[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Rollei] Urgent-buying decision 2.8F Xenotar vs. Planar vs. GX

> From: "Dirk Seffern" <dirk.seffern  >

i'm no expert, but some of these issues have come up recently.  the general
upshot is that condition of the camera is the most important factor.

> I have heard from others that the Multicoating of the GX would make a quiet
> big difference in image quality with colorslides and colorprints. also the
> lightmeter of the GX should be a lot better.

most people had said that the MC is not a huge deal.  a good hood will do
more to prevent flare.  the lightmeter is probably the weak link in the 2.8F
but i find mine generally accurate enough for negative film.  on the plus
side, the later Fs can take 220 film (the earlier Fs can be converted)
have the automatic film feeler loading system, and have a sportfinder
hood with critical magnifier (which i use a great deal).

> b. Would it help to put a multicoated skylight/UV filter on the lens?

not to reduce reflections.  a hood would help.

> c. Is there a difference in picture quality between the 2.8F Planar and 2.8F
> Xenotar, if yes where exactly?

from what i've read, the general consensus seems to be there's not too much
difference outside the prestige value of the zeiss name.

if i've committed any gaffes, i'm sure mjs will excoriate me.

- -rei