Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: zeiss and rollei
From: Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie)
Date: Mon Oct 4 11:56:45 2004
References: <1d9.2c7cf394.2e918213@aol.com> <Pine.SOL.4.58-L.0410040811150.27711@hedvig.uio.no> <006401c4aa31$e74b2ec0$0200a8c0@Desk>

I guess all the automat and other linkages are steel and the lens must 
be a touch heavier.
Frank

On 4 Oct, 2004, at 17:47, <robertmeier@usjet.net> wrote:

>
> Daniel,
>
> There is an interesting difference in weight between the 'cord and 
> 'flex models.   The Rolleicords weigh in the 33-35 oz. range, while 
> the F models are in the 43-45 oz. range, depending on whether it has a 
> 3.5 or 2.8 lens. Now, that's quite a difference in weight.   There 
> must be a lot more medal in an E or F than in a Cord.   Do you suppose 
> it's just lead weights?
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>> Ain't nothing wrong with that "cheaper" Rolleiflex-T :)
>>
>> Better egonomics, they say the Tessar has been improved. It still goes
>> "click".
>>
>> As you say ... everything on a Rollei is reliable and the T is a 
>> Rollei.
>> Better shutter release design too.
>>
>> You can't tell the difference in a photograph taken with a Rolleicord,
>> Rolleiflex, A-F or T. Rollei quality the whole way.
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>> On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 Summicron1@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>> the latter day rolleiflex cameras that lacked the automat feature 
>>> were the
>>> Rolleiflex-T models -- cheaper versions.
>>>
>>> the automat feature on mine never goes bad, although i suppose it 
>>> could, but
>>> it's pretty reliable, as is everything on a rollei since they're as 
>>> well made
>>> as leicas.
>>> c trentelman
>>> In a message dated 10/3/04 7:08:42 AM, lug-request@leica-users.org 
>>> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > I suppose that feature is nice. But for me, it's just one more 
>>> thing > that
>>> > could go wrong (haven't heard anything about it going wrong 
>>> though). I
>>> > sure wouldn't classify true Rolleiflexes according to them having 
>>> that
>>> > feature or not. A new Rolleiflex made this year or last year? You 
>>> bet!
>>> > It's the:
>>> >
>>> > 1) Glass
>>> > 2) The quiet "click"
>>> >
>>> > that matters to me. They're beautiful boxes. Love'em.
>>> >
>>> > Daniel
>>> >
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from Summicron1 at aol.com (Summicron1@aol.com) ([Leica] Re: zeiss and rollei)
Message from daniel.ridings at edd.uio.no (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] Re: zeiss and rollei)
Message from robertmeier at usjet.net (robertmeier@usjet.net) ([Leica] Re: zeiss and rollei)