2.8f -3.5f ever ready case the same?

[ToddB]

I was thinking of tracking down one of those Ever Ready case for the 3.5 I have. But there seems to be more 2.8 cases out there for a fair price. Is there a difference? Could I get away with using 2.8f case?

ToddB

 

[Allan Swindles]

I have a 3.5f and case, the front of which is detachable. As far as I am aware both model cameras are identical with the obvious exception of the lens. The inside of the front panel of my case is flat so I don't see any reason why it wouldn't interchange, but perhaps someone else knows different.

 

[RobertoMiglioli]

I´m sorry but are you talking about Rolleiflex cases? No, they are different for 2.8 and 3.5. Front deatachable is a bit bigger for 2.8. And there are a few diferences on the side plates too.

 

[ToddB]

Hey guys.. I'm watching 3.5 right now on KEH close out on the Bay.

Todd

 

[summicron1]

ur discussing the standard "never-ready" case? Why? I have one for my 2.8 E, but to use it I need to thread the handle and strap lugs into their proper holes, take the lens shade and maybe even the filter off, and on and on, every time I want to just close the dumb thing up to hike a bit farther down the trail.

Heck with that -- I have a case designed to take a 35mm slr and a tele-lens that holds the rollei 2.8 E camera with lens shade and strap nicely -- zips from the top, i just unzip, pull out the camera and there it is. There's a net pocket on the front for extra film and room under the camera (where the tele lens would extend) to put a couple of close-up lenses and filters in a separate plastic bag.

And it's padded.

You can purchase cases like this for a LOT less than a vintage Rollei case will set you back -- I sold an F case for $75 or so a few years ago, but I'd never buy one for that sort of money.

So if you want to use your camera in any sort of practical way, go to a camera store that has a wide selection of camera bags and find one. Should set you back about $25.