I saved one hassie from my photo era before the computer business and after USAF I was a commercial photog. I used ELM's for fashon work and had a couple of cms and a SWC wideangle fixed lens one.... I kept one c w/ 80m mm and a 150 mm and a few backs .... things used to be worth a lot but not so anymore... I may take my c over to the university to add to our SMECC museums tools of the journalist display we have there... Better used there than sitting in my desk drawer at the office...I have a kodak/nikon AP early digital camera I need to take over there too. Pretty funny the reason I got a computer in '79 which led to me getting into the computer biz was to keep a database of photos and transparencies I had for stock photo use. The lure of getting back into electronics and the new era of affordable small computers lured me in ! Ed# _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org) In a message dated 3/11/2016 12:07:46 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
> On Mar 10, 2016, at 10:05 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > I wonder if the tele tessar was a true tessar design or just a use > of 'the name' ? I have seen snipits in google referring to it being a true > telephoto... with a true tessar formula lens IS NOT. I think it’s based on the Tessar, but is something different from what’s in the Hasselblad manual. The cross-section is definitely different. There are apparently at least two Tele-Tessar designs, with different numbers of elements. > ok the norm for the hassleblad was a80 mm f 2.8 planar... > > in the rolliflex the tessar was the entry level lens... the planar the > upgrade. > > my first 'real' camera was a 1933 rolliflex with a f3.5 tessar. not > bad at all but a little soft wide open. > I still have this camera. and the low shutter speeds are a little > slow but OTW rest is fine.. > In HD I bought an argus c3 from my geometry teacher for $8 and > used it a lot more shots per roll and would operate eye level and > had a pretty good split image rangefinder.. the lens was decent too. > > when I went in USAF sold the C# to my brother but kept the > rolliflex ( wish I had saved both! as the argus shot some of my first > press work) adn when in USAF got a SLR. I’ve not been able to justify the cost of a Planar Rolleiflex, though I’d really love one with a nice f/2.8 Planar lens. Both of mine have the 75mm f/3.5 Tessar. The older of my two is from 1936, the newer from about 1958. For me the Rollei is more of a small lightweight travel camera, or shooting for fun, than a serious camera. Sort of a “getting back to my roots” sort of thing, as I started with a Yashica 44LM TLR. What I really need to do is spend the money and get my Hasselblad’s 80mm f/2.8 Planar C CLA’d, as the shutter on it isn’t accurate (or fast) at any speed. :-( It’s my "serious work" Medium Format camera. Zane
