Yashica 124, Minolta Autocord, Rolleicord V - tell me about them...

[tony lockerbie]

The Rolleicord model 1V came just before the V which is the last of the 'Cords. From memory the main difference was the fact that the V had the interchangeable finder so you could fit a prism. It may have had 22o capability, but I'm not sure.
Tony

 

[Mike Kovacs]

A new (or simply cleaned when possible) mirror alone can work wonders for a Rollei's viewfinder. A high quality fresnel is better yet as it evens out the illumination and brightens the corners as well.

 

[IloveTLRs]

Sounds like I should be selling my restored Rolleis in Japan!

Yes, you should. I looked at an original 6x6 Rolleiflex today (1928~1932) the one with the level in the viewfinder. Broken (the shutter was acting funny), the store wanted ¥20000 ($170?) for it.

This guy: http://www.siufai.dds.nl/RolleiOriginal.htm

 

[Matus Kalisky]

Well, the things have happened. I just took it via Buy-it-Now and hope to get a beautifull Rolleiflex 3.5T (black, version 1) in a week . It is supposed to be in a very nice condition (pictures of it look great) and fully working order, plus it has 1 year warranty. I keep my fingers crossed that it is really so. For 200 euro (~ $260) I did not resist. I wanted to get an autocord but nice example of late model is hard to find.

Thanks to all of you for your help. I will let you know my first impressions soon.

matus..

 

[Matus Kalisky]

I feel like I should bump this thread which I started long time ago. The point is - I have made a BIG mistake. I sold the Rolleiflex T in 2010 (to fund Mamiya 6 which I have now) and increasingly miss it

So - I am more and more seriously looking at getting a TLR again. As I do not plan to make the same mistake twice - once I will manege to get one I will NOT sell it again.

Contrary to many I actually liked the coupled shutter/aperture settings (though the lever was a bit small for secure grip in particular in cold weather). I also liked the film winding/shutter cocking and I am not sure I would like to swap with for the controls on Rolleicord in this regard.

I am looking at about the same candidates like last time (Autocord, Rolleicord, Rolleiflex T), though I would consider also the E or F 3.5 models (depends on funds a bit). However I decided to learn a bit more about the models in question before making the decision. I have contacted Harry Fleenor and asked him about Rolleiflex T and he told me, that it has less strong/reliable film winding and front controls as either Rolleicords (which are simpler) or Rolleiflex Xenotar/Plannar models (which are more robust). He explicitly mentioned that the T was not made for heavy use.

Now, I did not experience any problems with the T during the time I had it, but in the light of the above I would like to ask a few reliability related questions.

1) What about the reliability of the Minolta Autocord (later models with Citizen shutter)? I would love to hear comments on the internal robustness - any comments from repair/service?

2) Rolleiflex T owners - did you experience problems with film winding or the front controls?

3) I never had any other TLR in hand than the T - how does it compare to say 3.5F and/or Rolleicord V models side by side and in the use? How is the viewing screen? I found the screen on the T rather bright, but I was never sure whether it was the original one (when I bought the camera it was mounted upside/down and the camera miss-focused).

thank you

 

[Chrismat]

Last summer I bought a Rolleiflex T. I liked it but I sold it to buy a 4X5 Graflex RB which I had been wanting for a while. I have read on other posts and on this thread that the film transport mechanism on the T isn't as robust as other Rolleis. Still wanting a Rollei, last month I bought a Rolleiflex Automat. It's a little beat up but the test roll seemed to come out nice. I will probably send it to Rollei tech Krikor Maralian in New Jersey for a CLA. If you really want a Rolleiflex I think you should consider the Automat.

I have a Minolta Autocord and I love it. One nice feature about the Autocord is that film moves from the top down instead of the bottom in other tlrs which eliminates the film bending before a shot is taken. The film moves flat towards the film box. I've heard from different techs that say that it does and doesn't matter in terms of sharpness. Given that Rolleis are so good may make it a moot point. The focusing lever on the bottom of the camera is nice because you don't have to move your hand from the bottom of the camera like on most tlrs but Minolta used cheap metal for the lever and it can end up breaking and some people end up with focusing with a nub. Mine was broken and I got lucky and found someone who custom made a very strong metal focusing lever for Autocords. I bought it and had a someone install it so now I have focusing lever that is incredibly strong.

Also, Autocords seem to have obtained some kind of cult status and I've noticed that their price have been going up on Ebay. That might cause you to pause from getting one, but they are optically very good.

I have a Yashica 24 tlr, the problem with some of the earlier Yashica tlrs was light bouncing around the film box inside the camera causing flare. Flare was an issue with mine and I cured it by flocking the film box and the flare problem was cured. Now the images from it have great contrast. I think the better Yashicas are the early Yashicamats 124s. I've head the later Yashica 124G have more plastic parts. The Yashica 124Gs are very popular now so their price is higher.

Good luck with your choice.

Chris M.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrismat61

 

[R.Gould]

I have both a Roleicord, a Va11, and a Rolleiflex Automat from around 1954, and I love them both, I also have a weltaflex tlr which, while not as fancy as the rollei's,pushes them a close third,(Rolleicord/rolleiflex joitn first, can't chose between them for image quality, and both built like a brick), but I while I use the rollei's more I Would not part with the weltaflex as it is a lot of fun.
Richard

 

[rolleiman]

I use all three makes of camera mentioned, with slight model variants. I would summarize as follows:

Rolleiflex T....My favourite. Utterly reliable, had mine since 1978. Not once has it needed to see the inside of a camera repair shop. Tessar lens excellent, particularly for black & white. Slightly on the "cool" side with colour, so a skylight filter recommended in most situations.

Yashics 124. ....As has already been mentioned, less plastic parts than the 124G model, so probably a better buy if you can find one. Built in meter accurate, but it is geared for the older mercury battery type, so an adapter need for silver oxide replacement, not a major problem. Lens quality excellent, slightly less contrast the the Rollei. Comments have been made re. the 124G being more fragile than the Rollei, but my 124 has been fine, and should last for years if you don't "hammer" it. Focussing screen not as positive as the Rollei.

Minolta Autocord.....Lenses give superb quality, as good as the Rollei in my opinion. It's a very "quirky" camera. The film loads in the opposite direction to other TLR's, making it awkward to reload while on the move. The unusual focussing lever takes some getting used to. Definitely a camera for slow, methodical photographers, not for those in a hurry.

Summing up.....The Rollei T, would be my first choice, but these are getting difficult to find in really good condition, and when they are, they're very expensive. The Yashica 124 or 124G would offer the best value for money, and there's more of them around. The Autocord is more difficult to find since they were discontinued earlier, and offers more of a challenge to the photographer due to their quirky operation, but if you can get used to it, it's an excellent camera.

 

[mablo]

Rolleicord V is quite easy to find in good condition. They weren't often banged around by pros but were well handled by keen amateur photographers. The Xenar lens performs beautifully. I've had and used Autocord, 124G, Rollei 3.5 w. Planar and some other TLR cameras but I've always liked the Xenar as the top lens. Rolleicord usually needs a brighter view screen. There are several alternatives around from $30 to $150.

 

[Matus Kalisky]

Thank you for all your replies.

I am watching several auctions to get the idea on the prices of the models involved and can already see that Autocord in a good condition will easily cost as Rolleicord Va or Rolleiflex T. Rolleicord Vb sells for even more (collectors, or are these really so good?).

Concerning the Autocord and its focusing lever - if it is broken - is it hard to have a replacement made? Who would do such a job in Europe? I would not discard a camera because of one weak part it it can be replaced under reasonable conditions.

It was mentioned that the screen of the Rolleicord is darker - is it the screen itself, or the fact that the viewing lens is actually f/3.2 and not f/2.8 (about a half a stop difference). I do consider the Rolleicord, but if it costs as much as the T, but has darker screen and misses the "cool" film advance and automatic shutter cocking ... than I am not so sure. The weight difference agains the T is only about 100g and the reliability point is hard to quantify (but real - I do trust experienced repairmen)

How is the screen in Autocord compared to T or Rolleicords?

I am checking also the "top" models - E and F in 2.8 and 3.5, but there the price starts about 600+ €.

 

[Nick Merritt]

Matus, the slower viewing lens of the Rolleicords can be a disadvantage. (I believe they are f3.5?) The Autocord's viewing lens is f3.2, as I recall. I have found the Yashicamats are the best -- f2.8 and very bright, better than either of the others. I have never used a T so I can't compare that one. It's probably worth considering a replacement focusing screen if you decide to get a Rolleicord (the V is the one I'd recommend).

If you have had a good experience with the T you used to have, then that is important to consider. But what you have heard about their reliability agrees with what I have heard from repairmen as well.

The Autocord does indeed have a fine lens, but the Xenar on the Rolleicord is fully its equal, and I think the Yashinon is just about as good. So really the optics of all three are comparable.

I have two alternatives for you to consider, both really most similar to the Rolleicords. The Ricoh Diacord G has a wonderful lens, and a really useful dual focusing lever system (you can use either hand) that's a lot better than the single lever on the Autocord (and not a weak point, like the Autocord's). It's knob wind, like the Rolleicord. The other camera to consider is a later model Yashica D, which has the same Yashinon lens as the Yashicamat but is a knob wind camera. A big plus is that it has an f2.8 viewing lens.

Neither the Diacord nor the D has a built in meter. One drawback of them both is that, unlike the other cameras, neither has double exposure prevention. I don't know how easily available these are in Germany, but they're worth looking for.

 

[prumpkah]

Just to add another choice, you might consider the top-of-the-line Ricoh TLR, the Ricohmatic 225. Think of it as a Diacord with automat features, double exposure prevention and built-in meter. Its lens is in the same lofty category as the Autocord Rokkor (my preference), Rolleicord JSK Xenar and Yashica Mat Yashinon, all 4-glass Tessar types. It's a step up from the Diacords in that it has faster lever-style film advance with automatic shutter cocking, ala Rolleiflex, and adopts the arguably superior top-to-bottom film feed path used by the Autocord (where the film path goes around the bend post-exposure, not pre-exposure, thus allowing better flatness -- supposedly). The dual-lever focusing enables focusing with either hand, and the levers are robust stainless steel as opposed to the pot-metal single-lever of the Autocord (which is fragile but replaceable with a sturdier remake, and often is -- Karl Bryan in the U.S. who provides international service, can do this; methinks Will van Manen on your side of the pond can do this too). The Ricohmatic 225 and the Minolta Autocord are my own personal top choices in the category of cheaper-than-but-almost-comparable-to Rolleiflex TLRs, but I agree with Nick that a late Yashica-D with Yashinon taking lens and 2.8 viewing lens is a good alternative. It's a great value-for-money proposition. My only quibble is that except for the 124g, the Yashica TLRs lack internal film chamber baffling and hence are more susceptible to flare from internal light scattering. The advanced Ricohs and Autocords have rather good internal film chamber baffling, as do the later Rolleicords such as the V. The V (not Va or Vb) is my choice among the 'Cords, because it's relatively cheap and easy to find and is the last and best of the right-hand focus knob models, which personally I find best for handling.

 

[Chrismat]

If the focusing lever is broken on the Autocord, it will be difficult to find a replacement (unless you buy a beat up Autocord for replacement parts) or to have one made. I was lucky with the one I found. The person who made it did not make many of them, I think the one I bought was the last one. If you find your self looking to purchase an Autocord online, make sure you ask the seller to test the focusing lever to see if it moves freely. If it doesn't, walk away. If you are careful with one with a working lever, you shouldn't have any problems.

The focusing screens with my Yashica 24, Autocord, and my just purchased Rolleiflex Automat are about the same in terms of brightness. I think my Yashica may be the brightest, but just by a little.

 

[Brian Legge]

Karl Bryan does good work on Autocords, including focus lever replacement (with one made of a more robust metal). He also does very reasonably priced CLAs for cameras with sticking levers. Definitely consider him.

 

[Matus Kalisky]

Thanks. I would say a picture starts to emerge:

Rolleicord - darker screen (slower viewing lens) - it is worthwhile to invest in brighter screen. Technically simpler, but reliable. The lightest candidate. Misses the fancy features I liked with the T though.

Rolleiflex T - mechanically not as robust as Cord or "true" Flex. Brigth screen. Has all the fancy features. If I have not contacted Harry Fleenor it would be a no-brainer The one I had had the aperture-shutter coupling which I got used to and liked, although the lever was a bit hard to hold and pull in the cold (a bit small).

Automat EVS-MX (last version). In some way predecessor to the T, but as far as I understand with the mechanics of a Rolleiflex. I am not sure whether the lens is "the same" (performance, coating) as the T - as it is somewhat older (not much though). I understand that the EVS feature is done in a different way than on the T or on the 3.5F (type I and II) and is the same as 2.8D. But the idea is the same as with the T and I liked that actually.

Autocord - I am still not sure how does it compare to the above once in mechanical stability or robustness, but has interesting design and good lens. CLA can be had on the week part (focusing lever). Screen brigntess between T and Cord. Weight the same as the T.

3.5 or 2.8 E, F - pricey beasts, technically very good. About 200g heavier than the T.

Ricoh (and some other) TLRs - I have read some good things about these, but there user base is smaller and actually a reasonably priced one is not easy to find.

Yashica TLR (D, 124, 124G) - the lens is good, but the experience with the body are mixed. As the price for a nice 124 is very comparable to nice Rolleicord V I would probably pass on Yashica.

Questions left:

1) I would still love to head about the mechanical robustness of the Autocord.

2) If I would consider a new screen - what would you suggest? What are the prices and where can I get one? How to get one installed on a camera that does not allow to detach the focusing hood?

EDIT:
3) I have not heard too much about the Automat EVS-MX model - would love to hear more.

 

[prumpkah]

My subjective two cents:

You probably don't need to upgrade the screen in any Autocord other than the uncommon very first model which came with a somewhat dim ground glass (the model without depth-of-field markings on the film crank plate). Later Autocords came with fresnel screens, and with silicon dioxide [sic?] first surface mirrors that are robust enough to withstand delicate cleaning, allowing improved screen brightness. I find the screens on later Yashica Mats and Ricohmatics/Diacords bright enough for most work that I'd use a TLR for; the Rolleiflex screens seem to vary with model age, and the Rolleicord screens are reliably dim. If you insist on a new screen, someone else here can advise which $200+ third party screen is the best, since I'm too much of a cheapskate to spend as much for a screen as for the camera itself. When I've replaced screens, I've been happy with the no-name screen from Rick Oleson or with a Mamiya RB screen, purchased used and then cut to size.

With a few caveats as noted by others (e.g., the Autocord focus lever, for which a real metal replacement part can be made by Karl Bryan and others; the plastic gears and rubber band aperture-shutter linkages in the Rolleiflex T; and the coffee-grinder film transport in the crank-wind Yashica Mats), none of the cameras you mention are particularly fragile or failure prone under non-industrial use. But any of them might need a CLA, and typically they will; condition is key. It's possible to over-think the build question, unless you are planning to dedicate the camera to extreme uses such as live combat, weddings and children's birthday parties. In TLRs from the 50s and 60s, camera condition generally trumps any hairsplitting questions about build quality, even if a CLA is factored in; even good stuff can wear out in the course of fifty years hard use.

Anything Rollei may end up costing significantly more to own and operate than the purchase price, because the service is pricier (at least in the U.S.) and the accessories are dear, except for Bay I 3rd-party compatibles.

You can always try one camera and if you don't like it, sell it and try another. Other than Planar and Xenotar equipped Rolleis, they aren't ruinously expensive just to buy, and there seems to be sufficient constant demand for good working TLRs to support the relatively easy resale of discarded former love objects.

 

[mablo]

My subjective two cents:
You can always try one camera and if you don't like it, sell it and try another. Other than Planar and Xenotar equipped Rolleis, they aren't ruinously expensive just to buy, and there seems to be sufficient constant demand for good working TLRs to support the relatively easy resale of discarded former love objects.

That's exactly what I did. It's better to buy from here or RFF when you have a good chance of finding a camera that has been cla'd . One more caveat when buying a Rolleicord. Its shutter release button is easily removable. If it's missing you will not find a replacement. Another thing to remember is that Bay-1 (all Tessar variants incl. Xenar) filters and hoods etc. are much easier to find and much less expensive than Bay-2 (Planar, Xenotar).

 

[Dan Daniel]

On the Autocord: its focus system is bomb-proof, best as I can tell. Except for that little matter of how you actually make it work, of course, the lever! Here's the inside of an Autocord's focus block: http://www.flickr.com/photos/18067251@N04/sets/72157626869741228/
Block is the right word: getting the lens out of alignment would involve major damage to the camera body and the cast-metal lens board. This is much stronger than the Rollei or Yashica rail system.

The last four shots in that set show a Yashica-Mat. Rollei is the same idea, slightly stronger parts.

You a can see the Autocotrd shutter release in the fifth from end photo- much nicer than the Yashica. Not as nice as the Rolleiflex. Use matches mechanics here- the Rollei shutter release is the smoothest,Minolta good, Yashica ok until you get used to a better one.

On the wind mechanism, similar story- rollei is simply better finished throughout. Minolta is well-done, Yashica is rougher.

the big unknown in any of these cameras is condition and usage. I've seen Rolleiflexes used and abused to a pile of grinding metal, and
I've seen Yashica that work well. One thing I find interesting is looking at the repair manuals for the three camera lines. Yashica is really just a parts list; I've never seen instructions for adjustment, etc. Minolta has a few adjustments and some recommended maintenance and replacements. Rollei has most systems with tolerances, adjustments, etc. Tells me the company's expectations and market niche. Rollei planned for maintenance for professionals. Minolta figured serious amateurs would need some upkeep. Yashica saw itself as close to a throw-away, use it until it drops dead.

If I was backpacking through Asia, I'd take an Autocord for its solidity. And a small screwdriver so I could remove the focus scale access the lever if it broke.

 

[Matus Kalisky]

I really appreciate all your comments and suggestions.

- prumpkah -
Plastic gears and rubber bands in the Rolleiflex T, really? :eek:

- mablo -
Buying from a member is always the preferred method. But it is usually easier to sell than to buy. I made some good experience here, oever at RFF and also LFF.

- Dan -
Some interesting views. One question. If one were to change the focusing lever himself - what is the chance of messing up the focus calibration (or something else?) Should it rather be made by a experienced serviceman?

I have also contacted Karl Bryan (and he answered as soon as his day in US started) about the Autocord, Rolleiflex T and Ricohmatic 225. His answer was the following (hope others will find it interesting too):
Hi Matus,
The Minolta Autocord is a very reliable and easily serviced camera. Most models came with a Fresnel lens under the ground glass that made the viewing very bright, so there is really no need to install a bright-screen in them. Properly maintained they will last for years. The Ricohmatic 225 has one of the brightest viewfinders. The shortcoming with the Ricohmatic is the film crank assembly is not very robust and it is next to impossible to repair when it fails. The Rolliecord Va/b are nice cameras and the interchangeable film format capability is a neat feature, but the late model Rollei cameras went to plastic parts in the shutter and repairing them requires access to new parts which are hard to find. The Rolleiflex C, D and E are the best ones for use, most competent camera techs can easily repair them. The early Rollei F models are a royal pain to repair because of the RubeGoldberg approach to depth of field pointers and aperture settings used in the focus knob (a buddy of mine will no longer repair the F models because of the difficulty in reassembly). I only work on Minolta and Ricoh TLR cameras, I quit working on all others types of TLRs.
Good luck in finding your TLR.

I have to admit that I indeed feel attracted by the Autocord. Learning about plastic gears and rubber bands in the Rolleiflex T makes me fell ... not good I actually really liked the camera ...

I would still like to hear about the Rolleiflex Automat EVS-MX - what are the differences to later Rolleiflex model (apart from the lens and bayonet size)?

 

[Nick Merritt]

The Automat MX-EVS is just a beautiful camera, and maybe the best choice of all among the Tessar and Tessar-clone cameras since it's a "real Rolleiflex." From the golden age of Rollei, and built really well. Its only downside is that it doesn't have a particularly bright screen, even though it has an f2.8 viewing lens, but that is easily enough swapped out for something brighter. The "EVS" refers to the system of interlocking shutter speed and aperture so you keep the same "exposure value" when you change shutter speed or aperture. However, this is easily disabled anytime you want.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I'll second Nick on the MX-EVS being a gem. Rollei had worked out all the kinks in the design and was on a smooth roll. I have a 2.8C from around this time, and it shares the solidity and simplicity (although some plastic external pieces were quickly abandoned in later models). I am not enamored of the EVS system myself, and it could be one more thing to go wrong. I had it locked up at one EV value on a beater parts camera, but that camera had so many other problems who knows what caused that one?

The earlier rolleiflex, often called an 'MX,' with smaller focus knob and separate lever for changing flash sync setting, is also very solid. Interesting hear Karl Bryan's comments on later Rolleis. I've been a bit wary of the later Es and Fs, wondering if they had gone too far.

Some day I will get burned at the stake by Rollei nuts when I get a 75mm Planar f3.5 from an E or F 'Flex and install it on an Autocord body. I will have the Autocord's focus solidity and the Planar's extra bite, and my interest in any other TLR will end!

Adjusting an Autocord back to infinity focus won't be much more difficult than collimating any other TLR. How's that for an answer? Reassembling is easy since the factory installation leaves divots for the set screws; I don't know if other levers will index to the same place. One thing with a TLR is that even if the taking lens infinity point is off, you have a bit of a safety in that the viewing lens can be made to match the taking lens and life goes on.

Still, condition is critical with any of these. All of the models I discuss are 50-60 year old mechanical devices. This includes the lenses, where alignment is key.

By the way, although people can talk about this or that camera having plastic or being poorly made or whatever, all of the cameras under discussion will do you well. If you were shooting rolls each day and making your living from a camera, these issues meant something. These days, condition and maintenance will have more effect on how well ANY of these cameras hold up in most typical usage.

 

[jimgalli]

Just for the fun of it, get a copy of Don Normark's book Chavez Ravine, A Los Angeles Story, IMESHO one of the best photography tomes ever. He was a starving college kid and did those pictures (1949) with a Ciro-Flex, a little TLR that goes begging on Ebay for $30 even now.

That and my Autocord are my 2 remaining medium format cameras. The little Ciro has so little value, it lives in a zip lock baggie under the seat of my Model A Roadster. I still have 2 bricks of Panatomic X to use up

 

[rolleiman]

I too am somewhat surprised at the post about "rubber bands" and plastic forming part of the innards of the Rolleiflex. As I've already mentioned my Rollei T goes back to 1978 and is still going strong, I would happily buy another in good condition at a reasonable price. I believe Rollei switched production of some of the later f2.8 models to Singapore at one stage, and it's here that the rumours of plastic being used for some functions (as happened, I believe with Leica in Canada on the M4-2) came about.

However, one of the reasons for the excellent reliability record of TLR's is they are basically very simple cameras mechanically, compared to their 35mm counterparts......no motordrive to shorten the life of shutters....no flapping mirrors......they tend to be used by photographers who take great care with every shot, working slowly and methodically, so they tend not to get "hammered" like other types do, particularly as this type of camera went out of fashion with professionals decades ago.

I honestly think that whatever model you choose, providing it's in very good condition, you're not going to have too many worries over reliability.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Here's some interior shots of Rolleiflex T. the shot I (hope) shows on the left side shows the ribbons for the aperture and shutter indicators, and the large plastic shield around the viewing lens-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29504544@N08/5062580869/in/set-72157624987139266

Another gear on the wind side, between the film roller gear and the counter mechanism, might be a black plastic. The ratchet mechanism on the wind lever itself is very different than other Rolleiflexes, much more primitive. The overall mechanism for shutter cocking and winding looks different, and I know how to accommodate for the lack of the Automat mechanism.

I don't say this to disparage the T. It *is* built to a lower level than the Automats and letter models, it's just a fact. The real issue is what this means in day to day use: pretty well nothing. Again, condition, condition, condition.

 

[Matus Kalisky]

- Dan -
Thank you for the details on the T. Very interesting.
You would really throw away the nice Tessar in the Autocord and replaces it with a 3.5 Planar? I guess that would require a lot of work ...

- rolleiman -
I completely agree that it is the condition that matters most. Whatever parts were used in the T - the camera does not have "do not touch nobody can repair" reputation. So no reason to put it off the list.

- Jim -
I think I got the point

I will most probably concentrate on the Autocord and late Automats, but will not ignore a nice T if it comes my way However I will probably not get a Rolleicord - the lack of "luxury" features (not really the film loading - aligning an arrow is easy enough and reliable, but the wrist movement to wind the film) and the slower (darker) viewing lens puts me off a little. Again - if a deal would come up - why not, but otherwise I will concentrate on the others. Plnar/Xenar models are too expensive for me now and I actually liked the look the Tessar design produces, so why go there.

P.S.
My wife noticed that I am looking again in the TLRs and asked: "Why are you looking as cameras you have already sold?" - seems she still underestimates the effect of GAS on men