[rollei_list] Re: xenotar 2.8f vs planar 2.8f

  • From: "Richard Sintchak" <rich815@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 14:44:16 -0700

On 5/11/06, Jeffery Smith <jls@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I rarely even consider buying a lens if there are issues of fungus, cleaning marks, or separation. When this happens, we can pretty much toss them out of the running due to other possible influences.


My 2.8E Planar has a fairly good scratch on the front element, and numerous
lighter ones as well.  Used with a hood though I challenge anyone to see
there's any difference between the results I get from this lens versus any
other Rollei TLR.  It's performance is blow-away superb.  I got the camera
(in UGLY condition) for $150USD.  A $160 CLA to tighten up the slow speeds
(I was getting fine results even before the CLA though from 1/60th and up)
and it functions perfectly now.

http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=9845
http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=7738
http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=3409

I also have a 80/2.8 (non-T*) Planar lens for my SL66 that has some
scratches too, again, no issues with quality or performace.

http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=13511
http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=13513

No doubt your "policy", Jeffrey, ensures you get the best in lenses but I
must say you are missing some great deals out there with little to any true
sacrifice in quality or tangible results.

Richard

Other related posts: