Been watching, with interest, a thread about Rollei TLRs. By chance I saw a Minolta Autocord on one of my favorite blogs, Tokyo Camera Style.
Minolta is known for good optics, so I was wondering what people think about these cameras, as compared. The basic structure - twin lens - seems similar so, where does it branch off from there?
Meanwhile, I'm going to tell myself that this won't lead to yet more gear purchases...
Just kidding, both make great photos best as I can tell.
Condition is probably a bigger factor than brand choice for most purposes. I don't have an autocord, but I did some shopping for a TLR recently and there are very nice photos from autocords on flickr. I couldn't say no to a rolleiflex automat with 3.5 tessar which I tested with my own hands and purchased for $225. It complements my yashica c nicely.
I have never owned a Rollei but I like Autocords so much I have 3 of them. I've never had a problem with the focus lever, which seems to be a problem with these cameras. But the optics are great and they are a lot cheaper than the Rolleis....so there really isn't any reason not to get one. ;-)
I have an Autocord and the lens is top, top notch. It can take on my Hasselblad 80/2.8 any (sunny) day. The screen is not as bright as the Accumate on my 500CM but excellent unless it is starting to rain.
I've used Autocords for a while, and recently bought a Rolleiflex 2.8 Xenotar. Basically, I wanted more sharpness in the corners at wider apertures, it's that simple. The Autocord lens is very nice, and stopped down to f/8 or so it holds its own with most anything. The ergonomics of the Autocord are wonderful- wind lever knob, focus lever, love them both.
I have a heretical dream of buying a 3.5 Planar and putting the lens onto a Minolta Autocord body.
I know someone who has both and can't move back and forth easily. I have no problems picking one up in the morning and the other in the afternoon. Cost-wise, the Autocord will get you to quality MF shots cheaper.
Having used both, I think the Autocord has more pleasant bokeh than a 3.5 Planar. I also find the control layout much easier to handle. Both are subjective calls, of course.
+1 for Autocord and Diacord. The most advanced version of the Diacord is the Ricohmatic 225: superb handling, and optics more than hold their own. But overall, the Autocord still takes the prize. An Autocord in tip top shape is an absolute joy to own and can even be used to take great photos. Worth the $ and patience to find.
I was a happy user of Rolleiflex T (which I sold to fund Mamiya 6 a year ago), but I really miss shooting TLR.
I am wondering - how does the handling of Autocord compares to Rolleiflex T? Is the Autocord as robust as the T? What about shutters (I read around and the Citizen should be the best bet for Autocord)?
In particular with the Rolleiflex T I liked the way it was possible to change the shutter and aperture at the same time - one could directly set the EV value from the hand hold meter (Digisix in my case) and then just sliding the lever one could select the shutter/aperture combination.
I am not really asking about the lens sharpness - the T was really nice wide open and excellent stopped down. And the Autocord users seem more than happy too. Both lenses are Tessar - but is there any difference in rendering wide open?
Autocord is in general very robust provided the focus lever has been serviced and moves freely. Unlike many Rolleiflexes&Rolleicords Autocord is not EV locked so you need to handle both levers.