[rollei_list] Re: Why Rollei T?

  • From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:07:36 -0800

Yes, notice how it is missing "T" in that list.


On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:56:13 -0800, Dennis Purdy
<dpurdyphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>=20
> On Tuesday, Mar 29, 2005, at 08:42 US/Pacific, Peter K. wrote:
>=20
> > had inquired forever about the Rollei T and 220. Evans is completely
> > wrong. The T does not have a 220 capability. To validate this, I wrote
> > Herr Prochnow some time back and he replied:
> >
> > "The Rolleiflex T was never made for film 220."
> >
> > I saved the email and still have it, so I a, 100% certain on this. I
> > know no one that has a Rollei T with 220 capability, and you cannot
> > add a 220 switch as you can on the Rollei 3.5 or 2.8 Planar/Xenotar
> > TLRs.
> >
> > Peter K
>=20
> I just pulled this off Oceanside.com
>=20
> 220 modifications are possible on ,
> Rolleiflex TLRs, (including Rolleiflex 2.8F, 3.5F, Rolleiflex 2.8E-3,
> 2.8E-2, 2.8E, 2.8D, 2.8C, , 2.8B, 2.8A, Rolleiflex 3.5E-3, 3.5E-2,
> 3.5E, 3.5, Automat X, 3.5 Automat MX, Automat MX E-V, Tele Rolleiflex
> and the Wide-Angle Rolleiflex).
>=20
>=20


--=20
Peter K
=D3=BF=D5=AC

Other related posts: