Re: [Rollei] Mutar 0.7x

[Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh >]

Peter

You are not misunderstanding Jerry, only on what he wrote:-)

Enlarge those negatives to 10x10 inches and you will see
what I mean.

Of course, your standards may vary.

Jerry

"Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" wrote:

> Maybe I am reading this wrong,but why ONLY 5x5 prints?  Cropping it will worked equially well?
> What am I misunderstanding Jerry?
>
> Peter K
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Lehrer [mailto:jerryleh  ]
> Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 4:29 PM
> To: rollei  us
> Subject: Re: [Rollei] Mutar 0.7x
>
> Nick
>
> Mutars are great!  If you only make 5x5 inch prints, they have
> no equal and are certainly cheaper than a Tele or Wide Rollei.
> They work equally well (adequate) on any and all Rollei lenses.
> No preference is shown for Tessar, Xenar, Planar or Xenotar.
> You have to get the proper adapter rings.
>
> Jerry
>
> Nick Roberts wrote:
>
> > Does anyone have an opinion about the 0.7x Mutar on
> > either the f3.5 Planar or Xenotar? To me the greatest
> > limitation of the Rollei TLRs is the fact that a
> > standard lens isn't wide enough for much of my
> > photography, and as I can't afford a Wide, my
> > requirement is currently covered off ffairly
> > adequately but with excessive bulk my either my Mamiya
> > M645 or Pentacon 6. But I got to thinking that it
> > might be much easier and more pleasant to just carry a
> > Mutar - anbody used one? Happily? As a Zeiss
> > accessory, how well does it work with the Xenotar? (I
> > hesitate to ask if there's any difference between 5
> > and 6 element lenses.....)
> > It could be just the thing.
> >
> > Nick
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> > http://search.yahoo.com

------------------------------