[rollei_list] Re: Rollei SL2000F and 3003: Quality
- From: CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 12:06:44 -0300
Yes, to be fair it's necessary to add the Rollei 35 and SL 66.
Carlos
2010/3/30 Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>:
> The Rollei 35s were not bad... I've had no trouble with my German.
>
>
> Eric Goldstein
>
> --
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:57 AM, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> After to read the previous messages, my conclusion is that the only
>> reliable product made by Rollei along the history was the Twin Lens
>> Reflex.
>>
>> Carlos
>>
>> 2010/3/30 <Dirk-Roger.Schmitt@xxxxxx>:
>>> Of course when I hear about the production of the first batches of the
>>> SL2000 to highest quality standards I have to mention that there have been
>>> a lot of quality issues in the first batches.
>>>
>>> I got one with a serial no. starting with 6 (someone should know which year
>>> this means, I have forgotten the internal code).
>>> Honestly spoken, all cameras with the 6 should have been returned and
>>> overhauled.
>>>
>>> It is also not true, that the production was fully in Germany.
>>>
>>> Many parts came from Singapore, and they were used to assemble the camera
>>> in Germany. The film magazines came fully from Singapore. Well, the
>>> magazines had also a major issue of light leaks and double exposure.
>>> After the insolvency of Rollei and the continuation as Fototechnic it was
>>> also an issue for them to make the parts themself as there was no more a
>>> Singapore plant.
>>> I bought my Rollei 2000F directly from the liquidator (i.e. from Rollei
>>> Deutschland) when Rollei Fototechnic started operation. This was a batch
>>> which had remained with the liquidator, although it was agreed that
>>> Fototechnic should make production and marketing of all 2000F. Fototechnic
>>> was not really happy about these types of business of the liquidator.
>>> Anyway, I had full warranty, and later on, Fototechnic had to fix all
>>> issues.
>>> Finally, I got the body 5 times changed because a lot a bugs could not be
>>> fixed directly.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> Dirk
>>>
>>>
>>> Phone: +49 531 295 2545
>>> Mobile: +49 172 295 4416
>>> Fax: +49 531 295 2550
>>> E-mail: Dirk-Roger.Schmitt@xxxxxx
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>> Von: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von CarlosMFreaza
>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. März 2010 16:36
>>> An: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Betreff: [rollei_list] Re: Rollei SL2000F and 3003: VERY LONG
>>>
>>> The 2000F was not a Rollei internal invention, it was a prototype presented
>>> to Rollei as Heinz Waaske presented the Rollei 35 prototype, with the
>>> difference the Rollei 35 prototype was almost ready to production, the
>>> photographs shown in the Report 3 and the work that Prochnow made with
>>> others to develop the prototypes are not bogus, anyway it is not impossible
>>> the architect Franzmann took the idea from some previous camera.
>>>
>>> When you asked me about that contact with Prochnow he already was very ill,
>>> he wrote me at the time that Rollei was something very far away in the time
>>> to him.
>>> BTW a beer is always a good thing.
>>>
>>> Carlos
>>>
>>> 2010/3/30 Marc James Small <marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>> And, again, this is bogus, Carlos. The few remaining Zeiss Ikon
>>>> records -- and the few Zeiss Ikon executives of the time who are still
>>>> around -- make that certain. Yeah, RolleiLunatics really DO want to
>>>> believe the 2000F was an internal invention but the surviving
>>>> historical record makes this a really bogus claim.
>>>>
>>>> Back when Prochnow was alive, I asked you to put me in touch with him
>>>> over this issue, and you failed to do so. I really would have enjoyed
>>>> sharing a beer with you and Prochnow and Wolf Wehren over the demise of
>>>> Zeiss Ikon.
>>>> We all would have learned a lot!
>>>>
>>>> If this is NOT true, why did Zeiss Ikon present a working SL 2000F at
>>>> the
>>>> 1972 Photokina? One of our List members picked it up and played with
>>>> it, and it worked.
>>>>
>>>> If you want to agree that Zeiss Ikon passed on a one-off hand-made
>>>> camera to Rolleiflex in 1974, I have no problem. But the camera did
>>>> work -- again, one of our members used it and it worked for him -- and
>>>> then Rolleiflex had to reinvent the wheel to turn this into a
>>>> commercial product, I have no problem -- there is a surviving memo to
>>>> the Zeiss Foundation from Zeiss Ikon in 1971 spelling out the problems
>>>> they would have in producing this in real-time.
>>>>
>>>> But to suggest, as your RolleiFanatics do, that the SL 2000F was an
>>>> internal Rollei development is so much gibberish. Let us accept the
>>>> magnificent efforts Rollei made to perfect an imperfect Zeiss Ikon
>>>> product. The historical record on this is clear. Let us not ever
>>>> disregard the work of Prochnow but he was just flat wrong on this.
>>>>
>>>> You have not read my book?
>>>>
>>>> Marc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> 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
>>
>>
> ---
> 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:
