Rolleiflex 2.8E value (scratched lens)?

I recently picked up a whole collection of old stuff. Included was a fairly nice Rolleiflex 2.8E (v1) that seems to be in good working condition other than the fact that it has a scratched lens (it's a fairly big scratch probably about 5mm and it also has a bunch of other tiny scratches, kind of like what happens if you leave a set of sunglasses on a table with the lenses facing down).

There doesn't seem to be much on eBay as far as these things go. So I'm wondering 1) does anyone have an idea what it would be worth if I was going to sell it? and 2) Does anyone replace Rolleiflex lenses.

Oh and p.s. it's the taking lens that has the scratches, not the viewing lens sadly.

pay for

Your camera is worth what someone will pay for it. And that depends on a lot on how the scratch affects the photos. You will have to run some film through it. I just bought a really nice looking and working 60-year-old f3.5 Rolleiflex for $180 and think I got a steal. Aside from the dollar angle, you have a fabulous machine that takes fabulous photos.

This will be ending on ebay soon-

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=201110226539&ssPageName=ADME:B:WNA:US:1653

The lens on the ebay camera is useless in my opinion. It needs new glass. I would buy it for parts or if i had clean glass and a bad body. Your lens sounds like it might be in better shape (single gouges have less effect than hundreds of swirl marks). Anyway, see what happens to that camera to get an idea. And run film through your camera to see what the scratching does. And you also need to find out the condition of the shutter, focus, wind, etc.

If the camera is otherwise in good working order, you could try just putting a little bit of black magic marker on the scratch - it might very well solve any problems the scratch causes, and then you'd have a good user camera. If you could get north of $400 for it, I'd say it is worth selling on your end. I personally would not buy a camera like that with a significant scratch on the lens if for no other reason than it would be really tough to re-sell if I wanted to later.

That link to the ebay camera....that is not unusual at all for the Xenotar lenses, which had known coating issues. Most of what is in those photos is reflections from trees. I had one of those cameras that had much, much worse coating issues on the lens, and I put a hood on it as well as a yellow filter to help w/ the contrast. Honestly, I saw absolutely no difference from the photos from it and the one I had many years ago w/ a pristine Xenotar lens.

On your camera w/ the big scratch, just fill in that scratch w/ a marker pen or black paint (wiped off quickly to leave the stuff only in the scratch itself). Put a hood on it and I guarantee yoyu will be very happy w/ the results. Shoot, I have a Leica R Elmarit lens for sale on the classifieds here that had coating damage on the rear element from previous fungus removal, and shots from it look identical to photos from other Elmarits I have owned. You really have to mess up a lens to impact the IQ, unless we're talking about haze or fungus. Those will certainly impact the images.

A camera w/ scratched optics will undoubtedly bring less money than one w/ a pristine lens (photographers will buy it, posers or collectors will snub it), but you figure on buying it cheap, so you sell it cheap. It equals out.

momus said:

happy w/ the results. Shoot

Click to expand...

I got nikkor 70-210 f4 on flea market for next to nothing. It has 4-5 scratches on front element, and some on the back element as well. It is super sharp. Cleaning marks are scratches are not such a big problem as people think. I would always test first and then decide to sell it or not.