Rolleiflex TLR older model

[User_4525289]

<p>Dear fellows CMC connoisseurs...<br>

I was saving for that for a year or more and finally I am ready to get a Rolleiflex TLR. However the only one I can afford is a older model in bargain conditions on KEH. They have few but no picture etc. I am just wandering is it safe to get one from them? I have never have a thing from them in BGN conditions would it worth to give it a shot?</p>

[gene m]

<p>KEH has an excellent reputation, Kozma.</p>

[m._howard_edwards]

<p>Kozma -<br>

And so does Gene M. Trust him.</p>

[SCL]

<p>My experiences with KEH have been excellent - Almost everything I've bought from them over the years has been rated BGN and would have been rated very good almost everywhere else. Plus KEH has a good return policy. I'd say go for it!</p>

[craigd]

<p>I have never, ever been disappointed in the condition of any item I have purchased from KEH.</p>

[User_4525289]

<p>Thanks all. I will give it a try. Just kind of hesitant to spent on something with vague description and no picture at all. I did buy stuff on KEH but nothing in BGN conditions</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Usually, a BGN from KEH is as good as a lot of "minty" cameras sold on eBay. I have found their ratings to be <em>very</em> conservative.<br>

I now always look first at KEH before looking in eBay or any other site. Frequently, their prices are lower than the auction sites.</p>

 

[Two23]

<p>I have been buying from KEH off & on for a decade & a half. I recommend them.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>I haven't bought from KEH, but even here in Australia I hear only good things. Look forward to seeing some pictures from your new(old) Rollei, Kozma...you will love it!</p>

[gene m]

<p>"I am not sure about Gene, but KEH is reputable."<br>

Hey James. Go screw yourself.</p>

[chansonbleu]

<p>Kozma,</p>

<p> I'm another forum member that has had very good service from KEH.</p>

[MathewDH]

<p>In talking with Ken Ruth at Bald Mountain Camera Repair, he mentioned that even heavily used commercial examples of the these camera exhibit little wear to the shutter system. Most of these cameras never saw that much use so it is highly likely that almost any model you buy will be in pretty decent shape. Even if they have sat around for a very long time unused.</p>

<p>There is no shortage of lesser priced examples on ebay of any of these models. Be it the early K1 versions which are completely manual, or the later models into the 50's that became more automated. There are specialist who can service these machines, both for a good cleaning of the optics systems and correct timing of the shutters at the different speeds.</p>

<p>The nice part about the Rolleiflex models is there is no shortage of inexpensive accessories, like lens hoods and filters.</p>

<p>KEH is like any other seller of used equipment--you take your chances on the goods. At least you have the chance of returning it if it is not working right. Not so with an ebay seller. Good luck with your purchase.</p>

[dhbebb]

<p><em>At least you have the chance of returning it if it is not working right. Not so with an ebay seller.</em><br>

Simply not true. If an item is not as described and you complain to e-bay, they will find in your favor almost every time. This a vital part of their business model.</p>

[gene m]

<p>I've developed a healthy dislike for you, james martin.</p>

[User_4525289]

<blockquote>

<p>I've developed a healthy dislike for you, james martin.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />That is intense Mr.M. Glad that I am not an object of your dislike looks dangerous and damaging to the reputation. Therefore I will follow your advice along the advice of other comrades-manual camera owners and get the Rolleiflex from KEH in BGN conditions. Would not make me great photog, but would make me an owner of piece of fine German engineering </p>

[paul_wheatland]

<p>I like Photo.net and waited a long time before joining back many years ago. I dislike comments like what went on in this thread. It is entirely inappropriate. Frankly I enjoy Gene M. postings and it is the reason that I continue reading and posting. I feel what some people may think, disparaging remarks by whomever have no business on this forum.</p>

[User_4525289]

<p>C'mon Paul trolling is fun. And I would say here it it totally harmless.</p>

[John Seaman]

<p>Its significant that there is no such word in the English Language as "unsay". Once something's been said, whether face to face or in a public forum, that's it, you are stuck with it. I'm not suggesting we should say nothing, just be very very careful when making any kind of personal comments. Having said that it would be a dull forum indeed if no-one ever took any kind of risk.</p>

[gene m]

<p>"If I cared, I would know more about you than your spouse, or maybe you, yourself."<br>

<br /> This borders on the criminal and is at the very least meant to anger or frighten me. I assure you, I'm not frightened.<br /> Mentioning someone's spouse in a public forum such as this is in poor taste, entirely inappropriate and threatening. I strongly suggest that you no longer respond to any of my posts in such a manner. In fact, I want you to leave me alone.<br>

<br /> If there is a way to "ignore" posters here. I'd be interested to hear about it.</p>

[MathewDH]

<p>If one discounts the messages that are bickering and not substance to the original posting. not much appears to be added here.</p>

<p>As for a particular camera, the K4B an other 3.5 MX models are nice basic models. I have my father's example that he bought new in January 1953 in Michigan. I finally had it serviced by Harry Fleenor. I suspect it had never had been gone through since being bought new. A couple of the filters had gone bad and that is all that was with it, other than some 35mm 1953-54 Kodachrome slides that mold was making a good home on. While the camera was out for servicing I gathered up all of the missing bits shown in the camera's manual. You will want to get a Bay 1 lens hood. Plus the optional leather viewing hoods if you want to stay all original. Original manuals, boxes and leather cases are easily gotten too.</p>

<p>You did not mention which model of Rolleiflex or Rolleicord you were considering.</p>

<p>Gene M might have some photos to show from some of the different models. Others here might have a models preference for technical reasons. Those opinions would make a fine contribution.</p>

<p>CHEERS...Mathew</p>

[User_4525289]

<p>Mathew,<br>

My options are really-really-really limited. I think that I can afford 2.8 D in BGN that it is an absolute maximum I can go to. And as a matter of fact it is a bit stretch of my resources. I can go for 3.5 MX but I want to have 2.8 Planar just to see why it is so legendary.</p>

[User_4525289]

<p>James Martin,<br>

You are great military leader but just tell why did you hijack my thread of Rolleiflex purchase and make it a circus with lots of horses? Oh my....</p>

[User_4525289]

<p>Mr. Martin,<br>

Face-palm...no double face-palm. (getting out murmuring why moderation here is so lenient....)</p>

[gunbu]

<p>Kozma - I find the 2.8 D a good choice! I own a 2.8 C which I would also recommend, often cheaper and the last one with 12 diaphragm blades. First I had some problems with the viewing screen but after cleaning it (was easy) everything for me was fine. Those are the models where you cannot exchange hoods but unscrewing them is not a big task... Good thing for me: they weight a little less than the Fs. Good luck, looking forward to seeing your images with a Rolleiflex!</p>

[dhbebb]

<p><em>I am not sure about Gene, but KEH is reputable</em>.<br>

Is there some longstanding feud between James Martin and Gene M, or is this ALL it took to set off this quite long-drawn-out hissy fit?</p>