[rollei_list] Re: [off-topic] The new Fuji will be sold ... and affordabl...
- From: Choiliefan@xxxxxxx
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 13:38:07 EDT
Austin,
I believe Ed's referring to his Medalist 620.
Health, Peace
Lance
Selma, NC 27576
~~~~~~~~~~~~
In a message dated 10/5/2008 12:17:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
austin.franklin@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Hi Ed,
Why did you have to have it converted to 120?
Regards,
Austin
-----Original Message-----
From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Aghalide@xxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 12:14 PM
To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Richard Knoppow
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: [off-topic] The new Fuji will be sold ... and
affordable ?
I also have an Ikonta IV.It is a pleasure to use. I had the bald mountail
guys convert it to 120.
Then I had it "serviced". /////////////////////////////////Sharpness was
bad, until I discovered that Marty Forscher's /buddy diden't screw the rear
elements all the way in. I did it and it then had a wonderfull performer. Ed
-------------- Original message from "Richard Knoppow"
<dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: --------------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Meier"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 8:07 AM
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: [off-topic] The new Fuji will be
> sold ... and affordable ?
>
>
> > I've bought three Super Ikonta IV's in the last few years,
> > because I had one as a teenager, my first serious camera,
> > and had great results from it (still have the negatives I
> > shot then). I have bought three in resent years because
> > each one was not sharp. I finally sent one to to
> > whats-his-name on Bald Mountain to be alligned, and it
> > came back still not critically sharp. The standard I use
> > is to make an 8x10 print and look at it with a 4x
> > magnifier. Rollei shots are very crisp at that degree of
> > enlargement. The Super Ikonta shots are all much less than
> > crisp. I gave up on Super Ikontas.
> >
> Likely you are seeing the effect of the lens being a
> front element focusing type. Unless a lens is made fairly
> complex moving one element only will upset all the
> corrections. Front element focusing lenses are designed to
> have reasonable correction through their range but are never
> quite right at any distance. On top of that f/2.8 is right
> at the limit of speed for a Tessar type and generally such
> lenses suffer in comparison to slower versions even when
> stopped down. Tessars expected to have very high performance
> are usually much slower as, for example, the Kodak
> Commercial Ektar (f/6.3) and the Nikon LF lenses at about
> f/8. The difficulty in getting acceptable performance near
> wide open for an f/2.8 Tessar is probably why Rollei went to
> another design for its f/2.8 cameras.
>
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.
Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out!
(http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000001)
Other related posts:
