[rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex 2.8E value
- From: "Stephen Attaway" <attaway@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:29:09 -0700
Jan and the Rollei list:
The 2.8e and 3.5e were the last rolleis that didn't have to
compete with the Hasselblad 500 system in the pro market
and the Nikon F in the advanced amateur market.
I suspect many more 'e's were sold than all the follow on
'f's and 't's combined. Thats true of the M3/M2 vs later
Leicas, because of the Nikon F.
Anyone have sales figures?
I'm a big fan of the 2.8e, just having picked up a second
example. Its with Harry Fleenor right now. The meter was
1/3 of a stop low. Harry has no parts for the meter and
tells me that the meter cell and meter came in matched sets
from the factory and have no adjustments for sensitivity.
My 'old' 2.8e meter is spot on, so if I get finicky I
suppose I can swap them out.
Gasser's in San Francisco just sold a 2.8f with a dead
meter for $400. Everything else worked.
Using that as a baseline, and figuring in the cost of a
cla, I think the camera zeros out and the outfit is worth
what the case, strap, mirrored caps, instruction manual,
diffusor and box are worth - about $300 if you bought all
those things seperately from keh or somewhere.
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 08:58:02 -0400
Jan Decher <Jan.Decher@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have been offered a Rolleiflex 2.8E (Xenotar) with worn
> leather case, strap, mirrored caps, nice instructions
> manual, diffusor, original box and paperwork(!). The
> owner may still find filters and maybe a shade. Lens
> looks okay but the camera clearly needs a thorough
> overhaul, the meter is not responding and the selftimer
> sluggish. Aperture and shutter wheelies are very stiff.
>
> Any ballpark figure what these "middle aged" Rolleis are
> worth in this condition? I am at a loss regarding the
> value of these "user" Rolleis. Given rising CLA costs I
> don't want to offer too much but I also
> don't want to offend the owner with too low an offer.
>
> On a related thought: I am surprised that I can always
> find well-worn 2.8E's and 3.5Es in the US but never an F
> in decent condition. Also no late Rolleicords or T's.
> Any explanation? Did fewer Rolleis get sold in the US
> in the 60s and 70s because of the "onslaught" of 35mm
> SLRs?
> Jan
>
> ---
> 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
>
---
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:
