[rollei_list] Re: A proposition for Peter and Carlos
- From: Peter J Nebergall <iusar4s@xxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:08:38 -0500
A Mendelian square? What of the fact that 1 in 9 of the second
generation will have a double dose of the traits??
a 4-lens reflex? Stereo!
PJ Nebergall
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:39:57 -0700 (PDT) Jerry Friedman
<tinycameraco@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> Gentlemen:
>
> There is only one way to settle this for sure. I propose that we
> cross a Rollei
> T with a Rollei GX. By carefully observing the offspring, we should
> be able to
> determine the extent to which Rollei F genes play a role. Not being a
> geneticist, I leave the mathematic ratios to those who know these
> things.
> But,if no Rollei F characteristics are obvious in the first
> generation, we can
> always cross members of the first generation with each other. Again,
> i will
> leave the ratios to those that understand these things. I should
> think,
> however, that even a single first or second generation Rollei T with
> a Rollei F
> winding mechanism should prove fairly conclusive. Of course, if no
> subsequent
> Rollei offspring demonstrate a Rollei F auto film mechanism, that
> would be
> proff too, no?
>
> My one suggestion would be to cross an early gray Rollei T rather
> than a later
> one. But there is one problem I can not think through on my own;
> for the
> Rollei F.....should we use a 2.8 or a 3.5? It occurs to me that we
> might try
> cross breeding both with a Rollei T (3.5) just to see if there is a
> variation.
>
> There is one more concern--which may be nothing at all. Do you know
> of a good,
> accurate and reliable Rollei Breeding Station whose results we can
> all trust?
>
> Isn't anyone going to offer to help me clean out my downspouts??
>
> Regards, Jerry F.
>
>
>
> Regards, Jerry F.
> --- Carlos Manuel Freaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Yes Peter, as I wrote in my first post on this issue,
> > you integrate those Rollei users, enthusisast and
> > collectors group that believe that the GX/FX is a
> > modified T; and yes, I say that you are not right till
> > you or someone else could give a convincing technical
> > explanation about why the GX/FX camera is more close
> > to the T than to the F. I have written some of the
> > technical and historical reasons the FX is more close
> > to F than to T model. If you or someone else have
> > solid technical reasons to support your opinion I'll
> > hear them, of course.
> >
> > All the best
> > Carlos
> > --- "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx> escribió:
> >
> > > Hi Douglas,
> > >
> > > The T was something of a stripped down Rollei F that
> > > basically targeted the
> > > same market as the earlier Rolleicord. The T was
> > > named for Theodore Uhl, a
> > > choice of names that allegedly got him fired when
> > > management at Rollei found
> > > out he named the camera after himself.
> > > I have a Rollei T and it is among my favorites. What
> > > it lacks is 220
> > > capability and multiple exposure. But 220 and
> > > Multi-exposure were more for
> > > pros, and this camera was designed for the amateur
> > > and advanced amateur
> > > market. The T came with a Zeiss Tessar or Schneider
> > > Xenar F3.5 taking lens.
> > > It was lighter that the standard Rollei F and had
> > > the ability to use a 6 x
> > > 4.5cm adapter (an adapter the more expensive models
> > > could not use). Like the
> > > F it could use the Rolleikin for 35mm film, and had
> > > a removable hood, so you
> > > could use a prism in place of the Waist Level
> > > Finder.
> > > As someone already pointed out, the F TLRs of the
> > > 60s and 70s were different
> > > bodies than the T. The newer FX and GX bodies are
> > > based on the T as the
> > > tooling for the previous Fs was not available.
> > > Personally, it is my opinion
> > > that this was smarter idea since it was less costly
> > > to use a T chassis. Rest
> > > assured someone will disagree with me here and tell
> > > me I am wrong even
> > > though I state this is just an opinion. ;-)
> > >
> > > Peter K
> > >
> > >
> > > On 6/13/06, Douglas Nygren <dnygr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I have a Rollei and have not paid much attention
> > > to bodies, etc. It
> > > > performs well.
> > > >
> > > > What is a T body? An F body? The GX, FX are recent
> > > vintage cameras,
> > > > right?
> > > >
> > > > Doug
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Correo Yahoo!
> > Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
> > ¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar
> > ---
> > 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
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> ---
> 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
>
>
---
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:
