Rolleiflex 2.8 FX or M7

[noddy_b]

If it cost the same, would you buy the new Rolleiflex 2.8 FX or a new M7? Why do I

ask? Well, somebody quoted for me the price of Rolleiflex FX (the batch with compur

shutter) which is the same as for a new M7.

[al_kaplan1]

Apples and oranges! How can you compare them? Pck up a used M2, a Rollei T, a Weston Master IV or V light meter, and a bunch of film.

[lee_shively]

Neither. But I'd consider the MP as a third alternative.

[shambrick007]

i'd go w/the m7. already have two medium format rigs.

[bobtodrick]

Agree with Al. If they cost the same what would you buy...a 3 three passenger pickup or an eight passenger station wagon.

[noddy_b]

The question must have sound silly.

 

I asked a dealer here in Bangkok how much he can get the Rolleiflex FX (has to be

shipped from Hong Kong because the representative in Thailand is going to quote

something like 5x the price). He checked the price and told me its 90,000 THB which

is around 2200 USD, the same as a new M7 here.

 

I checked the price at BH and other places and they only have the GX (75 and 80

aniversary), and they seem to be more expensive. So my question should have been

"is 2200 USD a good price for a new Rolleiflex FX ?

 

Sorry about this!

[h._p.]

Or you could always compromise and get the other M7 (Big rangefinder camera, 6x7 format, built by Mamiya)

 

:-)

[noddy_b]

Thx Harvey,

 

This isn't a bad idea. My situation is this. I like the square format, built quality and

lenses of the Hassy (used 501 for a while) but dislike the bulk. I used the Fuji MF

zoom (645zi or

something) but found the lens to be much too slow. I also found the Contax 645 to

be too bulky for taking to places (perhaps I shouldn't expect to take the 645 to

places)

 

I think the Rolleiflex has the

combination of square format, great lens and f2.8. And it's not too bulky to take with

me to places.

 

How do you like the Mamiya rangefinder?

[stephen_w.]

Noddy,

 

You'll find that the Mamiya has pretty slow lenses too.

[mark_wilhelm]

I use both cameras. For some reason, I like the square format for black and white. Also, I believe the larger negative is more important for true black and white photography (e.g. Tri-X) than for color (extremely fine grain film is available which is more than adequate for small enlargement color photography). I use the Leica M7 with color transparency film and occasionally color negative (NPS) or, rarely, C-41 B&W. So, in answer to your question, I would suggest the FX if you will be shooting primarily black and white. Otherwise, I'd go with the M7, which is an absolutely wonderful camera and generally "feels better" than the FX.

[jay_.]

I wouldn't pay $2500 for either camera. Neither of them seems like there will ever be a digital conversion, and it will likely be only for the old and rare models of Rollei and Leica that anyone will bother going through whatever bother and expense there is to procure a roll of film and get it processed. I don't see either the FX nor the M7 holding their value at all well.

[john_layton]

Yet another alternative: go to *bay, and for the same dough, buy

both a slightly used M-7 and a Rolleiflex 3.5f, preferably a series

3 or 4 with the six-element planar. I have two 3.5f/s, each with

the six-element, and these lenses are stunning! I also find the

3/5f's light-meters, when equipped with the "Rollei Diffuser"

(25.00 on *bay) to offer quick and accurate (incident mode)

metering. I don't know about the Rollieflex FX, but I did have a

brief experience with a GX, and here's my two cents: 1. build

quality not up to par with older Rollieflexes. 2. Spot meter

accurate only if extraneous light is kept from finder (as when the

pop-up magnifier or prism is used). 3. On the GX, the entire

mirror is semi-silvered to allow light to hit the spot meter. This

makes the focus more diffuse than that on an older Rollieflex.

This is also a design flaw, as a small semi-silvered "spot"

slightly larger than the meter element would be sufficient, and

would by and large retain the crisp, decisive focussing of the

older cameras. The only downside to the older Rolleiflexes is

the fact that the lenses are single-coated, and tend to flare a bit

more than the more recent (multi-coated) editions.

 

I've also owned a couple of Mamiya Six's, and found them to be

quite wonderful with the 50 and 75mm lenses, which are also

stunningly sharp. If you like the square, buy the older models

without the extra (distracting) framelines for 645. But I fried the

electronics several times over with both my Norman power

packs and my older Metz CT-60 flash, even with a sync-voltage

regulator attached. So I lost faith and got back into Hasselblad,

but miss the Sixes! I also found the Mamiyas to be quite

hand-holdable at speeds down to 1/8 sec, which can make the

slower lens-speeds a bit easier to live with, depending on

subject movement. The bad thing about owning both Mamiya

Sixes and Leica M's, IMHO, is that they tend to overlap too much

in areas of use. The Leicas are a bit handier in faster-moving,

closer-in human interest imagery. A Rolleiflex, however,

compliments a Leica M-system wonderfully. Good luck!

[rgh]

I really like using my Rollei TLR 75mm f3.5, its fun and gives great results. I too had

thought of the FX and the price you mentioned is very low for a new camera. The new

lens [coating] is suppose to be really good and I have read make a difference. But for

me they are the same 'camera'; modern old style-new tech, will loose value in a short

time, and the less expensive, better built 'original' camera will do what I need. That

said, buy the FX if you need it, M7s will be around awhile at lower prices.

[raymond_tai]

I used to own the GX which is the same thing without the fake lizard skin and thought

it a wonderful camera. My previous TLR was a 124G so not surprisingly the Planar

was a better lens. I spent three days walking around Ho Chi Minh City with it as my

one camera and had tons of fun. The camera was small and light with an accurate

TTL meter and with the strap stretched against my neck I could even take a slow

shutter speed shot despite stopping in a cafe every hour or so drinking coffee with

the citizens. The Rollei made 80mm Planar is sharper and has higher contrast than

any standard Hasselblad 80mm I have ever owned. I'll scan you a few frames if you

like. What I didn't like about the GX was the film loading system. It was a bitch

getting the spool into the camera without scratching the interior, and then it was held

so tight in place that unless you are using the very clever Fuji easyload it is a pain to

get the receiving spool to catch. Try doing that in the middle of the street! For

something with a $2500+ price tag at least Rollei could have engineered a 220

pressure plate switching option. It is a wonderful user camera but with a collector's

price tag. I suggest getting a twenty year old 3.5f and sending it to Bill Maxwell for a

once over and a Hi Lux screen. The total should be less than $1k.

[kamol_.]

: )

[kaiblanke]

Although it had been already said: I have to agree with the others in buying an older Rolleiflex like the E or F series (maybe even one without the meter, from 700 USD on), a nice Pentax or Minolta Spotmeter or a good Gossen / Sekonic incident meter (200 USD), a used M6 (1000 USD) and add a Voigtlaender Nokton (USD 300) to that. That will give you much more possibilities than just the FX alone.

<p>

I do not think I would buy a new Rolleiflex TLR or a Leica, since both are built to last for decades. But If I had to buy new, I would prefer the FX since it already has a lens while you have to spend another USD 1000 to get one for the M7 ...

[sean_finch]

I don't own an M7, but I do have M6 and I also have a Rolleiflex FX. The Leica

is truely a favourite, and I'd alway recommend it to someone with a long term

interest in taking photos, assuming budget permits.

 

But just to say, that since having got the FX, which I agree is a lot of cash for

old technology and is by all accounts not as well built as a the original 2.8 &

3.5 F......I've really had a lot of fun taking pictures with it. It's certailnly built to

very good standards and is still very nice to use, and it's capable of extremely

nice results.

 

All said and done, I find it every bit as good an everyday camera, quiet, quick

to use & unobtrussive, as the Leica. Strapped across your chest it sits on

your hip, and although quite large is well out of the way and easy to carry.

Flip up the finder, angle your body, focus, meter, compose & shoot. In many

cases, I actually find it easier to use, for candids, portraits and on the street,

than either rangerfinders or the SLR's

 

Of course, you don't have to fork out for the FX to get this, as there are

numerous Rolleiflexes available used as well as other makes of TLR. But I find

the meter in the FX to be very good, I don't find a problem with extranious

light affecting meter (although manual warns of this), but then I live in the UK

and you're lucky if you get enough light to take a reading here, let alone have

a bit spare to be considered extranious.

 

But you do need a Maxwell Hi Lux screen, the one that comes with the

camera is near useless, Maxwell's screens are excellent and easy to fit on the

FX. Also get a metal lens hood for the taking lens, especially if you are going

to carry it around over your shoulder, in reAdy to shoot mode, without lens

cap on. It's not an issue with flare as such, but the front element is exposed

and liable to get knocked & scratched

 

 

Sean

[rainer_viertlb_ck]

look for the mamiya 330 system. i was working many years with them and they are very very good 6x6 cameras with changeable lenses of highest quality ( from 55 up to 250mm )and th possibilities too shoot very slow times as the rollei also. they arent "moden" and so they are cheap.......no idea why cause the quality is top.