CI Photocommunity

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Decision Rolleiflex 35F with Planar


I've been offered recently a Rolleiflex 3.5F Type III (Bayonet type II) equipped with Planar 75/3.5, according to S/N the camera produced in 1965.
According to the seller the camera has passed CLA just recently and also during the treatment the light measuring sensor has been replaced with a new one (new old stock).
Generally the camera in excellent condition, looks rather close to a Mint condition. Planar is pristine, the viewing lens exhibits a "slight sign of coatign desintegration" according to the CLA lab technician, but otherwise should be Mint.
Besides the camera there are:
1. Original bag/case
2. Set of 4 filters (apparently for B&W) in bargain but working condition
3. Grip (without Rolleifix)
4. Lenses caps
5. Light measurign sensor diffuser

What would be a reasonable price for the package given the conditions ?
I was offered all that for 900$, isn't it on the high side a bit ?
What do yuo think ?

Should I be better with Xenotar-based model ?


Well-Known Member
Alexz, Some people, myself included, would argue that the f3.5 Planar is superior to the f2 version. It is quite simply "the best" I have been interested in one for a long time.
Steer clear of the Xenotar lenses; they are not in the same league as the Planars
Yes, it sounds expensive, but if it is in as good a condition as described and you intend to use it, keep it and care for it, the price will become irrelevant. Let me know the outcome.


Thanks a lot Colin.
Frankly, for that price I would rather prefer absolutely clear camera, these "slight sign of coatign desintegration" of the viewing lens makes me worry a bit suspecting it may grow further with some time.
I just spoke with the seller, he also admitted there
is few small spots at the mirror edges, but as he said according to the lab, nothing to worry about.
However, what makes me also nervious about spending this amount is that these spots may or may not grow also covering more and more mirror surface. (just my assumption).

Do you have an opinion about these points ?


Active Member
$900 seems a bit steep for a 3.5F Planar. That's what I would pay for a user 2.8 F Planar or even a bargain GX. The accessories are also not all that earth-shaking although a nice set of filters is great IF you do black and white. There is not lens hood which you will have to find ($40-65).
As for the quality of the Xenotar models which Colin alluded to, the opinions on the Rollei Users Group vary quite a bit. Some think the 3.5 Xenotar is the sharper lens, others prefer the Planar. I am happy with the Xenotar on my 3.5 E, which I got for ca. $150 in excellent plus condition with (n)everready case, strap, hood, & yellow filter. I had a 2.8 E Planar 10 years ago which had an excellent lens although the camera was not in as good a shape. In my view you only need to purchase an F if you need the removable hood and want to get an eye-level prism. All I added To my TLRs was a brighter viewing screen (Maxwell or Beattie).


Well-Known Member
Alexz, First of all I meant f2.8 and not f2(obviously)
You certainly can have the mirror resilvered,but given the premium price being asked, I would be wanting a premium camera. Whilst I wouldn't worry too much about coating desintigration on the viewing lens, it does sound like it's less than perfect.
I would consider it quite expensive under these circumstances and you may do better by looking around