Which Rollei at KEH?

[stacy.anderson]

Hello, Everyone,

I am new to this forum and have been researching what entry level MF camera to buy. I have read rather exhaustively on this forum and others and think I have narrowed my choice to a Rollei TLR. Since I am inexperienced, I want to buy from KEH for reliability and returnability, and they have 3 Rollei's of interest (I'm looking to spend around $200):

• 
  3.5 MX-EVS Xenar for $235
  3.5 X Opton-Tessar for $172
  Rolliecord IV F 3.5 Xenar for $199

I'm going with the Rollei because I shoot handheld on the street and other places, and I understand they are well-designed and lighter than a number of other MF options. So, my question here is: is all the glass I've listed above comparable? Anyone have any experience with these particular models? And, I couldn't find any reference to the 3.5 X anywhere, so I'm not sure what model that is. What are the advantages of the MX-EVS over the other two?

Thanks in advance for all your help,
Stacy

 

[Pinholemaster]

Whichever one is the least beat up. All three are fine models for what they are, and all three are around 200 bucks.

 

[Uhner]

A Rollei is a good choice, and I agree that they are all fine cameras. Contact KEH and ask them about the examples you are interested in.

Good luck.

C

 

[Nick Merritt]

The glass is comparable in all three -- the Xenar was the Schneider version of the Tessar. All three are about the same vintage, though the 3.5 X is probably early '50s while the other two are more mid-'50s. I have the MX-EVS and it's a lovely camera, though mine has the Tessar (which I think is the more common lens for this model).

The EVS stands for Exposure Value System, which assigns a series of numbers to combinations of aperture and shutter speed. You'll see those numbers on the shutter speed adjustment wheel. Basically what it does is lock in (if you want) the combinations -- so if you're shooting at 1/250 and f/8 you can turn the adjustment wheel to 1/60 and it will change the aperture to f16 at the same time. The same concept as what's referred to nowadays as "shiftable program." A lot of people don't care for it, but it's not a hassle to defeat it if you so choose.

I'd say $199 for the Rolleicord IV is a bit pricey. I trust you've done some research and know the difference between the Rolleiflexes and the Rolleicords, so I won't get into that here. But let me know if you'd like me to get into that.

Whichever one you get, I would highly recommend you replace the focusing screen with a fresnel screen. There's a guy who sells these for a reasonable price (like $30) and they make a big difference in the brightness and thus the ease of focusing, especially in lower light.

 

[Ulrich Drolshagen]

Regarding the Opton Tessar you may want to read the post from seele in this thread (there was a url link here which no longer exists)
Sounds as if there is a chance of issues with this special version.

Ulrich

 

[Uhner]

I am new to this forum

I apologize for my absentmindedness...

Stacy, welcome to APUG.

 

[Larry.Manuel]

Rollei TLR advice - I hope.

I own two Rolleicords, and one Rolleiflex. One of each is currently at Harry Fleenor's for overhaul, and installation of Maxwell screen #2 [no micro-prism]. I can vouch for the excellency of the Rolleicord's Xenar lens - I'm using my overhauled, bought-from-Harry Rolleicord Vb these days. I've made many great hand-held exposures 1/8 is usually fine. Occasionally, I'm successful at 1/4 second.

Recently, I was exposing inside a burnt-out house [very dark, EV 3], at f/8, 45 seconds [TMAX 400, EI 800]. The Xenar lens will nearly scare you with the sharp results if stopped down a bit, and on a sturdy tripod. I do like the results at f/4 as well.

One thing I love about the 'cord version: the film transport mechanism is simpler; you will likely never need an overhaul on that. One must cock the shutter separately - no hassle for me.

One advantage with the 'flex: one can look "straight-through" sort of; using the magnifier and the mirror, looking down into the screen. Sort of 'sports finder' mode using the screen. Thus, one can focus in this mode. The 'cord has the sports viewfinder mode [great feature], but it's just through square holes for framing.

I'd seriously consider the cost of the camera as the starting point - an overhaul and new screen will knock your socks off with delight. Of course, your budget may not allow this for a while.

Proceed! I am enthralled with the creative process of using my Rolleicord, and the results have been very gratifying.

The big negatives allow tiny-grained, moderate enlargements with [my] ISO 400 speed film. In the summer, I use FP4+ [amazing], in the fall and winter TMAX 400 has been great at EI 800. Kodak recommends no processing changes between EI 400 and EI 800, so one can obviously expose for either on the same roll. How good is that?

 

[Larry.Manuel]

New screens for Rolleiflex/cord

Note that Harry Fleenor adjusts the focus synchronization between viewing and taking lenses when he installs a new screen. The Maxwell screen is much brighter. Much. And it's bright right out to the corners. I wish I could wave a magic wand and give all Rollei TLR owners these screens - they transform a lovely unit into an Uber-delightful camera. The subject - in a Maxwell screen - seems to come to life for me. Good luck!

 

[Larry.Manuel]

20 minutes of reading - MF cameras compared. Rollei: amazing.

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/fourcameras.html

Again: good luck! Larry.

 

[stacy.anderson]

wow--you guys are amazing. what a great forum, thanks.

@nick merritt--I have been researching, but I've been trying to narrow the field from all affordable MF (Mamiya 645, Mamiya 33/330, Yashicamat, Rollei) to one kind of camera to look for. In search of the most camera for the best price, as I'm sure everyone here can relate to . . . So, I haven't yet truly appreciated the Rolleicord versus the Rolleiflex--I'm off to look into it now, but since you seemed willing to offer up information, I'd love to hear it.

@Uhner--thanks much for the warm welcome--with all these amazingly helpful responses I'm feeling quite welcome already!

 

[Paul Howell]

[affordable MF (Mamiya 645, Mamiya 33/330, Yashicamat, Rollei) to one kind of camera to look for. In search of the most camera for the best price, as I'm sure everyone here can relate to . . .

For the money the Yashica D with the 4 element lens is a great buy, film transport is similar to the Rolleicod, but you need to look for the 4 element lens, off the top of head I cannot recall which lens is the 4 elements and which is the 3 element the Yashiaor or ar. I have both Ds and Mats, the D allow for very simple double exposure, while the mats are quicker to advance.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Of the three, take the MX-EVS. The Opton Tessar glass might have issues. The extra $25 over the Rolleicord is money well-spent, as it buys you automatic shutter cocking and a few other benefits.

Larry is right to point you in the direction of the Maxwell screens, and right, also, to specify the screen without the focusing aid. The two screens are different, and the one without the focusing aid is much better.

RFXB

 

[tac]

welcome
I found this site quite helpful when choosing a Rollei to purchase:

http://johnsrolleionlypage.homestead.com/Rolleimainpage.html

 

[Doug Webb]

Rollei is a great camera. I had a 2.8E Rolleiflex and really liked it, in some ways even fell in love with it, but I couldn't justify keeping it when other medium format cameras worked for me in so many situations that the Rollleiflex didn't and because I sometimes have to spend money on things other than photography. The two biggest problems for me were the limitation to a normal lens and the inability to focus close enough to make a reasonably tight portrait without distorting the face of the subject. If you are working now with a normal lens exclusively, this won't matter. Lots of people say, you can just use your legs to move closer to the subject or farther away, but this often isn't possible or means you will be standing in the middle of busy street to take your photo. The cameras you mention will probably have a very dim focusing screen and the corners will probably be even more dim. This makes it difficult to focus and at times difficult to compose. That's why so many people are recommending a Maxwell Screen. You mention wanting to spend 200.00. A Maxwell screen, professionally installed will be somewhere in the neighborhood of 150.00 including shipping. If you are very young, have great vision, and don't shoot in low light, you may be able to get by in some situations without a Maxwell screen, but a great lens doesn't show it's virtues if you can't get it in focus and it's really difficult to evaluate a camera when you aren't sure you got the photos in focus when they were taken. You will also increase your chances of getting the best results with a lens shade which could easily cost another 20 or 40 dollars. Then there is the lens cap, which if you don't have, you will probably wish you did in terms of keeping the glass in good shape, and the prices of these can be anywhere from 7.95 to over 25.00. If you want to use a tripod you will probably want a Rolleifix, another maybe 30.00 to 50.00. The cameras sold by KEH won't come with a lens cap or shade unless the listing specifically says so. Lots of these 40 to 50 year old Rollei camera don't advance the film properly, don't focus correctly, have never had a CLA, etc., and you are really on the right track buying from a reputable dealer like KEH who has at least some employees who can reasonably evaluate the equipment they sell and who will take the camera back if you are not satisfied because the cost of repairs can easily be more than the price of the camera. Just mentioning some of the above things because the purchase price of the camera on these models is usually only the beginning in terms of basic or necessary expenditures and although the Rollei is well made, it needs maintenance, like a CLA, just like any other camera. All that said, if you get a Rollei in reasonable shape from a place like KEH and decide not to keep it, you may be able to resell it for close to what you purchased it for.
I have also used a Yashica D and Yashicamat which produced images that are pretty much indistinguishable from the Rolleis in my opinion. The Mamiya twin lens cameras are a little heavier and some people find them not as pleasurable to use, but they can make great images and have interchangeable lenses.
Good luck in your search,
Doug Webb

 

[Nick Merritt]

Stacy, since you asked I'll give you a little more on the Rolleicords vs. the Rolleiflexes. As others have alluded, the 'cord is a simpler design, particularly the advance mechanism -- just turn the wind knob until it stops. In loading film, you have to line the arrows on the film backing up with the red dot and then close the back and wind to frame 1. Not as convenient as the film thickness sensor roller on the 'flex but very easy to use (and this is the way most other TLRs work anyway). The 'cord requires manual cocking of the shutter, via pushing a lever below the lens mount to the right (as you hold the camera). You then trip the shutter by pulling this same lever back to the left. It takes a bit of getting used to but it's no big deal -- it is, however, unique among TLRs since all others have a traditional button you push in or down. Shutter speed and aperture are set on the 'cords by sliding levers on either side of the lens. The 'flexes have small adjustment wheels between the taking and viewing lenses for this purpose. I prefer the Rolleiflex here, but this is also not a big deal.

One aspect where the Rolleiflex is better than the Rolleicord is that the viewing lens of the 'cords is f3.5, which makes for a noticeably dimmer focusing screen (and so harder to focus, especially in dimmer light like indoors). I get a little unsure here, but I think even the earlier Rolleiflexes had an f2.8 viewing lens, which helps quite a bit. Any of the cameras you're considering would be improved quite a bit by substituting a brighter focusing screen. I've never seen the results from one of the Maxwell screens, but I have purchased an inexpensive fresnel screen from a guy named Rick Oleson (known for his website full of repair information) and it makes a big difference. Later Rolleicords and Rolleiflexes came with fresnel screens, but not until the late '50s as I recall.

All that said, I can echo Doug's comment above that the Yashicamats and Yashica Ds with the Yashinon lenses will give superb results, on a par with the Rolleis. The 'mats are similar to the 'flexes; the Ds are like the 'cords. And the same level of quality can be found with Minolta Autocords and a couple of other TLRs.

Hope this is helpful -- let us know what you end up doing.