Looking for affordable older Rollieflex to buy

[mark_sinderson]

<p>Hi everyone,<br>

First post here and I'm hoping for some help/suggestions.<br>

I'm a current Canon DSLR shooter and really enjoying it. In addition to the DSLR I've been interested in getting an older Rolleiflex camera to play with and hopefully take some good photographs with. I'm completely unfamiliar with Rollieflex but am motivated by my Grandfather, who always had one, and was not afraid to use it :-)<br>

Some of my earliest memories were of him constantly taking photographs at family gatherings back in the '70's. He had a Rollieflex but I have no idea of the model. All I know is that it was a "view" type and that he took a lot of photos with it.<br>

I don't have much of a budget (maybe $300-$500 max) but I would like to find a camera similar to my Grandfather's and learn how to use it.<br>

Can anyone point me in the right direction as far as what model from that era (probably late '50's to '60's is when he would have purchased it). I'm thinking I will use the camera for basic shooting (city scenes, street, maybe some landscape).<br>

Thanks in advance for any help!</p>

[Robert_Lai]

<p>Any of the Tessar lens variants should be reasonable in price.<br>

Rolleicord Vb, or Rolleiflex T come to mind.</p>

<p>These are all ancient cameras (i.e. around 50 years old). Plan on getting them serviced.<br>

If you are in the USA, I have had a good experience with Krikor Maralian (Krimar), who is in New Jersey.<br>

I should warn you that there's a nice case to be made for spending a couple of hundred dollars for a new, much brighter Maxwell screen to be installed during your service.</p>

<p>Some people will suggest that you try a less expensive camera, such as a Yashica-Mat. They are fine, but once Rolleiflex-lust is present (as suggested by your posting's headline), nothing else is going to do. And, I warn you that once you get started, it is just inevitable that you're going to want a nice 3.5F or 2.8F for your NEXT Rolleiflex.</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>If your Grandfather bought it new in the late 50s or early 60s it was probably either a Model E or F. F being the late model. Those models in good condition are a bit out of your expressed budget. You might look to a slightly older model B, C or D, generally termed "Automats". You can find them often under 500 on ebay. There are in a lot of cases a choice between a 2.8 80mm lens or a 3.5 75mm lens. The 75 is less expensive but just as good. An awful lot of the older cameras will have issues. Hazy lens, fungus, scratches on the lens. Also the mechanical parts are likely in need of service from old lubricants gone gummy and stiff. <br>

Too bad you didn't inherit your grandfathers camera. If he is still alive maybe he would loan it to you.</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>http://www.ebay.com/itm/ROLLEIFLEX-MX-TYPE2-TLR-Condition-9-5-/320890314127?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item4ab68d9d8f</p>

<p>this one looks awfully good coming up in an hour....</p>

[mark_sinderson]

<p>My Grandfather passed away in 1984 and unfortunately, I wasn't into photography at the time. I've asked my Father about the camera but he doesn't have any ideas on where it ended up. It might still be in some boxes at my Uncle's house, I guess I should check one more time.<br>

I've done a little research since the post and it seems like the "Automats" might be the ones to focus on, so to speak. I've setup a couple of saved searches on ebay and will keep a check on those. Hopefully I can find a decently working camera for under $500. I think I will really enjoy shooting with it and it would be a nice change from the Canon.</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>Depending on your photography experience, your biggest problem might be in the metering from a Rolleiflex. You probably can't count on a good one in an old camera if it has a meter at all. </p>

[mark_sinderson]

<p>Yeah, that's what I've heard. It sounds like the best bet is to get a separate light meter. Any affordable suggestions?</p>

[johnw436]

Sekonic L308. Small and

durable and you will likely

never need anything more.

[brett_rogers]

<p>D Purdy, B models are not usually very affordable at all, as they are quite rare and are prized by collectors because of their unique Biometar lens specification. They would be more expensive than a lot of F examples.</p>

<p>I've seen some fabulous images made with 1930s vintage Rolleiflexes. Decent quality by todays standards, they must have been quite astounding when new. Personally I think condition is everything. Just about any Rolleiflex will be a superb picture taker if it has been cherished and not abused. But if you value some of the niceties the later models featured, a good C or D will produce images just as sweet as an E or F for a fraction of the cost.</p>

[eric_mogren]

<p>A good Rolleiflex is a work of technological art and a joy to use, but you can get almost the same camera for less with a Rolleicord. Look for V series 'cords, as they are, IMHO, the best Rollei "bang for the buck."</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>Brett Rogers, the 2.8B is rare and was made only for the US and has the Biometar, which according to Zeiss is the same as a Planar.<br>

However there were 3.5Bs made with either Xenar or Tessar that aren't so expensive. There is one on ebay now for 799 or best offer. 799 would be too much.<br>

Dennis</p>

[john_layton]

<p>A few years back I had the pleasure of owning an Automat with the 75mm 3.5 Tessar. Lens performance was ok wide open....but absolutely stunning when stopped to f/11. While my current circa 1962 Planar 3.5f may offer a broader range of stunningly sharp apertures than the older camera, the Automat's Tessar still had a wonderful signature, and, due to having fewer elements (4 versus 6 for the Planar) actually flared less than the newer Planar. While I will likely never part with my 3.5f, I wish I had never sold the Automat! </p>

[mark_sinderson]

<p>Thanks for the feedback everyone.<br>

I will check out some C or D models or perhaps a "V" Rolleicord. My budget is definitely under $500 at this point so max "bang for the buck" is important.</p>

[greg_alton]

<p>The max bang for the buck that is commonly available may be a Minolta Autocord. You will not be in the least disappointed - and I've used Rolleiflexes too. You can always keep looking for Rolleis at the right price and the right condition - the right price is hard to find, and condition is probably the most important factor in actual use.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

<i>"The max bang for the buck that is commonly available may be [another camera][...] You can always keep looking for Rolleis at the right price and the right condition [...]"</i><br><br>The right price is then lowered by the amount of money you had to pay for that other camera you weren't really looking for, making it very much harder to find the camera you are looking for at what then has become <i>"the right price"</i>.<br>When you're looking for a particular thing, and are on a limited budget, don't blow part of that budget on something else.