Zeiss Contarex Bullseye

The Edsel today is worth something like half a million dollars. It's still ugly, however.

Getting back to the Rollei SL 35 cameras, I agree with "Rol_lei Nut."

The one thing that I might add is that of the five Sl 35 E bodies that I bought, only one works correctly in autoexposure mode. The others work fine in stop-down AE. I've always wanted to try the SL 2000/3000 series -- I've heard some unkind things about the reliability of the electronics.

I have 3 SL35-E/VSL35-E bodies which work (well, one's BC and self timer doesn't), this after going through at least 2 bodies which had the "lazy mirror" problem. So a better than even success rate isn't too bad...


The original SL2000 used the same shutter (and apparently electronics) as the SL35-E, thus was prone to the same failures.
Later and fixed SL2000s are the so-called "3003 inside" model which, (you guessed it) have the upgraded and more reliable electronics of the 3003. Their shutter also reaches 1/2000 in automatic mode (on the SL35-E and normal SL2000s the shutter was originally designed to reach 1/2000 but was slowed to 1/1000 maximum because of reliability problems).
The 3001 is basically a simplified 3003 without the WLF.
On all these, using batteries or accumulartors other than NiCds can damage the electronics in some situations.
Also, the later film magazines are said to be more reliable than the earlier ones having the manual film length setting (though these too were often upgraded "inside")...

So, definitely not for the fainthearted! But can be great fun.

Regarding the use of NiCads only. Does it permit the use of the newer NiMH cells? Or is it NiCads and nothing but NiCads? I recall reading this in the past, but as I don't own the camera, I never understood why.

I thought I recalled reading that the Rolleiflex SLX had the same warning regarding its batteries.

Thanks for the explanation about the differences between the 2000 and 3000 series. My favorite lens of the Rolleiflex SL series is the f/2.8 85mm.

elekm said:

Regarding the use of NiCads only. Does it permit the use of the newer NiMH cells? Or is it NiCads and nothing but NiCads? I recall reading this in the past, but as I don't own the camera, I never understood why.

Click to expand...

Nicads only as in no NiMH.
I don't know exactly why, something to do their internal resistence. And the if the end of a roll is reached when the accus/battries are nearly discharged, it can cause serious damage.

Because of the small sizes of the 35mm & 85mm f/2.8 (and the 18mm isn't too big for its FL), the Rolleiflex is my travel SLR (Leica R equivalents of the same lenses are relatively huge).
If I had to choose a favourite lens, it would be the 35mm f/1.4 for its look, but it often gets left at home for its size...