![rolleiflex 2.8 for sale rolleiflex 2.8 for sale](https://www.adorama.com/images/Large/rl28fx.jpg)
I think the 3.5f late models really were the Magnum Opus of the Rolleiflex cameras, and by default, the TLR per se. Surgically sharp, beautiful out of focus areas and a great all round balance and compromise of a design that works well for everything and anything that I personally like shooting.
![rolleiflex 2.8 for sale rolleiflex 2.8 for sale](https://i.ebayimg.com/thumbs/images/g/7ycAAOSwQlZeN3EI/s-l300.jpg)
Very true, but if this is the only lens you have on your camera (and you have a hood on it, ha) you will possibly never want to use another one anyway. They say that Rolleiflexes can’t change their lenses like a Hassy. Believe me, this lens is where the buck stops. Sorry to fire shots here but these are also the words of a former Hassy owner. This is coming from somebody who’s owned most of Leica’s best brass stuff and somebody who likes the look of 50’s and 60’s Germanic, hi-res lenses more than any other. One thing that I am certain of however is that the 75mm 3.5 Zeiss Planar 6 element lens is my all-time favourite Rollei lens ever. I have found a higher number of my best ever pictures were taken on 3.5f’s, although I am not sure that this data really means much as even assuming that I owned 2.8’s for as long a period of shooting in my life (which might actually be true come to think of it), if I always reached for the 3.5 when going to shoot then my bias got in the way more than anything else I suppose. Also, a Rolleinar close up filter for either camera might make some of that a moot point anyway. Again, if all you ever wanted was to do natural light portraits, the (ever so slightly) longer 2.8 lenses and one third of a stop extra speed might serve you well but for me I find that a non-issue really and I do shoot a lot of Rollei portrait stuff that isn’t on this site for various reasons). I also like the ever so slightly wider field of view with this model, sure it’s very slight indeed but I find it a useful edge. When I have had both in my rotation (which has happened from time to time), I always felt drawn to the 3.5 when leaving the house and going to grab one. Simply put, I find the 3.5 to be more compact, less bulbous, easier to handle and carry, nicer to use, cheaper to buy (and sometimes find accessories for although that one doesn’t always hold up lately) and better proportioned to look at. So, why do I prefer the 3.5f Planar? Why is it one of the truly VERY best cameras ever? Let me save you the trouble: In both of the above ‘battles’, the correct answer is usually somewhere in the ballpark of ‘they are as good as each other, choose the one you prefer’.
![rolleiflex 2.8 for sale rolleiflex 2.8 for sale](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/rR4AAOSwPAhhOviS/s-l225.jpg)
Woe betide anybody daft enough to enter such debates into internet search engines and then try and find the time needed to actually wade through all the info and arguments that will come your way. Indeed, there are many useless debates in the world of the Rolleiflex user and the top two offenders would have to be those of a ‘Planar vs. If there are any hardcore devotees of the 2.8f out there that would beg to differ, fear not…I really do understand. I have to say, the 2.8f’s very nearly win out as they are also dear to my heart but in terms of real world use, the images that I get (and handling and carrying around), I just have to give the 3.5f’s the nod. I, like so many Rolleiflex nutcases, have rotated my way through ownership of many of them (probably more than I’d like to admit to publicly) over the years and so I have had ample chance to see the pros and cons of each. However, having already written a lot on this site over the last few years about classic Leicas, let’s examine the case for the ‘Flex in a tad more detail shall we? In the meantime, if it had to be just one and only one and you put a gun to my head, you’d still probably have to pull the trigger after you got annoyed at me still not being able to make my bloody mind up, the original solid brass Leica M’s and the 3.5f Rolleiflex take the crown kind of equally. I know the M3 would be top of the pile for so many and it might just be for me too although I actually prefer the M2 with a fast 35 and so this would definitely need to be hashed out properly if one were to make an all-time favourite pick. I have fallen in love with the images from those candidates myself over the years but there’s just something about this choice that I can’t automatically relegate to second place. This is no easy claim to make now is it? People are so invested in the ‘best camera’ concept and there are so many cameras out there that could claim the crown.