Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,915   Posts: 1,556,388   Online: 1104
      
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 73
  1. #11
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,283
    Dealer price list from 1972 shows the 2.8F at $577.50 which would be $3,107.71 today. So, the price of a 2.8 has doubled since then.

  2. #12
    dpurdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portland OR USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,057
    Images
    38
    I agree they are over priced. I am a Rolleiphile and I own an FX which I feel fortunate to have picked up when they were only 3000. I thought that was ridiculous. I know they are good people, being employee owned with much pride but the price makes it an unrealistic user item. IMO. I know value is relative to how much money you have to spend but it puts the camera in an elitist market. I wonder how many they would sell and how busy they would be building them at 2500. On top of that the new accessories are out of this world as well. The good news is you can find an F for 12 to 15 hundred in very good condition and get it completely over hauled for under 5.
    Dennis

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,286
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
    Why are Rolleicords cheaper?
    Lenses not as good, mostly, and all accoutrements generally not as good as contemporaneous Rolleiflexen. Knob wind vs. lever, dimmer screen, things like that. A Rolleicord in good shape is still a pretty good deal.

    I agree that the new prices are absurd. Clearly the demand is influenced by the price rather than the other way around; they could sell a hell of a lot more cameras at half the price, one would think, but for whatever reason they'd rather be a stratospheric boutique item. The used market for Rolleiflexen seems kind of rational to me, though; they're astoundingly good user cameras with world-class lenses, and the prices reflect that.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-D659 View Post
    For optical products, even Nikon's 600mm f4 lens at the low end or maybe you want to drop $500k or more on a confocal microscope from Nikon, Zeiss or Olympus..
    Yes, but how many Rolleiflex's have lasers?!

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Jersey Channel Islands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    348
    Rolleiflex is, in car terms, a lovely old 1920's car, worth many thousands of pounds, and loved and cherished by its owner, a hassleblad, or any other modern camera is a toyata or other modern car, which gets you around every day, but is much like every other car on the road, I speak as a photographer and classic car owner, I have a rolleiflex which to me is priceless and I happily paid a lot of money,( dare not say how much, my Mrs might read it) for a ,ovely, beautiful classic car, I cannot get enough of using my rolleiflex, I cherish my classic cars, My every day car, it goes though a car wash now and again, my modern Bronica, well, it's just not the same as my Rolleiflex but it works.
    Richard

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    730
    Make it a 2500$ camera and nobody would consider buying that old thing. At 6000$ it becomes an objet de convoitise. Simple, really.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,904
    When you used one, you understand why it is expensive.

    Jeff

  8. #18
    IloveTLRs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,001
    Images
    2
    I heard that old Rolleiflex Automats are cheap on eBay these days. $300 or so? That's cheap for such a great camera.
    Those who know, shoot film

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    623
    Same reason a Leica is. They are built in small numbers, by a company in a Western economy paying realistic wages and taxes. I'd also hazard a guess that a huge number of parts are custom made, not off the shelf, and not from another product in their line up.

    Rolleiflexes are far too expensive for me to buy new, but I am grateful that they are there, as something of a small bastion of the value of craftsmanship in a world of commoditized glued-together "me too" products.

    I had a 3.5E until recently, and in all honesty, did not feel that enamoured with it, maybe I'd feel different with a new one. I'm glad they are there giving us the option.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    62
    I suppose Rolleis are expensive because there are people willing to pay the price. But I have no idea why the town you live in is pronounced "burl-in" instead of "bur-lyn" like in Germany.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin