Autocord vs rolleiflex
i'm the happy owner of minolta autocord, it's really great, i love it for it's sharpness, bokeh, it's ergonomics, it's everything (except for, maybe, it's fragility, or, rather, delicacy). here's some photos done with minolta http://www.flickr.com/photos/icono/s...7622630702399/
Although i like experimenting and "finding". and i'd also like to try legendary rolleiflex. i'm thinking about 3,5E or F.
but as it's quite costly and quite rare, i want to understand the real advantages i could get using it.
For example i know it's reliable in terms of.. "hardware")) but what concerns optics - are there noticable differences, and, mainly, advantages?
maybe there are some forum members who have both autocord and one of these rolleiflexes and could just give me some comparison and opinion?
I don't own an autocord but I would advice to also look at the Rolleicord if money is an issue.
They are the same build quality as the Flex. Also much cheaper. The Cord does not have Planar or Xentotar lenses so wide open I suppose they are not as good.
I just got a Rollei and I can see why it has become such a popular machine. It is amazing.......
Helping to save analog photography one exposure at a time
Well my Autocord is just as solid as my kiev. I think the focus sweep issue is overstated by careless people.
About a 1/3 of a stop is one advantage, and if you carry both loaded you got 24 exposures . can`t think of any others.
All I can say is having used a fair few TLRs and sold them all, including a Rolleicord, I was never disappointed with the build and quality of the Rolleis. The reason I stuck with the Autocord was its focusing lever, never caused me a problem and I find it so much easier to use than the knobs on other TLRs.
That for me is the Autocord's sole feature that keeps me with it, and it's a good job the Rokkor lens is bitingly sharp and renders just beautifully.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
A lot of people would consider that a reason not to get a autocord.
Well my Autocord is just as solid as my kiev.
I liked my Autocord. Compact and light. Decent lens. The focus lever was wonderfully convenient. And constantly needed repair. I must add, I bought the camera well-used for 35 bucks.
I never had a speck of trouble with any Rollei, 'flex or 'cord. I was told, many years ago, that the very best bang for the buck in a TLR was a clean Rolleicord III or later.
John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA
i'm the happy owner of minolta autocord, it's really great, i love it for it's sharpness, bokeh, it's ergonomics, it's everything (except for, maybe, it's fragility, or, rather, delicacy). here's some photos done with minolta [
You have a very good photographic "eye." Keep posting your photographs. Well done.
And I have a Kiev 88. It works very well for me.
John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA
what he probably meant was that his Minolta is as durable and "unkillable" as Kiev (which really is), not speaking of it's optics or shooting quality.
Originally Posted by mikebarger
thanks for your words. i'm only a newbie)
Originally Posted by Anscojohn
I wouldnt call the Rollei's "rare," but they are costly. On the other hand, just like Leica, you can buy a Rollei, use it for years and usually resell it for the same price you bought it for - so from that perspective, they are cheap...
See here for my Rolleiflex Price & Information Guide