[rollei_list] Re: Bellows on 2.8D?
- From: Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:42:18 -0700
Todd,
Thanks for the clarification. I'm glad that I didn't check my 2.8F first.
I see now that the rubberized ring acts as a displacement diaphragm,
or membrane to affect an internal light seal.
Jerry
Todd Belcher wrote:
> Jerry,
>
> The 2.8 A and B have felt lining the inside of a metal ring that forms
> a light trap as the taking lens moves in and out. The taking lens moves
> back and forth in the felt surround. The 2.8 C, D, E and E2 have a
> rubberized cloth bellows in place of the felt light trap. The
> rubberized cloth bellows can be hard to see because there is sometimes
> a lens shroud on the back element of the taking lens that obscures the
> bellows. The E3 and F have the felt surround.
>
> In the 3.5 cameras, the felt surround is used up until the MX-EVS. The
> E, E2 and early F (ring shutter) have the rubberized cloth bellows and
> the later F and E3 cameras have the felt surround again.
>
> todd
>
> On 17-Aug-05, at 6:46 PM, Jerry Lehrer wrote:
>
> > Richard,
> >
> > I did that on my 2.8E2 and saw NO bellows. I won't
> > bother checking my 2.8F.
> >
> > Todd could straighten this out.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > Richard Knoppow wrote:
> >
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Jerry Lehrer" <jerryleh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: "rollei list" <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 6:30 PM
> >> Subject: [rollei_list] Bellows on 2.8D?
> >>
> >>> RUGers,
> >>>
> >>> On the Medium Format Forum, some chap stated that his 2.8D
> >>> had BELLOWS
> >>> in
> >>> it. Internally of course. Is this true? My 2.8E2 does
> >>> not.
> >>>
> >>> Eric, I believe that you have a 2.8D.
> >>>
> >>> Can someone confirm this?
> >>>
> >>> Jerry
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >> My 2.8E definitely has a short bellows. Rack focus out to
> >> maximum and shine a flashlight at the back of the taking
> >> lens, you should see a cloth surround there. Presumably,
> >> this forms a more reliable light trap than the plain
> >> telescoping tubes on earlier Rolleis. Perhaps it was used on
> >> only a few models.
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Richard Knoppow
> >> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> >> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>
> >> ---
> >> 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
> >
>
> ---
> 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:
