[rollei_list] Re: T body
- From: Nick Roberts <nickbroberts@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:37:38 +0000 (GMT)
Indeed. I'm very fond indeed of the T - a great camera, and an excellent lens -
and I often use the 645 format.
Nick
----- Original Message ----
From: Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 14 June, 2006 5:06:04 PM
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: T body
The 645 adapter Peter refers to for the T also has superslide masks.
The advance/counter automatically shift to 16 exposures. A really nice
and useful setup. The Tessar on the T was recalculated to take
advantage of then-modern (late 50s) glass and is a very fine lens...
Eric Goldstein
On 6/14/06, Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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
> >
> >
>
---
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:
