Re: [Rollei] 3.5E species follow-up

[Carlos Manuel Freaza <cmfreaza]

The flat glass plate option doesn't make sense. I have
read two years ago in the web a test made to this
glass with a Tele Rollei at early 60's  (I don't
remember the URL, but it was posted into a mailing
group  from a French magazin). The opinion was that
there wasn't differences between the photographs taken
with or without the glass and BTW the glass was a new
surface on the film directly exposed to dirt,
scratchs, etcetera,etcetera.    

- --- SandersM   escribió: > 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
>  

- ------------
Internet GRATIS es Yahoo! Conexión
4004-1010 desde Buenos Aires. Usuario: yahoo; contraseña: yahoo
Más ciudades: http://conexion.yahoo.com.ar

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