Got the Yashica 124G... but now Rolleiflex T3 or Rolleiflex 2.8E

[Jessestr]

Hi guys

I bought the Yashica 124G, really seem to like it, was only €50 so not bad at all. But I really want to get a Rolleiflex now. Got a deal for a T3 €450 and a 2.8E Planar (defective lightmeter) for €700.

Can't really decide what to get. It's almost double the price.. but it's a 2.8 planar. Is the half stop DOF really worth it?

 

[Chris Lange]

The DoF isn't, but the better focusing screens, advance that doesn't go "tic-tic-tic-tic', and "sharper" lens might be (if you're into that sort of thing).

The Y124 lens is a Tessar type, it delivers a significantly look close to wide open, especially when focused on objects somewhat near to the lens, than a Planar will.

In modern terms, it's like comparing a 3000 dollar DSLR to a 750 dollar DSLR. They're both perfectly capable of the same results, for the most part, but the 3k cam has that "PRO" "LEGIT" cachet to it...

up to you

 

[Jessestr]

Mhm. Makes good sense. Is the focus screen replaceable?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I would argue for the 2.8E, but I'm biased because I have a pair of 2.8Es. When you absolutely have to have the 2.8, it's worth having, but the difference between the 2.8 Planar and the 3.5 Planar lens is quite small. There is much greater difference between the 3.5 Planar and the 3.5 tessar-type lens than there is between the two planars. Between the look/feel of the Planar image and the aesthetic of the 2.8 lens on the camera, I decided to go with the 2.8 model. If you want to get a Planar-lensed Rollei, I would frankly shop around on Ebay for one - I did not pay more than $600 USD for either of mine, and the second one did not even need servicing. $600 USD ~ 350 GBP. Even with shipping and tax that's a heck of a lot cheaper than 700 GBP.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Mhm. Makes good sense. Is the focus screen replaceable?

The focusing screen on the E is not user replaceable, but a qualified technician can swap them out for you.

 

[snapguy]

ymat vs rollei

I used both a Yashicamat and a Rolleiflex professionally for many years and it is very difficult to tell the difference between them as far as lens sharpness goes. I recently bought a new-to-me Yashicamat and a Rolleiflex, both about 60 years old. The 2.8 Rollei is considered pretty sexy and only you can decide if that is worth the extra money.

 

[Kyon Thinh]

That's why I told you to get little Rollei.
Get the 3.5E instead, it's more balance, also cheaper, I got a good deal for 250 EUR included shipping and tax from US. 450 and 700 for T3 and 2.8E is expensive. 2.8E is going for 400-500 EUR in Germany.
BTW, I changed my screen to Oleson screen by myself, it's not hard to do at all, easy and fast (10-15 Mins because I'm careful).

 

[summicron1]

the rollei T models do NOT have the automatic loading feature. They are, essentially, a gussied-up rolleicord.

Love that auto loading feature. I have a 2.8 E, love it.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I have a 2.8 great camera even tough a bit pricey.

Jeff

 

[Allan Swindles]

Now I went for a 3.5F, I couldn't justify the extra cost of the 2.8 version, nice coupled meter, changeable screen and a Planar lens. Is there anything better?

 

[Jessestr]

I don't know where you can get those 2.8's so cheap. I find them for 800-1500 at real dealers online and even eBay...

 

[Jessestr]

Found two 3.5's... With a Tessar lens. 3.5A & 3.5B.. Are they any good? (260 euro and 299 euro)

The attachment is a 3.5B (figured out it's an automat from late 1954), bit dirty but can be cleaned off I guess. It's in good working order

 

[piu58]

I once had a Rolleicord which has a Tessar lens like the Yashicamat. I replaced it by a 3,5F with a Planar. The Planar is a remarkably better lens.
If you take architecture shots with brickworks up to the corners it gets fuzzy if you open a Tessar more than f/8. The Planar may be used until f/5.6. A 75 mm lens is harder to construct than the slighly narrower 80 mm lens. It may be that you can open an 80/2,8 half a stop more.

 

[JPD]

Found two 3.5's... With a Tessar lens. 3.5A & 3.5B.. Are they any good? (260 euro and 299 euro)

They are very good. Get the 3,5 B as it's better designed (details like the shutter release lock and M/X lever) and feels more modern, and the bigger setting wheels are more comfortable to use. It was the first Rolleiflex I bought, and the Tessar is excellent. I will never sell it. I also have earlier models and a 3,5 F with Planar. The 3,5 F is excellent too, but half a pound heavier.

The viewing screen is darker in the corners than the one in the T and F models, but it's very easy to focus on.

 

[Pioneer]

The K4B is a wonderful camera. But to be totally honest, the output of the Yashica Mat will be just as nice. But once you have been bit by the TLR bug it is hard to avoid buying a Rolleiflex.

As for Tessar vs Planar, I personally prefer the Tessar (Xenar).

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I don't know where you can get those 2.8's so cheap. I find them for 800-1500 at real dealers online and even eBay...

It's called patience. I bought both my 2.8E bodies through US Ebay for under $600 by watching and waiting. You can also find Tele Rolleis for under $1500 if you are patient.

 

[baachitraka]

Yes, you need to wait if you want good offers. Down-side is it will take lot of your time. :-(

Xenar is good when stopped down. I personally stay in-between f/8-f/11.

 

[Jessestr]

Thanks guys Got that Rolleiflex 3.5B. Really looking forward. Don't need the half a stop... And about the planar, yes it might be sharper on the edges and stuff.
But I'm used to my Sonnar on the Leica M6. The planar version is way sharper wide open, but I prefer the Sonnar for my portraits. It has this thing...

 

[baachitraka]

Good Luck. You can try and score some accessories. Rolleinar I and II for close up..

 

[JPD]

Thanks guys Got that Rolleiflex 3.5B. Really looking forward. Don't need the half a stop... And about the planar, yes it might be sharper on the edges and stuff.
But I'm used to my Sonnar on the Leica M6. The planar version is way sharper wide open, but I prefer the Sonnar for my portraits. It has this thing...

The abberations wide open can be charming and romantic for those special photographs, where a Planar could feel boring. When you need the best sharpness possible you use a tripod and stop the lens down anyway.

The 2,8 is only the best option if you really need that aperture. But the 3,5 Planar, especially the later six element, is a little bit sharper and has better micro contrast. The Tessar is just as good stopped down one-two stops more.

Even the three element Zeiss Triotar is a fine lens. Very sharp stopped down to f:8 - f:11, and quite charming at full aperture.

Triotar at f:11





Triotar at f:4

 

[Pioneer]

Your Automat MX-EVS 3.5B (K4B) is a very nice camera. I am sure you will enjoy it.

It is lighter than the Yashica Mat (980g vs 1100g) and feels a little smoother in operation (especially the film advance). The only problem I have ever had with mine is ensuring proper focus without using the magnifier, and I have a Maxwell screen.

The Rolleiflex is allegedly more reliable, and it may be, but I seriously doubt anyone is using their Rolleiflex or Yashica Mat like the pros used to.

 

[Kyon Thinh]

It's called patience. I bought both my 2.8E bodies through US Ebay for under $600 by watching and waiting. You can also find Tele Rolleis for under $1500 if you are patient.

You also need luck for BIN, like I did with my perfect function 3.5E.

 

[mwdake]

You also need luck for BIN, like I did with my perfect function 3.5E.

Don't forget Craigslist.
I got me a 2.8C with Xenotar in very nice condition for $120

 

[Kyon Thinh]

We european dont have craigslist unfortunately...

 

[mwdake]

We european dont have craigslist unfortunately...

Maybe I should have said Craigslist type sites, I am sure there would be some equivalent sites.
BTW, the UK has Craigslist and the UK is kind of Europe.