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

Re: [Rollei] Build Quality


I tend to agree with you on the MX-EVS type 2, as they are also my
favorite Rolleis.  However I have replaced the screens with a Rollei
6000 screen or a Rolleiclear with RF wedge. Brilliant!


Richard Coutant wrote:

> My two cents worth - I prefer an MX-EVS type 2, which lets you unlock the
> EVS coupling, and has a larger focus knob and slightly brighter finder than
> the MX or earlier cameras, but still has that undefinable feel to it, that
> the later cameras don't.  I have an early 3.5F that I use often but it's
> just not quite the same quality, and the nadir of all Rolleis in my
> experience was a 2.8C.  As I remember it was rough, sort of like comparing a
> later Kiev to a Contax, and had a lot of plastic in it.  I also enjoy using
> the older Rolleis, if they have good mirrors.  In my experience that's the
> biggest obstacle to using the Automat and earlier cameras - you just can't
> see what you're shooting.  I have an Automat type 2 with a nearly perfect
> mirror, and it's just a joy to use - light, utterly smooth controls,
> everything just as tight as the day it was made.  It's a tradeoff of sorts
> between prewar quality control and later innovations, I suppose.
>                                             Richard
> >From: curtiscr  
> >Reply-To: rollei  us
> >To: rollei  us
> >Subject: Re: [Rollei] Build Quality
> >Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 13:22:46 -0700
> >
> >On 17 Jun 02, at 14:41, Craig Roberts wrote:
> >
> > > However, the 2.8E's Xenotar lens is, in my estimation, a noticeably
> >better
> > > performer than the Tessar.
> >
> >Maybe.  But if I were getting a good MX at a good price, I wouldn't
> >lose much sleep over lens sharpness.  Actually the biggest
> >nuisance with my MX, the one thing that really drives me nuts, is
> >the hinge system for the back.  Whenever I change film, the back
> >almost always falls off.  Those little hinge things that allow the
> >removable back always slip into the removal position.  It appears to
> >me that this was improved in later models.  I hasten to add that the
> >light seal when the camera is closed is perfect.  Whatever
> >problems I have when loading do not otherwise affect performance
> >in a field situation.
> >--
> >Curtis Croulet
> >Temecula, California
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com