[rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- From: "Eric Goldstein" <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 18:40:51 -0400
Without a doubt, that is what's going on.
As a stereo Realist shooter, I can also attest to the superiority of
that design.
Do you remember those "pocket tripods," the chains with a tripod screw
at the end? Attach tot he camera, step on the chain, pull up, and
Bob's Your Uncle...
Eric Goldstein
--
On 9/8/07, Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: (snipped)
> I rather think the answer is the inertia of the heavier
> camera or gun.
---
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:
- » [rollei_list] Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm
- » [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex SL 35M and Rolleinar 3,5/200mm