[rollei_list] Re: Why Rollei T?
- From: Bob Shell <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:07:42 -0500
On Tuesday, March 29, 2005, at 09:54 AM, Jan Decher wrote:
> Why a Rollei T and not a 3.5F? Do you prefer the characteristics of
> the 3.5 Tessar over the Xenotar/Planar for portraits?
I have a T because I stumbled onto a deal on a like new one. This was
several years ago and a company called Anchor Sales had a bunch of them
as British military surplus. I think the price was right around $ 300.
It was complete with original case and instruction book, and only
missing the lens cap. I use a metal Yashica TLR lens cap on it and it
has not rebelled.
I use it mostly for landscapes and such. I find a 75mm lens too short
for portraits, so when I shoot portraits in medium format I use my
6008i and 150 lens.
Oh, and I didn't use it at all when I first got it. I hate "waist
level" viewfinders. I started using it after I found a good deal on a
prism on eBay (dented housing but perfect optics). I find TLRs almost
impossible to use without a prism finder.
> I also noticed in A. Evans' book that the T is much lighter (36 oz)
> than the 3.5 F(44 oz), has only Bay I filter mount and (type 3) is 220
> capable.
Mine isn't 220 capable, but that doesn't bother me.
The T lacks the film feeler system of other Flexes, and is more like a
Rolleicord in loading, or like one of the current Flexes. That doesn't
bother me, and it makes for a mechanically less complex camera.
> Great features. I will start looking for one.
I hope you find a nice one.
Bob
Other related posts:
