Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/14

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex
From: dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings)
Date: Mon Jan 14 06:23:08 2008
References: <4787E670.8060008@hemenway.com> <DC4B73A4105FCE4FAE0CEF799BF84B36013F1FEC@case-email>

On Jan 14, 2008 2:40 PM, David Rodgers <drodgers@casefarms.com> wrote:

> That's certainly a nice camera. I'd like to find another Rolleiflex. The
> shutter in my 2.8C Xenotar is questionable and I'm not sure it's worth
> repairing.

Of course it is! 134 USD + shipping with work done by the very best:

http://www.rolleirepairs.com/cla.htm

> I had my 3.5E Planar CLA'd a few years ago. My only regret is
> that I didn't have a (Maxwell?) bright screen installed at the time.

Don't give it another thought. The Maxwell screens are bright, but
they are more difficult to focus. You see more, but it does not snap
in and out of focus like the ground glass screens do.

I have a Maxwell screen on a Rolleicord.

I have another Rolleicord with an original screen and then something
called a Rolleigrid. The Rolleigrid is a fresnel lens that you put on
top of your original screen. It redirects those dark corners into a
nice evenly light view. It costs about 30 USD on auction. It is made
by Rollei.

It isn't as bright as the Maxwell, but the difference is not great and
certainly not worth 100 USD and the headache of getting your focus
correct. Maxwell screens are not quite the same thickness as the
originals. You can install them yourself, but it takes some tedious
trial and error.

Don't get me wrong. I really like both, the Maxwell screen and the 
Rolleigrid.

But the Rolleicords have a 3.2 viewing lens. The 2.8 view lenses of
the Rolleiflexes are much better. Looking down a Rolleicord is like
looking down a dark chimney.

A Rolleigrid on a Rolleiflex ground glass is all you need. Though,
truth be said, I am satisfied with the original ground glass of my
3.5E (Xenotar, of course).


> Just after I got the E back I came across a used 2.8F Planar priced at
> approx what you paid. It had a bright screen. I already had two Rolleis
> so I passed. Now I wish that I'd bought it. The bright screen makes a
> big difference. The only bad thing about buying an older TLR -- or any
> older camera for that matter -- is the potential for repair. The CLA on
> my E wasn't inexpensive. It probably cost about what the camera is
> worth.

Check out the link to Harry Fleenor. He has a fixed price for the
shutter overhaul.

Daniel

Replies: Reply from drodgers at casefarms.com (David Rodgers) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)
In reply to: Message from Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)
Message from drodgers at casefarms.com (David Rodgers) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)