[rollei_list] Re: Who uses a T as a 'daily driver'
- From: Jeff Kelley <jlkphoto@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:14:42 -0800
Sometimes I think the Xenar on my Rolleiflex is so sharp I could put an eye
out.
For example:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=10609850
P.S. I had Harry Fleenor do a CLA on this MX-EVS. At that time I also had
him install a Maxwell screen. I think the Maxwell screen is an improvement
over the original Rollei screen on this camera.
Jeff
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 12:59 PM, <stephen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Eric:
>
> And I've got a nice Beattie screen in my 'cord iv, all shimmed up proper.
> I'd imagine the Beattie is a stop or so brighter than the T screen.
>
> Good to know about the element seperation issue with the T. And nice to
> know it's recomputed Tessar isn't any sharper than a good old Xenar.
>
> Guess I'll put the 16 on kit back in the drawer and keep shooting with the
> 'cord.
>
> Thanks for saving me a few hundred bucks!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Eric Goldstein [mailto:egoldste@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Monday, February 1, 2010 03:19 PM
> *To:* rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [rollei_list] Re: Who uses a T as a 'daily driver'
>
> Ah... now I see. Full frame, the Xenars on the 'cord IIIs and IVs produce
> images as fine as the T Tessar... supposedly that T was recalculated to make
> use of newly available glass but I have no evidence of improved corrections
> under the enlarger or scanner. I also know several folks who have had
> element separation issues with the T Tessar, myself included... I find my
> 'cord III (flocked; the later IVs were baffled) to be an easier camera to
> handle and the ergonomics really nice. The only advantage to the T is a
> brighter viewing set up... Eric Goldstein
>
>
Other related posts:
