[rollei_list] Re: "There is a 220 Rollei T" (BS!)
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:16:47 -0700
What horizontal 24x36. Do you mean 6x4.5cm? There is also a mask you
place on the viewing screen for 4x4cm (Superslide format) but the
actual film is recorded as 6x4.5cm.
Jerry, you are a man of many cameras.
Peter K
"Der Grieche" mit einem T
On 4/22/05, Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jim
>=20
> The Rolleikin was set for VERTICAL 24x36 exposures. The Spezial T kit
> was for HORIZONTAL 24x36. I have the frame/mask for that.
>=20
> It is still not for 220 film!
>=20
> Jerry
>=20
> Jim Somberg wrote:
>=20
> > According to my two Rollei T's, the film pressure plate is settable to =
either 6X6 cm or 24X36MM, the latter with a Rolleikin, of course.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: David Seifert
> > To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2005 6:34 PM
> > Subject: [rollei_list] Re: "There is a 220 Rollei T"
> >
> > Ardeshir Mehta wrote:
> >
> > >On Friday, April 22, 2005, at 07:02 PM, David Seifert wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>Marc,
> > >>
> > >>You were only partially in error. The units in question were equipp=
ed
> > >>with a 24 frame counter. The camera still used 120 film but produce=
d
> > >>24 smaller (24x36?) on the film via a masking system. We went throu=
gh
> > >>this last year in more detail than anyone cares to recall.
> > >>
> > >>Best Regards,
> > >>David
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >Oh? This is interesting! Are you sure the prints were as small as 24=
x36
> > >mm? Could they have been 30x60 mm?
> > >
> > >A.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Ardeshir,
> >
> > Just for you, I look this up again. According to Prochnow in Rollei
> > Report 2 page 409 there were 250 units of this type built in June 196=
1.
> > He notes that these were "Direktverkauf, nicht gelistet", direct sale=
,
> > no price listed. I interpret that to mean that these were a custom
> > order batch. The customer is not mentioned. They used 120 film and
> > produced either 12 6x6 images per roll or 24 24x36 images per roll us=
ing
> > the special mask kit. Thus, they had a 12/24 frame counter.
> >
> > For the record, the standard model of that run (56,000 units) came wi=
th
> > a 12/16 frame counter equipped to do 12 or 16 exposures per 120 roll.
> > The mask kit produced 16 4.5x5 images.
> >
> > Thus spake Prochnow!
> >
> > David
>=20
>=20
--=20
Peter K
=D3=BF=D5=AC
Other related posts:
