[rollei_list] Re: "Apples to apples" (was: Surprised)
- From: Ardeshir Mehta <ardeshir@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:48:09 -0500
On Tuesday, March 29, 2005, at 07:10 PM, Marc James Small wrote:
> At 11:56 PM 3/28/05 -0500, Ardeshir Mehta wrote:
>
>> Yes, you are right about a Leica III (I was thinking of getting one
>> myself on eBay), but they are more properly paired off with
>> Rolleicords, not Rolleiflexes.
>>
>> But try getting an M3 or higher - M4, M6, etc. - on eBay for anything
>> less than $1,000! I got a Rolleiflex D, equipped f/2.8 Xenotar, in
>> almost perfect working condition (only the sports viewfinder mirror
>> is missing) for US$255 plus shipping. I WISH I could get an M3 that
>> cheaply - I'd JUMP at the chance!
>
> Apples to apples, again.
>
> The IIIc Leica equates to a Rolleiflex Automat in terms of vintage and
> use at the time they were produced, both being then professional
> cameras. And a IIIc with its standard Summitar will run about as much
> as an Automat in equivalent condition.
Yes, in terms of date of production you are right.
But what does an M3 compare to in the Rolleiflex world, then, according
to you?
> In today's market, an M6 equates to a 2.8GX. See which is cheaper in
> the used market!
Oh, no question about that. But even a 2.8F Rolleiflex TLR - let alone
an E or a D model - is a lot cheaper than a Leica M3.
> Your issue about lenses for the M6 is a bit misleading [...]
Which issue was that?
> [...] : a solid Jupiter-3 will run around $100 and a Leitz LTM to M
> adapter will run around $70, so add $170 (or more, if you wish to use
> a Leica lens) to the price of the M3 or M4 or M6.
Yes, but using a Jupiter on a Leica defeats much of the point of using
a Leica, dunnit. The heart of the Leica mystique are its lenses! If you
want to use a Jupiter, use it with a Zorki, or at best a Leica III
replica made in Russia or the Ukraine.
By the way, my Jupiter-11 cost me just $10 plus shipping, and my
Jupiter-8 came with my $45 (shipping included) Zorki! And both are
tack-sharp, though probably not QUITE as good as a Summicron.
> The M4 does have an inflated price, one that I regard as improperly
> inflated, as I find it a weak sister in the Leitz line and a camera
> which lives much more on reputation than on performance. The M3 and M6
> are substantially superior cameras.
Yes, that's true, at least as regards the M3 (I am not familiar with
the M6).
But my point is that an OLD Rolleiflex with an f/2.8 Planar or Xenotar,
that is to say anything made in the sixties or before, is considerably
cheaper on eBay than any OLD Leica M-series complete camera (i.e., with
one f/2 Summicron included) made at about the same time! Right?
... RIGHT?
Cheers ;-)
Other related posts:
