Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> Since both cameras have > lenses of the same focal length and speed, that also reduces the problem. > Do you have modern screens in both? Do you find any differences in the > quality of the Xenar vs. the Planar or Xenotar (I don't know which you > hajve in the 3.5E)? > Bob, I have the 3.5E with the Xenotar. If I see any difference between it and the Xenar? No, not really. Well, ... the Xenotar is sharp at all aperatures. The Xenar does lovely things with faces at f5.6 and wider. But usually I can't tell the difference between my negatives except for the fact that the 'cord has a little "defect", or at least tell-tale stamp, on the upper frameline. I have a Maxwell screen in the 'cord. With the original screen it was like looking down the shaft of a coal mine at midnight. The 3.5E has the same screen (the original), but the 2.8 viewing lens helps enough that I haven't bothered and I don't think I will. It's a give and take situation. The brighter screen is, well, brighter, but it is more difficult to focus. The ground glass screen snaps into focus and you see it easily. With the fresnel screen it's a little more difficult. People say that the Maxwell screen is better than most in this respect. I don't know. I like it. I hear the later 'cords have screens that you don't have to worry about. They're good the way they are. Mine is from 1954 or there-about. I really like these old cameras. The day before yesterday I went to an exhibit in Göteborg (Gothenburg) by Malick Sidibé. He won the Hasselblad Award for 2003. He's been using the same camera since 1962, a Rolleiflex E. http://www.hasselbladfoundation.org/sidibe_samples.html I'm fascinated by his pictures. They simply breathe Africa and he is such a pleasant man. He wouldn't let go of the Hasselblad he received when he was here. Slept with it on his stomach. The 'flex might be threatened :) Sorry about the off topic people. Daniel > > > > > Thanks Jim and Bob. I appreciate that. > > > > Bob, you ask if there is a pattern or reason for choosing between the > > 'flex or the 'cord. I actually read your letter a while ago and thought "I > > better think about that". > > > > No there isn't ... not a clear one anyway. Rollei made (makes) some really > > fine stuff. If I'm just going to pick one of them up and take with me (I > > actually do that quite a lot), it will usually be the 'cord. It's lighter. > > Otherwise, the choice will usually be decided by what kind of film is in > > them (Delta 3200, APX 400 or slide film) and that tends to be color for > > the 'cord and b/w for the 'flex, for no other reason than habit. > > > > I'm glad the feeling of light came across. The wind was blowing almost > > "storm" and it broke up a hole in the clouds only very briefly. I was > > really happy to see it. > > > > Best, Daniel > > > > On Sun, 28 Dec 2003, Jim Hemenway wrote: > > > > > Ditto Daniel > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > robertmeier@usjet.net wrote: > > > > > > > Daniel, > > > > > > > > Lovely end of the year shots. The light looks awfully good to me, > > > > especially on the fence and on your daughter. Soft, diffused, yet > glowing. > > > > You can't ask for better light than that. Is there any pattern, or > reason, > > > > to lwhy ksometimes you use the 'cord and sometimes the 'flex? > > > > > > > > Happy New Year. > > > > > > > > Bob > > > > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html