[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Rollei] 3.5E species follow-up
- Subject: Re: [Rollei] 3.5E species follow-up
- From: todd <todd_belcher >
- Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 09:48:32 -0700
- References: <1e6.97dbcba.2c00f7f1 >
I ain't gonna answer the first question.
The flat glass option was built into F cameras for a while before being
deleted. It required that the camera have a small pin on the right hand
side of the film gate. This pin was connected to the crank action such
that when the crank was turned, the pin would push out. The outward
motion of the pin would press upon the pressure plate, raising it away
from the film gate. This back was a special one with three positions
rather than the regular two positions. The back can also be identified
by a protruding rectilinear bump on it's back. The reason why the
pressure plate had to be raised, was that a specially cut piece of
optical glass was inserted into the film gate. Thus the film was
effectively sandwiched between the pressure plate and this piece of
glass. So the camera had to have the pin and the ability to accept the
glass - plus a different back.
If your E has a meter, why don't you just remove it?
> Thanks to all who answered my question about the differences between a
> 3.5E2 and 3.5E3. Vincent Gookin's post, in particular, made several
> points that raised additional questions for me, that I hope the list
> might answer:
> 1. Vincent mentions that the E3 has a six-element Planar lens. I'm
> currently using an original 3.5E, with the five-element Planar. I know
> this was a subject of some recent discussion on this list, but is there
> any discernable difference in image quality between the two lens designs?
> 2. Vincent and other respondents mention a flat glass plate option.
> What is it, and why would I want it?
> 3. I gather that the E2 is built on the E body, whilst the E3 is built
> on the F body, and both have removeable focusing hoods. If my goal is
> to have a 3.5E TLR without the meter, is there any reason to prefer the
> one over the other as a working camera?
> Thanks in advance for your answers and patience.
> Sanders McNew