| |
"Tony Polson" wrote in message
news:ph4rh1ts9prd2rdohcf0ld730965e3cg2o@4ax.com...
> "Matt Clara" wrote:
>
> >I see an EL, PQ and PQS, and those are available new, so their
differences
> >are explained (EL = Budget, PQ = Professional Quality, PQS = PQ with
faster
> >shutter speed). But then I see a 50mm on Ebay that says only 50mm 1:4
HFT
> >Made by Rollei (no other designations). I assume this was pre-EL,PQ,PQS,
> >but I can't find any info specifically on it. A little more research
> >reveals they've been making the 50mm almost as long as the SLX it was
> >originally designed for, with updated coating coming later and designated
by
> >HFT. I also read about the addition of a floating element for CRC.
Anybody
> >have any idea when the floating element was introduced and whether any of
> >the 50mm pre EL,PQ,PQS contain it? Better yet, can anyone spell out the
> >geneology of this lens?
>
>
> Matt,
>
> I am not 100% sure, but I think this lens is the Carl Zeiss Distagon
> which was made under licence by Rollei.
>
> At some point, Carl Zeiss withdrew Rollei's licence to use the Zeiss
> Distagon (+Sonnar, Tessar etc.) names, apparently due to quality
> control problems at Rollei's Singapore factory. However, this
> affected mainly (if not entirely) Rollei-made lenses for 35mm cameras
> like the 3003.
>
> Also withdrawn was the licence to use the T* symbol, but the Rollei
> HFT coating is to all intents and purposes identical to the CZ T*.
>
> If this lens is the unnamed Distagon, which I strongly suspect, it is
> an average to good performer, with a Photodo rating of 2.6. But it
> costs a fraction of the price of the better Rollei 50mm lenses, and is
> probably more than good enough for most use.
>
> I cannot answer your other questions, sorry.
>
> Tony
Thanks, Tony. 2.6 sounds like it might not be good enough for wedding party
portraiture in small churches...it better have that outstanding Zeiss bokeh!
;-)
--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com
|
|