Here they are bigger I thinkOnly the last photo comes up viewable, all others are thumbnails and too small to determine anything.
Based on the last photo the front cells are fine, open the aperture to f2.8 and photograph them again with the back open and straight into the lens.
There is more to a Rolleiflex than the lenses. Look at the overall condition of the camera. Check how the back fits against the body. Paint condition on the rim of the raised circle at the wind lever. Straightness and condition of the focus hood. Etc. For your figuring, rough ideas of what problems in other areas will cost you- Shutter, $125, focus $175, winding system- $175.
Looks to be an E? Worth $600-800 base, add for excellent condition, recent overhaul, etc. My numbers might be low because many camera prices have been rising in the last few months.
On an Ebay camera with no returns, best to be certain that either the listing goes over condition, or you ask questions and get in writing from seller. This allows you to return because it didn't match seller's description.
Not to send your brain down the drain again, but don't ignore Rolleiflex 3.5 models.
All Dan’s advise is spot on. His comment on the 3.5 models I find especially true. I have a couple of 2.8 models and personally I find they do not balance in my hands nearly as well as the 3.5, the 2.8’s are front heavy. My final Rollei TLR purchase was a 3.5f for that reason. What’s a half a stop with today’s great fast films anyway.Not to send your brain down the drain again, but don't ignore Rolleiflex 3.5 models.
There is more to a Rolleiflex than the lenses. Look at the overall condition of the camera. Check how the back fits against the body. Paint condition on the rim of the raised circle at the wind lever. Straightness and condition of the focus hood. Etc. For your figuring, rough ideas of what problems in other areas will cost you- Shutter, $125, focus $175, winding system- $175.
Looks to be an E? Worth $600-800 base, add for excellent condition, recent overhaul, etc. My numbers might be low because many camera prices have been rising in the last few months.
On an Ebay camera with no returns, best to be certain that either the listing goes over condition, or you ask questions and get in writing from seller. This allows you to return because it didn't match seller's description.
Not to send your brain down the drain again, but don't ignore Rolleiflex 3.5 models.
Thank you for that info and advice! Do you think $875 is too much for it? Appreciate the advice
Again, I may be out of touch with the market these days so... $875 for a 2.8 E Xenotar (assuming it is an E) would be medium high. I'd expect a warranty or return option.
For your first medium format, I would suggest that you be careful of Ebay sellers. If they have a few thousand sales and yet aren't willing to take returns, something is fishy. If it is a smaller seller, under 1000 over many years, they might be ok. Look at their previous sales. If they are selling lots of cameras and won't offer a return, I suggest walking away. If they have thousands of sales of all sorts of flea market goods and they say 'don't know how to test, so as-is' RUN. They do this for a living and they know damn well how to test a camera. Places like KEH, Roberts, I'm sure other people have names, will be honest and handle things if something goes wrong. I got my best Rolleiflex by putting a 'wanted' classified in a place like this- a much safer place to buy and sell as both parties are usually more honest and more interested in making certain both sides are content.
Back to the camera above, can you post any full body or other images? Hard to know the condition. Some Rolleis have been in garages collecting oxidation. Some have been ridden hard by pros who knew how to keep glass clean but have beaten the mechanics into the ground.
And then at some point you just have to dive in. If you are prepared to drop another $200-400 on a camera with no returns, go for it.
That should be expressed as your opinion not as a fact. The 2.8Planar is not a better lens. In my experience with several Rolleis including the 2.8F and the 2.8FX I have now, after lots and lots of testing, I consistently find the Xenotar to be the better lens for reason of less flare and less issue of separation and better coating... along with equal if not better sharpness.it looks to have minor fungus starting on the edges of the taking lens, based on the photo in the first post. I'd avoid it. Also, the Planar is a better lens, I'd hold out for a 2.8F planar. 3.5F planar is a nice choice too.
Here are some more photos. I will do more research on this and see if I can ask this seller for a return option. Or I will wait until the more reputable sources receive one. But from these photos do you see anything glaringly wrong?
Also the seller has a 100% rating with 373 reviews. They have sold other cameras in the past.
Thank you for your help, you have been really awesome. This is a journey that is just beginning for me.
View attachment 235335
One comment on ebay, it doesn't matter if the seller says no returns, you are still eligible for a return+refund if the item is not as described/broken/wrong. Especially if you pay with paypal they generally err on the side of the buyer which can be almost to the point of sellers being scammed. Just make sure that you read the description, check the photos and you can still return something if it arrives fungus ridden and inoperable when it was described as clean and working. The only exception is on items sold for parts/as is.
Both the Christopher Perez tests and tests from Modern Photography (among other objective tests) confirm that indeed the Planar is better than the Xenotar. It's not opinion, it's fact. That said, sure, a xenotar is a nice lens too but all else being equal the planar is always the better choice. They hold value better as well if you ever need to resell.
-Ed
Chris Perez tested several rolleiflex and found that a xenotar 2.8 and 3.5 beat the planar on center sharpness in 2/3 samples. The planar beat the xenotar in edge sharpness in all samples. I'd love to see the modern photography results too, but I'm not sure Mr. Perez's tests are as conclusive as some may say they are.Both the Christopher Perez tests and tests from Modern Photography (among other objective tests) confirm that indeed the Planar is better than the Xenotar. It's not opinion, it's fact. That said, sure, a xenotar is a nice lens too but all else being equal the planar is always the better choice. They hold value better as well if you ever need to resell.
-Ed
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?