Rollieflex Question

Sgore · May 8, 2016

In the coming week I will be getting my first Rollieflex. In researching the serial number (124****) I find that is a K4, but instead of the 3.5 Tessar, it has a 3.5 Planar. I cannot find any information suggesting that this camera was ever supplied with a Planar and am wondering if anyone can clear this up for me. The camera is from an estate and though I have agreed on a price, that price was based upon the fairly rough cosmetics and the researched value for a K4 with the standard Tessar. I don't want to take advantage of this situation to "steal" a camera that may very well be worth far more than I have offered, so I am appealing to the vast knowledge base out there for advice.

jimjm · May 8, 2016

Are you sure about the serial #? The one you quoted would be for an Automat MX (K.4A) which came with a Jena or Opton Tessar, or a Xenar lens.

Does this camera have a meter? Starting with the 3.5E (K.4C) serial # 1,740,xxx, Rollei fitted them with either a 3.5 Planar or Xenotar.

I suppose it's possible that the taking lens was replaced, or maybe just the front ring. If this was the case, I'd probably steer clear of it. Also, coming from an estate sale it's likely to need servicing if it hasn't been used in awhile. Unless you're getting a screaming deal on this one, it might be less trouble to pick up a recently-serviced Rollei from Igor 's Camera or Harry Fleenor.

jimjm · May 8, 2016

Unless you absolutely have to have a 'Flex, someone here in APUG Classifieds is offering a very nice Rolleicord Vb at a fair price with accessories, recently serviced by Harry. The results I get from my Rolleicords are every bit as nice as those from my 'Flexes.

baachitraka · May 8, 2016

You may get that cord in classified. CLA'd and with good focusing screen for less than 400.

Sgore · May 8, 2016

It does not have a light meter, and the viewfinder is screwed into place, not removable like the 3 2.8Fs that compromised the rest of the collection. The price to me, at this point is $250, so I'm going to go ahead and stick with it. I have handled the camera, and the only issue I can see is that the leather is torn in a few spots, and engaging the 1/500 speed takes a little effort. I knew the former owner and am certain that it was well maintained. I do plan on having a CLA, just for good measure.

baachitraka · May 8, 2016

Does it come with Synchro-Compur or Compu-Rapid shutter?

frank · May 8, 2016

There is less stress on the shutter if you set the speed to 1/500sec BEFORE cocking the shutter, rather than after.

Sgore · May 8, 2016

Dan Daniel · May 8, 2016

Welp. that's an MX alright. Body, at least. The small focus knob, the short lever above the flash sync socket, the style of the strap lugs, etc.

And yep, it says Planar.

I don't know exactly what to look for, but there are ways to tell how many elements are in a lens by the ways that reflections happen, the number, etc. Maybe someone can tell you.

The interesting thing for me is that a 3.5 Planar or Xenotar lens does fit a #00 shutter. And the front lens element is very close to the size of a Tessar/Xenar front element. On the 3.5 Es and Fs, the Bay II fitting was some sort of marketing BS move by Rollei, not a neccessary change because of the new lenses. If you look at a 3.5 E or F, you will see an extra black ring outside of the lens element filling in the extra space for the Bay II mount rather than a Bay I mount. There might need to be some widening, but a Planar will fit a Bay I camera. Some day I will mount a Planar onto a Minolta Autocord body with a Hasselblad NC-2 prism and I will have my perfect camera.

Anyway, either someone swapped the front ID plate on the lens, or you have a franken-rollei.

A note and photo to Harry Fleenor might be in order. I seriously doubt that this a collector item worth lots more than $250. More a curiosity piece worth whatever pleasure you get from shooting with it.

By the way, it is not recommended to go to 1/500 second with a cocked shutter on this early Synchro-Compur. These shutters still used a tensioning spring booster for 1/500, and trying to engage that with a cocked shutter is extremely difficult and can damage the shutter.

Ai Print · May 8, 2016

This whole shutter speed vs shutter cocking thing has piqued my interest, sorry to hijack, but:

I have a 2.8D Planar, is there any special consideration to be made when advancing the shutter, what speed to "rest" it in when not using it, etc?

Dan Daniel · May 8, 2016

Ai Print said:
This whole shutter speed vs shutter cocking thing has piqued my interest, sorry to hijack, but:

I have a 2.8D Planar, is there any special consideration to be made when advancing the shutter, what speed to "rest" it in when not using it, etc?

Can I suggest starting a new thread on this topic? It will be seen by more people and will be searchable in the future.

I haven't owned a D so I don't know which Synchro-Compur model it has. But I seem to remember that it has five aperture blades, not 10 like the 2.8C or the K4 MX model under discussion here. I tend to think that the five blades and lack of tension booster spring went together- lose one, win one.

Sgore · May 8, 2016

Dan Daniel said:
Welp. that's an MX alright. Body, at least. The small focus knob, the short lever above the flash sync socket, the style of the strap lugs, etc.

And yep, it says Planar.

I don't know exactly what to look for, but there are ways to tell how many elements are in a lens by the ways that reflections happen, the number, etc. Maybe someone can tell you.

The interesting thing for me is that a 3.5 Planar or Xenotar lens does fit a #00 shutter. And the front lens element is very close to the size of a Tessar/Xenar front element. On the 3.5 Es and Fs, the Bay II fitting was some sort of marketing BS move by Rollei, not a neccessary change because of the new lenses. If you look at a 3.5 E or F, you will see an extra black ring outside of the lens element filling in the extra space for the Bay II mount rather than a Bay I mount. There might need to be some widening, but a Planar will fit a Bay I camera. Some day I will mount a Planar onto a Minolta Autocord body with a Hasselblad NC-2 prism and I will have my perfect camera.

Anyway, either someone swapped the front ID plate on the lens, or you have a franken-rollei.

A note and photo to Harry Fleenor might be in order. I seriously doubt that this a collector item worth lots more than $250. More a curiosity piece worth whatever pleasure you get from shooting with it.

By the way, it is not recommended to go to 1/500 second with a cocked shutter on this early Synchro-Compur. These shutters still used a tensioning spring booster for 1/500, and trying to engage that with a cocked shutter is extremely difficult and can damage the shutter.

Thank you for your reply, it has been helpful. I plan on sending the camera to Harry Fleenor, after I put a roll or two through it, of course. I'm just happy to be put at ease about the price.

RalphLambrecht · May 8, 2016

Sgore said:
In the coming week I will be getting my first Rollieflex. In researching the serial number (124****) I find that is a K4, but instead of the 3.5 Tessar, it has a 3.5 Planar. I cannot find any information suggesting that this camera was ever supplied with a Planar and am wondering if anyone can clear this up for me. The camera is from an estate and though I have agreed on a price, that price was based upon the fairly rough cosmetics and the researched value for a K4 with the standard Tessar. I don't want to take advantage of this situation to "steal" a camera that may very well be worth far more than I have offered, so I am appealing to the vast knowledge base out there for advice.

be patient with me, but it hurts me deep into the stomach and spine to hear or read' Rollie. It's a Rollei for heaven's sake; This s far worse than saying Hassy, which is pretty bad in itself;Sorry but there is a limit to cultural diversity.Enjoy your Rollei with or without a Tessar.I'm such a nitpick,I know;forgive me.

piu58 · May 9, 2016

> the Bay II fitting was some sort of marketing BS move by Rollei, not a neccessary change because of the new lenses

That is correct. BUT the bay II works a lot easier, less prone to twist.

Brett Rogers · May 9, 2016

Dan Daniel said:
Can I suggest starting a new thread on this topic? It will be seen by more people and will be searchable in the future.

I haven't owned a D so I don't know which Synchro-Compur model it has. But I seem to remember that it has five aperture blades, not 10 like the 2.8C or the K4 MX model under discussion here. I tend to think that the five blades and lack of tension booster spring went together- lose one, win one.

Hi Dan,
slumming it over here today for a change. You're spot on as ever, I do have a 2.8D and it's definitely got the later shutter, no booster, new speed scale (and EV system ). So speeds can be set before or after, timer used with all speeds (except Bulb, of course).
Cheers
Brett

Brett Rogers · May 9, 2016

RalphLambrecht said:
be patient with me, but it hurts me deep into the stomach and spine to hear or read' Rollie. It's a Rollei for heaven's sake; This s far worse than saying Hassy, which is pretty bad in itself;Sorry but there is a limit to cultural diversity.Enjoy your Rollei with or without a Tessar.I'm such a nitpick,I know;forgive me.

I don't think you're nitpicking, at all. I've noticed that about one in three members of this site can't spell the manufacturer's name properly, either. Pretty amusing to read some of them pontificating at length about various aspects of the TLRs. Not sure how seriously they expect a distant observer to take their views on such cameras if they cannot even get the name right. The issue is positively endemic here. 63 pages of search results for "Rollei". 22 pages of results for "Rollie". It's a joke.

Now, I need to go and have another look for my Hasselblad's dark slide serial number. I've read it on good advice from a long term member here that they have one, (somewhere).

Theo Sulphate · May 10, 2016

On cameras such as Rolleiflexes, Hasselblads, Voigtländer Bessamatics, Retinas, and almost everything else with a leaf shutter, I have always made it a habit to select the shutter speed before winding/cocking. Maybe it's unnecessary, but I have thought it to be less stressful on the shutter mechanism.

Hmm... I even do that on my Minoxes.

dpurdy · May 10, 2016

Seems to me there should be a Planar serial number on that ring around the lens, and the serial number should be researchable for date of manufacture. Also Rollei didn't start using the planar until after they learned to coat lenses. The coating on the front of a Planar should be yellowish in color. If the lens isn't coated it must me something else.
Dennis

Sgore · May 11, 2016

So here's the scoop. I picked up the camera this morning and mentioned that the lens was not standard. I was told by the widow, who was selling the cameras, that she has several Rolleis that she took to a technician to have Diana lenses put in them, and that after the first, he insisted that she bring another camera that could benefit from having a Planar put into it. She said that he cringed every time he saw her coming. She made some amazing photos with that Rollei/Diana hybrid though, and a good bit of money too. I will get the original Tessar that the camera came with in a few days. I think I'll leave it like it is though

Here's one of her hybrid photos: http://bombmagazine.org/article/220/mary-mhoon

Rollieflex Question

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency