[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Rollei] Rolleifix question
- Subject: Re: [Rollei] Rolleifix question
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:14:32 +0200 (CEST)
from Tom Frank:
> ...Are you saying that the Rolleifix is necessary as a form of
> reinforcing for the bottom/back of the TLR so that the back doesn't
> get damaged when using the existing tripod socket?
There are two issues there. The first is what happened to Patric if
you use a screw which is too long. The same problem could occur to any
camera. There, the Rolleifix acts as a mechanical fuse, you'll damage
the Rolleifix but not the camera.
The second issue is related to the two spikes in front of the
Rolleifix which efficiently improve the transfer of most of the weight
of the camera (which is in the front part) directly to the Rolleifix.
So if you buy a used Rolleifix, check that both spikes are there and
that the system fits with no play. Another potential benefit of the
Rolleifix is that the fixing point is just under the middle of the
lens. Not only this position balances the weight of camera better on
the screw, but being closer to the nodal point this is supposed to
reduce unwanted parallax effects if you want to glue several images as
a panoramic view, rotating around the screw. And of course the
rolleifix makes life easier to change film when you use a tripod.
On the Zeiss Contaflex and Contarex, the problem was addressed as
follows: the removable back was shaped with a U-cut to allow the
fixing screw to hold on the main front part of the camera and not on
the thin back. On the last generations of 6x6 Semflexes, after using a
design similar to the R-TLR, the back was modified in the same spirit
as the Contaflex/rex. So the back was protected, and you could open it
and change the film without taking the camera off a tripod.