[rollei_list] Re: Whiteface T with Xenar question
- From: Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:15:16 -0400
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Marc James Small
<marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: (snipped)
> Carlos is correct in saying that F&H would establish minimum quality
> requirements and that the Xenar must have met them as well as did the CZ
> Tessar. But that does not mean that the Tessar did not exceed these
> requirements. I would doubt it: JSK is a company who does not make
> mediocre lenses (well, they DO, but at Göttingen at their ISCO works). I
> see no reason to believe that the recomputed Tessar and the contemporary JSK
> Xenar were not on a par in terms of optical performance. But I do not KNOW
> this as I have never seen any test results such as MTF charts.
>
Sanders -
What Marc wrote here is at the heart of it; minimum performance
standards don't mean the lenses are identical. Plus, as we all know
and have said so many many times, therer is enormous individual
variation on these cameras. So anyone who claims one to superior to
the other is dancing. Then, of course, there is the matter of how well
cared for/adjusted the camera is...
See how well the Xenar actually shoots, and you will have your answer...
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
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
