Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,968   Posts: 1,523,407   Online: 1119
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    28

    Interested in purchasing a Rollei TLR

    I've been looking to purchase a Rollei 2.8 XXXX
    Can someone tell me which bodies to look for? I'm only interested in bodies with 2.8 lenses.

    The FX and GX are out of my price range.


    Thanks!

    PS: I have my eye on a Rollei 2.8 E in excellent condition for $750. Is that a good price?

  2. #2
    dpurdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portland OR USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,039
    Images
    38
    Are you watching ebay? Unbelievable how much money the Rolleiflexes are bringing now. You might try posting a WTB in the classifieds though you might have to be a subscriber to do that.
    If that E is in near mint condition I wouldn't be surprised to see it go for that much on ebay.
    The body differences aren't much to worry about, the main difference is in whether or not you can remove the WLF finder hood and how the meter works. There is a model called the E2 that has the removable hood but the E and everything previous has the non removable one.
    A lot of people like the C because of the aperture blades. A lot of people think the E was the best ever.
    There is a lens option in the 2.8s. Either the Schneider Xenotar or the Zeiss Planar. The Xenotars tend to sell for a little less though nearly everyone agrees it is equal in quality to the Planar if not better.
    Good luck,
    Dennis

  3. #3
    dpurdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portland OR USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,039
    Images
    38
    ebay item # 320652299489
    This one might be what you are watching. It is a very nice condition E with Planar that is already over 800.

  4. #4
    Toffle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Point Pelee, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,793
    Images
    121
    Don't discount the 3.5s out there. To paraphrase Dennis, there are some who say that the 3.5s are every bit as good or better than the 2.8s. My 3.5 f is without a doubt the best camera I own. (though I understand that all TLRs are obsolete regardless of their exceptional functionality ) You would not be disappointed with either version. Good luck with your search. Keep us posted on your progress.

    Cheers,
    Tom, on Point Pelee, Canada

    Ansel Adams had the Zone System... I'm working on the points system. First I points it here, and then I points it there...

    http://tom-overton-images.weebly.com


  5. #5
    dpurdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portland OR USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,039
    Images
    38
    My first Rollei was a 3.5F and I decided to sell it and get a 2.8 because I stupidly thought the viewing lens would be brighter. The viewing lens is a 2.8 in either case.

  6. #6
    Toffle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Point Pelee, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,793
    Images
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by dpurdy View Post
    My first Rollei was a 3.5F and I decided to sell it and get a 2.8 because I stupidly thought the viewing lens would be brighter. The viewing lens is a 2.8 in either case.
    Yes, I was going to mention that. The 3.5 Planar is a highly regarded lens. The thing to consider is the availability and price of attachments. Most 3.5s are Bay 2, which I believe are still more available than the Bay 3s of the 2.8s.
    Tom, on Point Pelee, Canada

    Ansel Adams had the Zone System... I'm working on the points system. First I points it here, and then I points it there...

    http://tom-overton-images.weebly.com


  7. #7
    eddym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Puerto Rico
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,927
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Toffle
    Don't discount the 3.5s out there. To paraphrase Dennis, there are some who say that the 3.5s are every bit as good or better than the 2.8s. My 3.5 f is without a doubt the best camera I own. (though I understand that all TLRs are obsolete regardless of their exceptional functionality ) You would not be disappointed with either version. Good luck with your search. Keep us posted on your progress.

    Cheers,
    No, not just obsolete; archaic! Worse, they have no right to even exist!

    But who cares, just keep taking pictures with your TLR and ignore the blathering from trolls. The pictures speak for themselves!
    Eddy McDonald
    www.fotoartes.com
    Eschew defenestration!

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    It clearly did sting, knowing that noone in his right mind would design a camera as a TLR nowadays, unless there was absolutely no way round it.
    But why you failed (and continue to do so) to take comfort in the fact that this doesn't mean that they (good ones) can't take excellent pictures is still quite remarkable.
    One would almost believe you really don't care about photography. Just about one particular type of camera.


    Back on topic: even the f/3.5 Tessar Rolleiflexes are quite capable machines.
    So given the state of the market, i would not dismiss too many cameras too soon.

  9. #9
    Rob Skeoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Burlington, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    984
    I had a GX that I sold last year... like you said, very pricey. But years ago I had the "T" model. I think it was a more basic model, although I can't think of anything more basic than a TLR anyway. My point is it was an outstanding camera, did everything I needed it to do, and took great photos. The model was not all that popular and is often less costly used because of this. I thought it was a great camera though.... any of the photos that weren't great were because of user error.

    -rob
    Rob Skeoch
    This is my blog http://thepicturedesk.blogspot.com/
    This my website for photo supplies...
    www.bigcameraworkshops.com
    This is my website for Rangfinder gear
    www.rangefinderstore.com

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    529
    Images
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by eddym View Post
    No, not just obsolete; archaic! Worse, they have no right to even exist!

    But who cares, just keep taking pictures with your TLR and ignore the blathering from trolls. The pictures speak for themselves!
    I think, we should post in all photography related forums how uncomfortable the Rolleiflexes are to work with, how bad the lenses are compared to modern lenses on d*tal cameras and that the outcome does not justify the hassle working with them. Our praising the Rolleiflexes is misleading too much people into wanting one.

    Ulrich

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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