, decent 4 element lens. Did I mention cheap?

[Troll]

If you have a Leica CL, why in the world would you want a Rollei 35 or a POS

like a Minox 35.

[Gus Lazzari]

Wow Bill, For one, the Leica CL is not considered pocketable. (See my photo's)

 

Two, the optics on these true pocketables are stunning for their super compactness.

 

IMHO a Contax T is one of the best true mini's ever made. It combines many of these fine camera's attributes.

 

A Contax T: Solid (Unlike the Minox), Auto exposure (Like the Minox & Olympus), Rangefinder manual focus (Like the CL), all with a great 38mm Zeiss Lens packaged smaller than a pack of cigarettes!

 

Finally, the excellent photographer and reviewer Ken Rockwell showed how a "beat-up" $5 Olympus Trip 35 from the mid 70's, virtually out performed a modern top Canon DSLR & lens. "AHA! The Olympus Trip 35 is sharper, since the 17-40mm got a little softer in the corner and the Olympus' sharpness stayed as high as it was in the center." (Kind of a SHOCKER!)

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/olympus/trip-35.htm

[Gus Lazzari]

What a fine camera...

[mharris]

Thanks everyone for the great responses. Bill I wanted the Minox to take along with me to Yellowstone tomorrow. I have other cameras for the outside shots but I wanted the Minox to get people shots in the shops and stuff around Yellowstone. Sort of street shots with out the streets.

 

Last time I went to Yellowstone I saw a wonderful mix of people, this time I wanted to capture some of those faces. A small camera like a Minox would have been great. I went ahead and traded the busted Minox for the Rollei TE. I shot with my CL at the fair today and just did zone focusing to get used to it.

[gadge]

http://www.submin.com/35mm/collection/minox/index.htm

 

 

See Minox ML page - note comments below re serial numbers and shutter improvement...

 

 

"Although the pinnacle of the Minox 35mm range of cameras the Minox 35ML is still plagued with reports of poor shutter reliability. There are cameras sold in 2003/2004, 20 years after production, that clearly have never been used and the shutters faulty.

 

A modest 30-40GBP spent on repair will fix most problems. As a gauge on this out of 20 second hand cameras of unknown pedigree 10 had faults. These where mostly with the shutter not opening or not adjusting from P mode to aperture priority or only doing so sometimes, 2 developed problems with selecting f18 and f16 whilst 'on-the-shelf', and one was returned un-repairable with timing problems because a new circuit board could not be obtained. Six needed new ASA/DIN dials which where the only obvious signs of heavy use and these were replaced by Minox for free.

 

When the MDC was released Minox incorporated all the sophisticated improvements of the latest ML. The ML was given a new shutter "making it more reliable than ever". IX/92 covering serial numbers 7171451-7178701.

 

The results from the Minox 35ML may be matched by some other Minox models, and some owners who also have Rollei 35mm claim the Rollei has a better lens, yet continue to use regularly their Minox 35ML as prove that this camera is well worth the expense.

 

Walter Zapp owned a Minox 35 ML that was used by him and his family for many years."

[gadge]

I use both a Minox ML with improved shutter and a Rollei 35. The ML was a true Ebay bargain. It came like new in all original packaging.

 

I love the ML and use it all the time as a backup. I often choose to use the ML in prefernce to heavier "first option".

 

The Rollei gives nice results too but I rarely use it. Design is a bit quirky and its rather heavy to carry easily in a pocket. I view it has having little if any image benefit overs the Minox ML.

 

A Contax T2 is arguably better than either especially when built in flash is considered. It's Sonnar lens blows ML and Rollei away but I still often prefer taking lighter ML whenever possible for basic tourist stuff.

[paul_neuthaler]

ever think of putting a Leica IIIF w/50mm Elmar in your "pocket"?

[godfrey]

The Minox 35 shutters were not particularly reliable until about the time of the 35GT.

 

I have a Minox 35GT-E as well as a couple of Rollei 35 cameras (both Sonnar and Tessar

models) that have seen a LOT of service over the past 10-15 years that I've owned them.

Both have excellent lenses, although the Rollei 35S Sonnar lens is sharper and has more

even illumination across the field, particularly wide open and down to about f/8. Then it's

almost impossible to tell them apart. I did extensive testing comparing the Rollei 35S

against the Leica CL with Summicron-C 40/2 and, frankly, they are so evenly matched that

the major advantage to the Leica is the interchangeable lens and rangefinder, not the

difference between the lenses. The Rollei is much smaller and handier if you're carrying

just one lens. In use, I tend to prefer the Rollei 35 over the Minox, although there are

occasions when the aperture priority AE on the Minox is an advantage. I the Rollei 35

controls more sensibly laid out and easier to work for a very small camera.

 

But all this is delving into ancient history of time before 5 years ago. I haven't touched a

roll of 35mm film since 2002, and it's not likely that I will any time soon either.

 

Godfrey

[john_wire]

"If you have a Leica CL, why in the world would you want a Rollei 35 or a POS like a Minox 35"

 

.....let's see now, my $2 POS Minox 35GL, a "real" pocketable 35mm film camera, is tough. Been dropped numerous times and has a cracked door. How tough is the CL, Oly or Rollie after some trips to the floor?

 

Check the battery regularly and "work" the ISO/Aperture settings to keep the electrical contacts wiped and it should be fine. Is the lens any good, probably. Regards.

 

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/6400639-lg.jpg"></img></center>

[simonpg]

If you are after a Rollei 35, I'd suggest the SE with its Zeiss Sonnar lens as superior to the Tessar lens. But you will need to check the accuracy of the meter as they are quite old now. Mine (mint) took superb photos but the meter was out by about 2 stops.

[godfrey]

<center>

<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW1/large/mva.jpg"><br>

Wall - Mountain View 2001<br>

<i>©2001 by Godfrey DiGiorgi<br>

Rollei 35S</i><br>

</center><br>

I wouldn't really recommend dropping any of these cameras ... but one of my Rollei 35s

survived being dropped same as an older Minox 35 that I had. I try very hard never to drop

a camera.

<br><br>

Personally, I prefer the Rollei 35S over the 35SE model. I prefer the match needle meter

readout on the top deck over the diode readout in the viewfinder. Regards the lens and

shutter, all the mechanical components, they are identical.

<br><br>

Godfrey

[john_wire]

"Minnie" (the 35GL) is so small and light it's easy to forget she's with you. She's great for "stealth" shots. Meter the scene and set the aperture for the shutter speed/DOF needed, zone focus and then P&S without raising the camera to your eyelevel. Nobody notices/cares what happened.

 

Easy for me. Regards.

[gadge]

Don't forget that the ML model also has a program mode as well as the normal Minox 35mm camera aperture priority mode.

 

Just stick it on P setting, set distance and snap away. Note the very quiet shutter whilst doing so!

 

It also has a lock exposure capability, x2 exposure quick set button and ability to set different film speed from that in use all to deal with tricky lighting situations. Plus hot shoe for flash AND a self timer, all built in what was the worlds smallest 35mm camera at that time.

[gadge]

<p>Just rediscovered this old thread. Should have mentioned at the time that the big advantage of ML versus Rollei was lighter weight. <br>

Not such an issue if you are using a bag but in the picket the ML really wins out. <br>

The lens quality on the T2 was the best though. <br>

I still own the ML but sold the Contax T2 and my Rollei 35. I suppose that sums the best choice for me overall!<br>

I now mostly use a Canon Ixus which is a great tiny camera. I use a 12MP black version which was the last one they made which also had a viewfinder. The Canon is way smaller and probably lighter so the ML is not seeing as much action these days but I will never sell it. </p>