[rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- From: hoarcroft@xxxxxxxxxxx
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 15:31:59 -0400
I know exactly what you are saying, and I agree with you. I suppose we
ought to defer to Marc regarding factory QC procedures. Yet F & R's
reputation depended on quality.
I would aver that the differences among lenses, pre- or post-war, were
nearer to exquisite vs. ecstatic than to excellent vs. reject. Absent
gross errors that to be sure must have slipped by when a line inspector
had a little too much during mittag refreshment, so?
Let's put the question to the list, though: post your information on QC at
F & H, especially regarding lenses; what were the manufacturing
tolerances, how were they measured, and how was consistency assured?
In <BEE30460.11FE4%egoldste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, on 06/25/05
at 12:53 PM, Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>> It is a
>> safe assumption -- I hope! -- that unit-to-unit differences in lenses in
>> Rolleiflexes are expected to be tightly controlled. That seems to be the
>> experience of most of those here, n'est ce pas? -
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>> les clark / edgewater, nj / usa
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>That is a very interesting question, and one that to my knowledge has
>never been addressed with authority on the list...
>Exactly what were the QC standards at the factory over the years? Prewar?
>Postwar? Did the factory specify specific performance from specific lens
>suppliers and factories (by type?) and if so, what were the criteria?
>Annecdotally, we know that there is now significant difference in
>performance from example to example, but much or most of that could well
>be due to the cameras treatment over the years and it's current state of
>tune. It is well-known that pre-80s, there was a good deal of individual
>variation between "identical" lenses and it was not uncommon for a
>serious shooter to shoot/test multiple examples until finding a "good
>one."
>Eric Goldstein
>---
>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
>http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
-
-----------------------------------------------------------
les clark / edgewater, nj / usa
-----------------------------------------------------------
---
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
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
- Follow-Ups:
- [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- From: Marvin Wallace
- References:
- [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- From: Eric Goldstein
Other related posts:
- » [rollei_list] Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- » [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- From: Marvin Wallace
- [rollei_list] Re: Veiling Flare
- From: Eric Goldstein