[rollei_list] Re: Limit of Rolleicord Triotar
- From: "Eric Goldstein" <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 18:36:11 -0400
Dear karqvlsg (forgive me, you did not sign your post),
My experience with the Triotar is that in the center, the definition
and corrections are about as good as with a Tessar/Xenar; it is corner
performance that is compromised with these lenses. So much of the
answer to your question depends upon what you have photographed... a
head shot is capable of enlargements to 20 x 30 or more with good
technique. However a scenic with a lot of in-focus detail on the
corners will not fair as well under high magnification.
If I am remembering correctly, the Triotar is best corrected at around
f/16; the Tessar/Xenar somewhere around f/11...
I like nice Triplets very much for shooting heads and shopped down for
modest enlargement of scenics from 69 folders...
Eric Goldstein
--
On 10/11/06, karqvlsg <sextant@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What is the largest enlargement the memeber of this list would have found
the Triotar of the Rolleicord II to be capable of?
Mine is approx 1948, a coated version.
I am aware that often you may crop the image and not always print the whole
neg.
Would the best definition be around f8-11?
My previous experience has been the triplet lens used in the Chinese Seagull
and Pearl River cameras.
---
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:
