Rolleiflex model choice does not matter

[Eddie Vaughan]

First-time Rolleiflex buyers frequently ask for advice on internet forums about which Rolleiflex model they should prefer, or which lens would be the best choice. These questions invariably draw a large number of different answers, as well as a lively debate, but there is one interesting fact that emerges from them. Choice does not matter. While some addvise that a Rolleiflex F a with Planar lens is clearly the best choice, as many recommend a different model and a different lens. In short, there is no unanimous or even majority opinion on which model or lens is the best choice. Even owners of pre-war Rolleiflex models with an uncoated Tessar or Xenar lens affirm the excellence of their cameras and claim complete satisfaction with them.

One is left with the strong impression from these comments that choice of Rolleiflex model or lens does not really matter in terms of photographic performance or owner satisfaction. So long as the camera is working as it should, any model or lens is likely to leave the new owner feeling very satisfied with his or her purchase. This is a testament to the quality of Rolleiflex cameras, of course, but it also suggests that most of the comparisons between different Rolleiflex models and lenses, which at times has been both technical and intense, misses the more fundamental point that Rolleiflex owners are invariably delighted with their cameras no matter which model or lens they possess.

Eddie Vaughan

[DPurdy]

It is true that even the very oldest Rolleiflex standard with uncoated lens can give very nice sharp image quality with beautiful contrast. It is also true that the Xenotar and Planar designs have not undergone significant change from beginning to end. The famous 6th element added to the 3.5 lenses is not something that causes a difference that can be detected easily. So in that way what you say is absolutely true.

However in my own Rollei ownership experience the different models do make a difference in whether or not I like the camera..
My first Rollei was a T. Not very interesting to me because I didn't much like the field of view and I wasn't all that impressed with the optical quality.
I traded up to a 3.5F with Planar and still the field of view was not what I wanted. When I looked in the view finder things were farther away than I thought... The distant objects were smaller than I expected. It is because the 75mm lens is a little bit wide angle. I sold that camera to a friend who wanted it and later came upon a great deal on a 2.8E2 with Xenotar lens. Switching to the 880mm lens solved that distant perspective problem for me and the image quality was great. Still the Waist level finder was all I had and it caused me enough frustration that I didn't use the camera much. Then I acquired a prism and it all changed for me. Once I could look through the camera as if it was an SLR and with the image oriented correctly it suddenly became a relevant camera for me.

So to me the Rolleiflex with a 2.8 lens and compatibility with a prism makes it a much more viable camera and one that has become my favorite camera to use. If I was commanded to give up my 2.8 F (or FX) for a E or C or anything that didn't use a prism or have a 80mm lens, that Rollei would go in my closet and never come out again.

[Eddie Vaughan]

I think your reply partly illustrates my point, Dennis. Most Rolleiflex TLR owners will indicate a firm preference for a particular model or lens type when asked to make a recommendation, but the thing is that there is no unanimity among their recommendations or even a majority recommendation when the recommendations are viewed overall.

An illustration can be seen in the recommendations offered to first-time Rolleiflex TLR buyers by Rolleiflex owners or users posting replies on the photo.net or rangefinderforum.com website forums. They are replying to questions about which Rolleiflex TLR model or lens type represent the best choice. The following recommendations on model types are given in separate replies, and in about equal proportion: 2.8F, 2.8C, GX, 2.8D, 2.8 E, 3.5MX EVS, 3.5F, 3.5D, 3.5F, and the Rolleiflex T. ( In your case, Dennis, you would presumably recommend a 2.8 with a prism viewfinder attachment.)

The recommendations are similarly divided when it comes to lens preference, with the Planar, Xenotar, Tessar, and Xenar all being recommended separately and, again, in about equal proportions. The Rolleiflex T, whose total production was second only to the 3.5F model (according to Rollei Club figures), is often mentioned as a camera to avoid, but at least as many replies describe it as an excellent camera that offers better value for money than E or F models.

What these replies show overall, in my opinion, is that (apart from the deficient 2.8A tessar, which was withdrawn by Rollei) there has been no bad Rolleiflex TLR model ever made. There are no duds or lemons, and Rolleiflex owners appear to be very happy with whatever model or lens they happen to own or use. In this respect, the first-time Rolleiflex TLR buyer will very likely be happy with whatever model or lens is finally chosen.

Perhaps other club members could indicate their own preference -- and hopefullyl confirm my opinion!

Eddie Vaughan