[rollei_list] Re: New Rolleiflex and Serial Numbers

  • From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 22:03:33 -0800


----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc James Small" <marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <charzov@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 6:39 PM
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: New Rolleiflex and Serial Numbers


At 07:32 PM 1/26/2007, Richard Knoppow wrote:
>     A couple of hours ago I found an MX with Tessar at a
>local thrift shop. They wanted $25 for it so I took a
>chance. Unfortunately, the front element of the Tessar is
>not in very good condition but may still be usable. There
>was also an MX with a Xenar in it but it needed a lot more
>work than this one and was more. Also, the Xenar was badly
>etched so I passed it up.
>     The serial numbers of the one I bought are:
>
>Camera body, 1278950;
>Zeiss Opton Tessar, 75mm, f/3.5, Nr. 912808, T coated;
>Finder lens, Heidosmat, 75mm, f/2.8,  Nr. 632127.


Thanks, Richard.

"MX" is an American designation (US and
Canada).  The factory called this camera a 3.5A
and it was so marketed elsewhere in the
world.  and its work project number was K 4
A.  The product code for orders was Aulux.  The
price in 1951 in Germany was DM510.  (That was
the day of the "four in one Mark", so that works
out to $127.50 in 1951 US dollars, equating when
adjusted to inflation to $978.57 in 2005
dollars.)  The camera was produced in two batches
between JUN 1951 and MAR 1954.  Your camera is
fairly early in the first batch, so I would
hesitantly suggest a production date of late 1951
or early 1952, but what do I know?  <he grins>

The lens (are you certain that its not marked
"Zeiss-Opton"?)  was part of a batch of 15,000
such lenses produced at some unknown date in the
early 1950's but, apparently, prior to late
1951!  (The early Zeiss Oberkochen records often
do not include the date on which the batch was
completed, though the Jena records almost always
do so.  But Oberkochen seems to have lost a lot
of its early production records, so that the
scholars of the breed, Charlie Barringer, have to
work from actual lens sightings such as Richard's
richly appreciated numbers or from secondary
sources such as Hasselblad and F&H and Exakta records where these survive.)

Thanks for the Heidosmat number.  We are
accumulating these though, so far, most do not
seem to make a lot of sense.  Some statistician
will undoubtedly earn her PhD by finally
deciphering this scheme from the data preserved
at the Barringer Zeiss Odditorium in southern New
Jersey or at the Helmut Thiele Institut für
Weltweit Wissenschaft in Ost Eisfeld, Germany,
but that will be too late to do those of us in
our present number much good, I fear, though we
will all be by then sitting at the table in
Valhalla discussing the International Sign of the
Doughnut with Bertele and Nerwin and Franke and
Heidecke and the various Ernst Leitz's and
Kellner and Zeiss and Abbe and Schott and Petzval
(if he is FINALLY over his snit) and all of the
others, while being served steins of meade (not
my favorite brew:  I do hope that they serve some
single-malts and Guinness in the eternal
hereafter) by Valkyries on Zeiss Ikon and
Voigtländer and KW trays.  Happy days are ahead,
and, yes, there WILL be pie in the sky, by and by!

Marc


msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!

  No snipping I don't want to miss anything.
The lens IS marked Zeiss-Opton Tessar. Unfortunately, the flare from the damaged front surface shows up even with aerial image examination with a 10X loupe. The rest of the lens is in pretty good shape and the finder is perfect. The camera has all the production changes listed in Prochnow, i.e., it has the grooved socket for the Rolleifix, internal baffles, spring retainer for the Rolleigrid. It is slightly newer than my other MX which has a Xenar on it. I am about to get ready for work but later I will post to you the finder lens numbers off my other Rolleis. Except for my Old Standard all have Schneider lenses. I don't know if these are of interest to you. As far as I can tell this camera has very little wrong with it other than the lens (which is sort of important). Not bad for $25 :-) I will search out replacement lenses. I don't know what John van Stelten wants for repolishing and coating a single surface (actually both sides probably get coated) but I suspect its more than I can justify. In any case, the thing is in too good condition to consider it a parts camera.

---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: