Talk:Rolleiflex
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Rolleiflex is a product line from Rollei, so it deserves its own page, not a redirect. Bendybendy 22:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
A number of issues with this page: 1 - the reference to Zeiss lenses having superior sharpness and bokeh to other manufacturers is unsubstantiated, and not entirely correct. Indeed F&H themselves had some issues with Zeiss lenses over the years (particularly with the Tessar for the 2.8A) and considered the Schneider lenses to be every bit as good - as do the majority of Rolleiflex users today.
2. The 2.8 GX is not in current production; however, the 2.8 FX with Carl Zeiss lens, and 4.0FW and 4.0FT with Schneider lenses are in production.
3. In the section on the 2.8A, the lenses referred to should be the "Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar" and "Opton Tessar made by Carl Zeiss" - the former made in the DDR, the latter in the Federal Republic of Germany.
4. The 2.8C deserves a mention as the first Rolleiflex with a Planar or Xenotar lens - these lenses cemented the position of the Rolleiflex as the camera of choice. Nickorando 23:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I have "softened" the language involving the superiority of Zeiss and Schneider lenses, while retaining the idea that these lenses were perceived as high-quality in the market. Oboeaaron 13:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Split article into TLR and SLR articles[edit]
The characteristics, history, and development of the Rolleiflex TLR and SLR lines are wholly different, so I propose to split the article into TLR and SLR articles. Oboeaaron 13:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:36, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
