[rollei_list] Weights (was Re: Re: 3.5F for $1,200?)

  • From: Thomas A.Frank <taf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 19:14:18 -0500

Jerry;

According to the data in Parker's book (and Marc's tabulation below), they (the 2.8F and 3.5 F) DO weigh the same.

Even if you assume that the 1220g value for the 3.5F is a typo, and it's really 1120g, that means that the 3.5F only weighs 100g less than the 2.8F, which is such a small difference as to be essentially meaningless.

For the weight of a sandwiches worth of cold cuts, I'll take an extra stop, thank you.

Tom Frank

Marc,

Do you mean to tell me that you actually believe that
the 3.5F and 2.8F weigh the same? If so, you are too
f&^%$ing gullible.

I say, in legal language, BS!

Jerry

Marc James Small wrote:

At 11:14 AM 12/4/05 -0800, Peter K. wrote:
Is it much heavier? Anyone have the weight differences?

Here are some representative weights, camera bodies alone without cases,
straps, hoods, &c:

3.5E            1120g
3.5E2           1120g
3.5E3           1120g
3.5F            1220g

2.8E            1255g
2.8E2           1250g
2.8FE3          1250g
2.8F            1220g

In short, the 2.8E and F cameras were approximately 100g heavier than were
their 3.5 contemporaries. Contemplate this one, guys: the difference is
around 3.5 ounces. This is hardly a world-shaker.

Marc



---
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:

  1. Home
  2. rollei_list
  3. Archive
  4. 12-2005