Shopping for first TLR, a few questions

[Christophoto]

Thanks for the replies. I have a line on a freshly rebuilt Minolta Autocord, so I think I'm going to be set. That said, I can easily see myself collecting a few more out of interest once I get my reliable shooter situated. Looking at eBay, camera stores, etc, approximately what percentage of TLRs would you guess are good to go and don't need an overhaul? Are there any tips on what to look for (assuming Internet sales where you can't check them out). It seems to me like a total crap shoot, I'm just wondering at what rate would I expect to not need an immediate CLA.

 

[Arklatexian]

Been lurking a bit but I'm new both to here and to analog (first roll of 35mm film is sitting in my first film camera since the point and shoots I had as a kid, chems are in the mail). I've been wanting to get a 6x6 and am drawn toward TLRs, specifically Rolleiflexes. I'm not completely opposed to other brands but I have a clear preference for the Rollei style. I want to find a nice one in excellent condition, but keep in mind I want a user, not a collector, so quality over rarity or prestige.

Being that this would be my first MF camera, I'd probably take it hiking, and I'm kind of testing the waters, so I'd like to keep the prices down. I still don't really want to sacrifice much on quality or durability, just not interested in trendy special features.

I prefer to buy from known people on classifieds or reputable shops like keh, eBay is a last resort. I know a CLA is likely going to be needed, but are there any shops that at least test and certify performance before a sale? I know CLA is an eventuality but it would be nice to know I was at least buying one that didn't need it right away so I could get some use out of it first. What are some good online stores? Keh doesn't have any and I've only found some on one store page in the UK.

Finally, I think I found one I like, but the price made me cautious. It's on the site if a reputable store. It's labeled as a standard MX, but by the photos to me I think it's an MX-EVS. It's only $200 while T models in similar condition are $350 and others are significantly more. From what I could tell by research the MX are pretty good, and I didn't read about any deficiencies compared to other typical 3.5s. I did come across a Rollei technician that on his page said that he doesn't service T models because they're inferior to other 'flexes and he can't warranty them, and equates them as being closer to a Rolleicord. Where does the MX and MX-EVS stand? Are they skimped on or as good of quality? Wondering if the price is right because they aren't trendy or because they aren't as good. I've read that T prices are inflated because they're trending.

Sorry for the long first post, my brain is getting scattered from too much reading about these online.

Edit: I should probably mention my budget. While I liked the $200 price of that MX, that isn't my budget cap. I'm willing to spend about double that. That could be that MX and a CLA, or $450 or so for one that doesn't need a CLA. I think $500 on one that already needed a CLA would be pushing my budget further than I wanted for a first camera. I'm sure I'll end up there eventually though. That's the main reason I ask if any stores test and certify their cameras. Whether or not it needs an immediate trip to the shop has a significant effect on my budget.

Why don't you check with one of the repair companies that specialize in Rollei products and see if they have any used Rolleiflexes that have been overhauled or at the least CLA'd , for sale. If you go to the right ones, they can and probably will answer the questions about the different models. As to Rollei Ts, I had rather have a good Rolleicord than a "T". We had not very good experience with the "Ts" when they were new and I was a salesman trying to sell them and, more important, trying to keep them sold.........Regards!

 

[piu58]

I vote for a Cord instead of a "T" too. The crank is not worth some hundred dollars.
I you want to have the better Planar optics, then go for a 3,5F or a 2,8F. If you thin a Tesar is ok., go for a cord. I owned some cord and like the Vb most. It has the bright screen the later Flexes have.

 

[btaylor]

These cameras are all elderly. Every old film camera I acquire i figure on a CLA. The two I have purchased that clearly stated they had just had or did not require a CLA to go out and start shooting absolutely DID need work by a competent technician. Just add about $200-250 to whatever you're spending to be sure it is operating the way it should. That's just the way it is.

 

[Christophoto]

Sounds like "recent CLA" in an ad shouldn't add any value, since it can't really be trusted. I think I'm set now, waiting to finalize on an Autocord, but if I use it enough I might treat myself to a really nice Rollei next year. I'll be sure to just assume it'll need a rebuild regardless of what the ad says.

 

[mooseontheloose]

I think you'll be happy with the Autocord - it was my first TLR and it's my favourite of all of them. After 10 years of shooting various brands of TLRs I finally got myself a Rolleiflex, and was kind of surprised at how much I didn't like using it. Don't get me wrong - the optics are fantastic - but it's definitely not as user-friendly as the Autocord. YMMV though.

 

[Lee Birder]

Rolleiflexes are extremely durable cameras-- I use them exclusively for my backpack trips. Currently I use an MX-EVS, 3.5e2 planar, MX-synch (my great-grandfather's) and a baby rollei. All are fantastic cameras, but I really have to recommend the MX-EVS - I think Rollei really hit its peak here. I prefer its focusing knob and general aesthetic to the 3.5 models, and the selenium meters on the newer cameras are mostly a waste of weight these days. Earlier Automats are of course very similar but the focusing knobs are of the smaller-diameter type. One advantage (in my opinion) of my MX-synch is that its aperture and shutter are uncoupled, making the wheels turn much smoother. That said, I like using EVS on my baby rollei and Primo JR.
I watch a lot of Rollei's on fleabay: I would recommend springing on clean looking MX-EVS that offers returns. You never know until you hold it in your hands and test all the functions, but I have seen MX-EVS' go for $180-280, which leaves plenty of room for a CLA. I paid $425 for mine at a local camera shop including case, hood, and filter set, plus a year warranty.
Good hunting!

 

[Christophoto]

Thanks for the tips. From reading around, and from personal preference on cosmetics alone, I also seem to prefer the MX-EVS to most of the other Rolleis. Of course I've never even held one, but I love the look of them. A nice one is out of my range right now so I'm just going to keep it in mind for later. I'll get my budget user now and later, probably after new years, I'll look for a cherry Rollei. Or who knows, maybe I'll sell one of my other toys to finance it lol. That's a ways out, I'd rather spend a few hundred extra on film to put through my budget one.

 

[piu58]

> selenium meters on the newer cameras are mostly a waste of weight these days.

I have a 3,5F an the meter still works. After more than 50 years!

 

[Christophoto]

> selenium meters on the newer cameras are mostly a waste of weight these days.

I have a 3,5F an the meter still works. After more than 50 years!

Is it accurate? I've always heard they were all inaccurate, even if they did work. I'm just curious.

 

[baachitraka]

I may never ask about the accuracy of a light meter. This word, for me do not fit for a light meter.

 

[John51]

A vendor accepting returns is a good idea for any camera purchase but even more so if you've never used a TLR before imo.

In the 70s I went into Scrooge mode to save up for a Mamiya C330. Great camera but I just didn't take to the waist level finder. Sold it after putting less than 10 rolls through it. I was young and preferred the immediacy of SLRs. Now, I find myself thinking about giving TLRs another go as I'm not in such a hurry these days.

 

[anfenglin]

I tend to slow down with a TLR, it's SLRs I tend to get snap happy with.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... I really have to recommend the MX-EVS - I think Rollei really hit its peak here.
...

Is the MX-EVS a K4B? Rollei model numbers are so confusing. How does an MX-EVS compare to the D models (K7D)?

> selenium meters on the newer cameras are mostly a waste of weight these days.

I have a 3,5F an the meter still works. After more than 50 years!

As you can see, I've amateurishly covered the meter on my 3.5F to block light from it while it's not in use. The meter does work and is reasonably accurate. I just want to preserve it.

Also, the addition of the meter and its linkage greatly complicates any repair that's needed. I much prefer meterless Rolleis.

 

[Lee Birder]

I believe the MX-EVS is often referred to as the "3.5B". I have also seen it labelled as k4b, although I have also seen non-EVS MX-synchs described as k4b's. The MX-EVS is very much like a 3.5 version of the 2.8D. If you are ever looking to sell your 2.8D, I have been looking for one...

 

[piu58]

> Is it accurate? I've always heard they were all inaccurate, even if they did work. I'm just curious.

When I got the camera, it was 2 stops to slow. This could be covered with adapted ISO setting. But it is easy to calibrate the meter, what I did.

> I've amateurishly covered the meter on my 3.5F to block light from it while it's not in use.

I don't think that is necessery, and I don't believe that light is the reason meters die.
The selenium sheet is covered by cellulose lacquer to protect it. The life span of such a cell depends on the quality of the lacquer.

 

[Helinophoto]

> selenium meters on the newer cameras are mostly a waste of weight these days.

I have a 3,5F an the meter still works. After more than 50 years!

Strangely, my 2.8F is pretty darn accurate as well.
I tested it against two other meters I have and with the diffuser, the incident-readings are very very close (the needle on my 2.8F goes a small hair further, indicating around 0.5 stop less exposure needed and that's it).

Shot a whole roll of Fuji 160NS and used only the built-in meter, none of the shots were underexposed (shot at EI 100 and kept the needle juuuust on the "good" side of the meter-indicator, giving the film around 0.5 stop more light than indicated).

I need to test it a bit more, but my confidence with that meter is pretty good.

 

[elcabezagrande]

> selenium meters on the newer cameras are mostly a waste of weight these days.

I have a 3,5F an the meter still works. After more than 50 years!

The meter on my 3.5f is accurate enough to use with slide film. And I use a Rolleilux meter on my MX-EVS and other Automats that is similarly accurate.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

> I've amateurishly covered the meter on my 3.5F to block light from it while it's not in use.

I don't think that is necessery, and I don't believe that light is the reason meters die.
The selenium sheet is covered by cellulose lacquer to protect it. The life span of such a cell depends on the quality of the lacquer.

That is good to know - thank you.