Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Raimo Korhonen wrote: > > The 2.8 Tessar is the worst Rolleiflex lens of them all. As this model (2.8A from 1950 was supposedly recalled by the factory it should be rare and therefore it might be expensive. McKeown´s book states $250-375 USD. As a photographic tool - well... > All the best! > Raimo > photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen > > -----Alkuperäinen viesti----- > Lähettäjä: kulapat permbhusri <kulapat@mozart.inet.co.th> > Vastaanottaja: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2000 17:13 > Aihe: [Leica] Off-topic/Help on Rolleiflex > > >Hello All LUGers, > > > >I just got a Rolleiflex from an attic of my relative. I believe it model A > >serial number 1144007 with Tessar 80/2.8. The lens has some moll and the > >compur-rapid does not function. Is it worth to restore this camera? > >Comments on value, not in term of money of course, of this camera and the > >performance of Zeiss Tessar would be appreciated? > > > >Kulapat > > > > The poorness of the 2.8 Tessar is a bit over done. This is, after all the same lens as the Super Ikonta B 532/16 in its coated version. Just avoid shooting wide open and watch out for flare. They were, as is stated above, rare, and you may be better off selling it and gettin a later Automat with the 3.5 Tessar, a very fine performing lens or even one with the 3.5 Planar, a suberb lens. Good luck with the camera. I see you are posting from Thailand, is 120 film easy to find in BKK? John Shick http://sites.netscape.net/bosjohnusa/homepage