Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,692   Posts: 1,548,952   Online: 788
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 41
  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by Chan Tran View Post
    Unlike a lot of people I do not think an electronic camera is less reliable than a mechanical one. However, in the case of the Minox vs Rollei the Minox's electronic seems to have a reputation for unreliable.
    Well, the meters of the Rollei 35's were no sure thing either, but at least the meter wasn't tied into the exposure system. Plus, at least in my experience, those meters were not that great even when they were working. Still, the Rollei wins the craftsmanship award between Rollei and Minox. JW

  2. #22

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,957
    Quote Originally Posted by John Wiegerink View Post
    Well, the meters of the Rollei 35's were no sure thing either, but at least the meter wasn't tied into the exposure system. Plus, at least in my experience, those meters were not that great even when they were working. Still, the Rollei wins the craftsmanship award between Rollei and Minox. JW
    Oh well didn't own a Rollei either but meter isn't high on my list. It's just icing on the cake.

  3. #23
    zanxion72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Athens
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    113
    I hate my minox 35GT. It works perfectly, but...
    Many frames coming out blank. The shutters works perfectly, but sometimes when the meter reads too much light, the springs move so fast that the shutter does not open.
    No exposure control. The meter is far from perfect. It gets fooled easily and ruins many of those frames that do not come out blank.

    Other than that, I just love its looks, its size and that's why I keep it.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,915
    Quote Originally Posted by Chan Tran View Post
    Unlike a lot of people I do not think an electronic camera is less reliable than a mechanical one. However, in the case of the Minox vs Rollei the Minox's electronic seems to have a reputation for unreliable.
    The electonics are more reliable unless there is static electricity exposure.

    The electric contacts/transducers can be horrible any battery contact, switch or electro magnet...but are curable with clean and petroleum jelly or light oil to protect from environmentals.

    The mechanics rarely wear or break cept if you force them but the lube turns to solid butter or migrates.

    The difference in maintenance $ is dependent on design The Contax II has way to many parts the Leica II almost none.

  5. #25
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,852
    The 35mm Minotar lens on the Minox 35 would put many S.L.R.' lenses to shame., I have had excellent 20"x16" enlargements from the negatives.


    Sent from my KFOT using Tapatalk
    Ben

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,915
    Hi Ben

    If you look at the MTFs for late triplets and double Gaussian lenses there is not much difference.

    The very high refractive glass and the better matching of dispersions possible reduces the difference.

    With a slow film test chart and heavy tripod you will have trouble telling apart at /5.6 until you cheat and look at back of print.

    Good thing we still have PanF?

    Noel

  7. #27

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by Xmas View Post
    Hi Ben

    If you look at the MTFs for late triplets and double Gaussian lenses there is not much difference.

    The very high refractive glass and the better matching of dispersions possible reduces the difference.

    With a slow film test chart and heavy tripod you will have trouble telling apart at /5.6 until you cheat and look at back of print.

    Good thing we still have PanF?

    Noel
    I'll second the blessing for PanF. I shed a tear when PlusX died, but I'd really cry if PanF ever dies. I don't shoot much of it, but when I do I almost always like the results over any 100 ISO film. Tmax is nice and the grain is super-fine, but PanF has a "better looks" to it. Just my opinion of course. As for the lenses on the Minox 35's? I think that coatings, type of glass and a pretty ridged lens mounting system all contribute to the very good results from a simple lens design. JW[/I]

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    111
    While I'm here and have a lot of attention from compact-a-philes, I'm looking to buy an XA4 Macro and/or a Ricoh GR1v.

    Thanks

  9. #29
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Xmas View Post
    Hi Ben

    If you look at the MTFs for late triplets and double Gaussian lenses there is not much difference.

    The very high refractive glass and the better matching of dispersions possible reduces the difference.

    With a slow film test chart and heavy tripod you will have trouble telling apart at /5.6 until you cheat and look at back of print.

    Good thing we still have PanF?

    Noel
    One of the main reasons I originally bought the 35 G.T. Noel is a test report I read in the now defunct S.L.R.Camera Magazine that said that they had to test the 35mm minator lens three times because the results were so good they were unbelieveable.
    Ben

  10. #30

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by benjiboy View Post
    One of the main reasons I originally bought the 35 G.T. Noel is a test report I read in the now defunct S.L.R.Camera Magazine that said that they had to test the 35mm minator lens three times because the results were so good they were unbelieveable.
    That must be the twin lens to the one on my beater Minox EL. I do know that the other Minox 35's I have, while very good in the lens department, are not as sharp as that old EL's lens. All lenses are not created equal, even if the name is the same on the front. Just sample variations I guess, but when you get a good one keep it. JW

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin