Value of Rolleiflex 3.5F

[max_barstow]

<p>Hi</p>

<p>Aperture have a Rollei 3.5F for 790pounds, not posted on the website, which I've reserved; they're holding it for two weeks. It's in very good cosmetic condition (one small scrape on the paint and otherwise perfect), and it all feels very smooth (the shutter speed dial is slightly stiff, but that's all, and the shutter is very quiet). I trust that the lens/mechanics are all fine, Aperture have a good reputation, it nothing seems amiss. It's a later model (I forget which type exactly), but made post-1960, so I think a model III or IV. It doesn't come with any accessories (no case, strap etc.), only a lens-cap; it does have a very nice, bright and useable viewing screen (which saves me forking out an extra 200pounds or so on getting it replaced), with a split-focus in the middle. It also has a working meter. Bearing all this in mind, does 790 seems an excessive price? The camera isn't mint, but it's close to perfect.</p>

<p>Cheers, Max</p>

[dave_s]

<p>Yes.</p>

[dave_zoll]

<p><a href="http://tinyurl.com/d8x2hu">Rolleiflex Price Guide</a><br>

Dave</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>It is a bit high but it is the bird in hand and you know that it is in nearly mint condition and you know that it works and has a bright screen. I have seen them go higher on ebay depending on how well the ad was written. You might spend a few months researching auctions and finally end up saving a couple hundred dollars if you are lucky but then there is the risk from not being able to see it. You could spend the money now and have the camera now and consider that expedience and assuredness to be worth a little money and the bright screen to worth some money and consider that you got a great camera at a fair price. If you can do it and the camera feels good to you then I would. Don't sweat the little extra you might have paid.</p>

 

[BernardMiller]

<p>I think I glanced at that precise camera the other day...it had the "reserved" tag on it.</p>

<p>It is indeed very clean--I just had a cursory look at it through the glass of the display case, but was quite impressed with the condition.</p>

<p>For me, though, that price would be waaaay too high. I'm shooting with a Planar 2.8F of older vintage. It's a real beater, but the lens is in great shape. That set me back only £350 from <a href="http://www.croydonphotocentre.co.uk">High Street Radio</a> in Croydon (along with the strap, lens hood and another bit or two). But then I want a camera to shoot with, not one that looks pretty sitting on the shelf.</p>

<p>Aperture are good folks--I've bought from them before--and they do know very well what their gear is worth; I really think a lot of the Nikon gear they sell, for example, is very reasonably priced. In this case, though, I believe you're paying a pretty stiff collector's premium--that camera would be desirable because of its excellent condition. They'll probably get something close to that price someday due to that, and they know it.</p>

<p>The question is, do *you* want a camera to use all the time, that you're not worried about tossing in a bag and it getting scuffed a bit? Rolleis tend to be a bit expensive for what they are, and they become even more dear exponentially as the cosmetic condition improves. If you're only going to use it occasionally, and you like the camera for what it is--as an object--and having a nearly pristine version of it is important to you, then that price may not be entirely out of line (although, as Dave Sims said, it *does* seem just a bit high).</p>

<p>If you're wanting to get the Rollei experience and the prints & slides that result therefrom, there are indeed much cheaper ways to go about it. But you have handled the camera and *know* what condition it's in, and Aperture will probably offer you a warranty and will no doubt work with you if you discover some problems within a reasonable period after purchase, so the peace of mind may be well worth the extra cost.</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolleiflex-3-5F-Type-3-K4F-Planar-12-24-meter-/260656021014?pt=Film_Cameras<br>

It might be interesting to watch where this one goes. It seems to have about the same description and it has no reserve on the bid. I love sellers that trust the buyers to make a good bid.<br>

d</p>

[dave_s]

<p>Yeah, I was being terse (and supercilious), but I think in that price range you may want to see evidence of a recent CLA by one of the experts, like Mr Fleenor, or whoever his UK counterpart is. Even though the camera looks great, the lubricants may need attention, or the shutter may be out of spec, or the lenses out of collimation. </p>

<p>I believe you could get a comparable unit from KEH.com (in the States) for UKP200 less, but then, as D Purdy said, it's not the bird in the hand.</p>

[sergio_ortega7]

What's the pounds trading for now...$1.55? I'd say $1,200+/- is rather high. The last near mint 3.5F type III, with the Schneider lens (you didn't

state which lens this one has, but the Schneider version usually is less expensive) I saw for sale a few months ago, with the original hinged metal cap, leather

strap and case, but with an original rather dark screen, not a newer brightscreen, was less than $800. Condition is everything, and also what the market will bear, but that

still seems like a lot.

[tom_cheshire]

<p>Do they really find anyone to buy at those prices? That is excessive. </p>

[frank_bunnik]

<p>As others have written, it is a rather high price. Just a tip should you not buy this one but another one that does not have a bright(er) screen installed: buy a screen for a Mamiya RB67 and cut it to size. Then install it with the fresnel lens facing upwards. A secondhand RB67 screen should not sety you back more than 15-20 US$. The plastic screen is easily cut with a sharp hobby knife.</p>

[sergio_ortega7]

Forgot to mention....Whiteface models sell for more than regular ones. See link for comparison photos of WF and

non-WF Rolleis: Rolleishttp://johnsrolleionlypage.homestead.com/WhiteFaceCollection.html

[sergio_ortega7]

Let's try the link again: http://johnsrolleionlypage.homestead.com/index.html

[neilambrose]

A little expensive, IMO. I paid £450 for a 3.5 that is in absolute mint condition with no mechanical imperfections and a

meter that agreed with my sekonic.

[max_barstow]

<p>Neil, when you say a 3.5, I assume you don't mean an F? I find that hard to believe otherwise! Where did you find this incredible bargain?</p>

<p>I've pretty much decided to get the camera; Rolleis are more expensive in England than America, and the price matches up with equivalent cameras from Ffordes. If I got into buying a 'user' camera, I'd need to get it repaired/CLAed, and replace the screen, all of which mean i'll probably end up spending 600quid, quite possibly more, on an ugly camera, which doesn't seem the best option to me. I also trust Aperture, which is worth a bit.</p>

<p>Thanks v. much for all the advise though, even if I'm going to act against most of it!</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>congrats on a great new camera. I have been watching the really good ones since you started this and I don't think that you are out of line with what people are paying. There are always cases of the people who got the good deals but do you want to wait for fate or spend the time waiting for your low bid to win? I got my late 2.8F white face for 865 off ebay but I watched for 2 years to get that under priced "buy it now" camera and no way in hell I would sell if for that now 5 years later. The other thing is that some cameras feel good to you and some don't. Some strange karma thing I guess but get one that feels good in your hands.<br>

Dennis</p>

[photo5]

<p>I am still satisfied with my 1949 Rolleiflex Automat X with the Zeiss-Opton Tessar lens. It may not be the brightest viewfinder in the world, but it takes gorgeous photos. And best of all I only paid $115 for it at a camera swap meet 20 years ago. I've decided that the Planar lens, while being a better lens overall than the Tessar, isn't worth paying $800 for. You can buy an entire Hasselblad with an 80mm Planar lens for that in any case, but I enjoy using my Rolleiflex more than my Hasselblad, and in fact am selling the 'blad at this time.</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>Ok that camera on ebay I linked to early in this thread started with no reserve at 10 dollars or so and ended up bringing 1775.00 USD. Considerably more than the camera Max wants. Another 3.5 F running at the same time with a waist level finder from a Rolleicord went for 1425.00 USD. Again more than the camera Max wants. At least according to ebay sales, which are cheaper than I see other places, 3.5F Rolleis are bringing a lot more money than they did just a couple years ago.</p>

[max_barstow]

<p>Thanks again for advice, I've still not got it, probably another week to wait, hopefully less..</p>

<p>I intend to put a UV filter and hood on the front, will the filter be detrimental to the image quality, or have any effect other than reducing flare and acting as a lens-protector?</p>