Rollei 3003

[Jorg Willems <jorg@salesmedia.com>]

Return-Path: <owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 09:37:21 -0800
From: Donal Philby <donalphilby@earthlink.net>
Organization: Donal Philby Photography
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: CLE
Sender: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us

>Alastair Firkin wrote:
>> Mr Rollei if he could be tempted to roll in behind the 3003 again. [vain
> >hope, but how good would an autofocus version be? ;-)]

>Alastair:

>The 3003 is the 35mm system, yes?  I remember looking at it some years
>ago as the one truly innovative system.  Especially for us location
>shooters working with lights and needing a polaroid back, it seemed
>wonderful.  Even the way it fit the hand.  The lenses were reported to
>be excellent (typically Rollei), if limited in scope.  
>
>I especially loved the interchangeable backs.
>
>Is the system still made??  Perhaps it was just too innovative for the
>traditional market.
>
>Donal Philby
>San Diego


Donal:
 
I used to own a Rollei 3003 until I traded it 6 years ago for Leica equipment.
The 3003 use the same lenses as the Rollei SL35.  The lenses are made by Zeiss
and the scope is from extreme wide to over 500mm (if I remember right).  I had several
non-Rollei (non-Zeiss) lenses.  My favorite lens was the 80mm f1.4.  Rollei sold the zooms under 
the label "Rolleinar".  They were quite nice, but not as good as the Zeiss lenses.
I traded for Leica because the 3003 need batteries to operate.  The battery consumption was HUGE,
to say the least.  The battery charger was over $80 and lasted for 2 years max.
Unfortunately my camera was not very reliable.  I had problems to get it fixed in the US and my wife refused to accept
that I had to travel to Germany to get my camera fixed.  I agree with you that the concept of the camera is great.

Jorg Willems