[rollei_list] Re: [off-topic] The new Fuji will be sold ... and affordable ?

  • From: "Robert Meier" <robertmeier@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 19:40:15 -0500 (CDT)

Richard,

The Super Ikonta IV has a 75mm f3.5 Tessar, but you are undoubtedly right that it's the front element focusing that is the reason for the difference from Rollei Tessars. I have a Rolleiflex T with the Tessar, of course, that is very, very sharp. The Rolleicord's Xenar is also, in my experience, very sharp, again much sharper than the S. I. IV. I was very disappoointd that I couldn't get a IV that was usable, in my opinion, because I love the pocketable size of it and the selenium meter was very usable. I also tried the Fuji 645, but I didn't like the 645 B&W images that the Fuji lens produced. That camera also has great problems with its bellows. The Mamiya 6 also had great promise, but it turned out to be not pocketable like the IV. sigh

Robert

----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 4:11 PM
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: [off-topic] The new Fuji will be sold ... and affordable ?



----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Meier" <robertmeier@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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
---
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: