Where to find Rollieflex Tele 4.0 4/135mm HTF?

[Bokeh Guy]

I've looked the world over and cannot find any example photographs from one of those Tele-Rollieflex 4.0 4/135mm HTFs. Has anyone seen any and is there a reputable dealer who might be able to find one?

 

[archphoto]

The Tele's were scarse in the day's that they were made and expensive......

KEH maybe at times, ebay (expect high prices) but even at local camera stores.
You don't state where you live...

Peter

 

[dpurdy]

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolleiflex-Tele...63400e041&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14#ht_2582wt_1106

Here is one and that is a reputable dealer. You might be better off getting an older version without the HFT coatings and getting a close focus lens. Unless you have more money than God.
Dennis

 

[Greg_E]

I think I would get a Mamiya 330 first, that's a lot of coin for a camera.

 

[Bokeh Guy]

I did see the one on eBay (well, the product image and I've read things about the seller), but haven't even seen any photos of one anywhere else. I haven't even been able to find photos made with the camera. I'm interested in the camera because it carries the same perspective that I shoot in 35mm.

I live in the States, by the way.

 

[Terence]

The older ones are much more cost effective, even with having to get the separate Rolleinar to focus close enough for head-size portraits. I just got one myself. Truly a thing of beauty.

Although I didn't end up getting mine from him, Ken Hansen is probably the best guy to contact for one of the older ones. Reputable, and a true gentleman. Although he doesn't have his store anymore, he still deals in Rolleiflexes, and at least a year ago, had an inventory that made me want sign over my bank account to him. Sanders McNew from APUG recommended him to me.

 

[John Lawrence]

All these dealers have 135mm f4 Tele-Rolleiflexes for sale:

http://www.apertureuk.com/used-MF.htm

http://www.fotokor.com/

http://www.collectcamera.com/colcam/catalogus/rubriek_list.php?ocat_ID=72

 

[Bokeh Guy]

John,

Thanks, but those suppliers have the old version. I'm looking for the new version that has the reformulated Schneider lens in it.

The older version with a Rolleinar might be more cost effective, but that kind of thinking has seemed to have eluded me my last few camera years (although I'm still quite a film guy).

 

[dpurdy]

I did see the one on eBay (well, the product image and I've read things about the seller), but haven't even seen any photos of one anywhere else. I haven't even been able to find photos made with the camera. I'm interested in the camera because it carries the same perspective that I shoot in 35mm.

I live in the States, by the way.

I have watched Rolleis in ebay quite a bit and I don't remember ever seeing a new version tele for sale used. So all the images have been stock product images. You might at least contact Kurland Photo in New York even though they don't show a Tele on their web site. I know they have Rollei resources and they might be able to get you a quote and a camera if you asked. I bought an FX from them once and they were very professional about it.

Dead Link Removed

Also you might PM Sanders McNew here on apug and ask him if he knows somewhere they are available in NY. He is a Tele fan and lives in NY... though he prefers the older version.
Dennis

 

[Bokeh Guy]

Geez, you guys are fast.

Thanks for the info. Hopefully I can find one of these rascals (now it's become a quest).

 

[ic-racer]

If you just want a picture of the camera, I have a Rolleiflex brochure from around 1972 that has a nice full color spread with an awesome close up picture showing a TELE, with prism, Rolleinars in place and the pistol grip. I could scan the pictue if you are interested. At the time they no longer made the WIDE, and that TELE was their top-of-the-line TLR.

 

[Bokeh Guy]

Actually, that'd be great. So far the thing has been a ghost.

 

[ic-racer]

This is older than my brochure but it has a nice color picture. See page 6:
http://www.cameramanuals.org/rolleiflex/rollei_camera_acc_1961-62.pdf

Here is the TELE manual:
http://www.cameramanuals.org/rolleiflex/rolleiflex_tele.pdf

 

[dpurdy]

If you manage to acquire one I think it will make you one of a very small group in the world. It was hard enough to get to examine it's sibling the 2.8FX before buying. In fact it was impossible and the first time I ever saw one was after I had bought it. I still have the only one I have ever seen in person.

I can tell you that the new FX of the same vintage as the Tele you are seeking is a beautiful camera and the HFT coatings do make a difference. The lenses have less flare and more contrast. The focus and film transport on mine (which would be the same on the Tele) are the smoothest and most effortless of any Rollei I have ever had.

That said, with the price difference between and old version Tele and a new version Tele and the amount of value you are liable to lose once you open the new box, I might give the old version a try first and see for sure that I like it.
Dennis

 

[Bokeh Guy]

ic-racer, thanks for the links, but I can't for the life of me open them. Tried everything.

dpurdy, thanks for your comments (thankfully I'm not the only one that buys cameras sight unseen). Here's a question for you: If I decided to get an "ordinary" Rollieflex, should I get the 2.8f or the expensive 2.8fx? I'm asking on the basis of quality - some things I've read said not to get the fx because of inferior build quality.

 

[dpurdy]

dpurdy, thanks for your comments (thankfully I'm not the only one that buys cameras sight unseen). Here's a question for you: If I decided to get an "ordinary" Rollieflex, should I get the 2.8f or the expensive 2.8fx? I'm asking on the basis of quality - some things I've read said not to get the fx because of inferior build quality.

My opinion is that the lessor quality of the newer FX is a myth. I have both a late model 2.8F (Xenotar) and the FX (HFT coated Planar). The new camera doesn't have a self timer and it doesn't have the auto film sensor. I prefer to line up the arrows on the new camera to trusting the auto film sensor on the old model because the new camera has never failed and the older one has run right through several rolls. I would like to have a self timer but I guess I can buy one that screws into the cable socket. The bodies are the same and you can put the F back door on the FX. The focus is much smoother and easier on the newer camera and I have had the older one rebuilt by Harry Fleenor. Both cameras seem very solid however the brown leather on the FX is more damageable than the leatherette on the old camera. Optically the new camera is better but by such a small margin it is really not an issue. The new camera has a much better meter system. Makes no difference to me as I use a handheld and don't even keep a battery in the FX.

I really have to say that the difference in picture quality is not enough to justify the expense of the new camera vs the old. I would buy a really nice condition F and have it completely refurbished by one of the top guys. Then spend the money you have left over on film. I like my FX better than my F but I bought it when they were less expensive than now and I used inheritance money. I also personally like a camera that feels like a new camera rather than an old one. Also I like having a rare camera.
Dennis

 

[Bokeh Guy]

Dennis,

Thanks for the comments. I currently have a Hasselblad FE system, but have been angling for the Rollieflexes. With the cost of the FE stuff, I should do all right with the Flexes.

One question is your thoughts on the draw on the Xenotar v. the HTF Planar. I imagine that they are virtually the same on sharpness, but what is the difference in character?

I have a hunch that I'll be getting an F or FX before I see a new version of the Tele.

 

[dpurdy]

Planar vs Xenotar is such a classic argument. If I weigh in on it someone will counter what I say. However. In my little world, I have been pretty obsessive in my side by side testing and my experience is that the single coated Planar is slightly less contrasty and is a little more flare prone than the single coated Xenotar. The HFT coated Planar is slightly contrastier and a little less flare prone than the single coated Xenotar. As to sharpness it is so close that using them as a photographer with camera on a tripod I can't see a difference even at the greatest enlargement possible on my enlarger and examining the images through a grain focuser.

Any difference can be chalked up as user error or wishful thinking. That said, it seems to me that the Planar images seem to have a little more presence on the print. Put a gun to my head and I would say it is my wishful thinking.

Dennis

 

[Bokeh Guy]

Dennis,

Thanks for your opinion. I looked at the FXs and, frankly, they are pretty expensive nowadays. I'm looking at a few Fs with the Xenotars. I figure that I can always sell one of those if and when a new tele version is found. By the way, I think I may go the way of McNew on the tele. Lots of midnight oil the last couple of nights.