dennispurdy.com

I still shoot 8x10 and 4x5 and 120 with Rolleiflex and Pentax 67. I still make prints, mostly platinum but some silver. Everything and every opinion expressed in this thread is a moot point. Barking up the wrong tree, pissing in the wind. All the technical stuff you are talking about is just nerdy head up your ass kind of thing. Everything done that is of value is primarily done with your mind. If you think that using a lens that gives you this amount of lines per mm versus what that lens gives you then you are a hopelessly head up your ass nerd. Study art, not lens designs. Find a camera that feels good in your hands. Make prints... not just digital files or contact sheets. Finish your work.

Well for what it is worth, I have a very late 2.8F from the 295 series and an early FX with brown cowhide that I bought new. I have now spent more money servicing my old 2.8F than the FX cost me new and 10 years later the new FX has not needed service. I don't use camera light meters so that is a moot point for me. I do miss the self timer though the 2.8F self timer has now twice stopped working and needed service. I prefer the arrow and red dot system of film starting as the feeler roller in the 2.8F went out of adjustment and I needed to put tape on it to get it to read my favorite film, it is currently being readjusted by Mr. Fleenor. Personally I prefer Schneider lenses to Zeiss. My Xenotar on the F out performs all the Planar models I have had. The FX Planar with the HFT coating is now on par with the Schneider Xenotar. My 90mm Schneider Super Angulon for 4x5 is one of the most stunning lenses I ever had. The rollers on the interior of my FX are black and the film mask is matt.. so there is less of the roller reflection of earlier Rolleis. The film transport and focus are much more smooth and effortless on the FX than the F ever was. The shutter button does have a learning curve to use as it does kind of catch where it is supposed to turn on the meter. You can learn to recognize that spot and the next little effort will trip the shutter.

I have a beattie with split image in my Pentax 67 as well as a Maxwell with split image in two Rolleiflexes. I actually llike the Beattie better because it doesn't seem so clear. I also notice that the split image of the Maxwell screens is more distinct in one Rollei than the other. With one it is very easy to see and focus with, in the other the split image is pretty faint and I can lose it in whatever image I am looking at. Just anecdotal info that probably doesn't help.

I just checked the tightness of my late version 55 on my P67. It is the lens that I most often just leave on the camera because it is my favorite. It never occurred to me that it was a tight fit but checking just now I guess it does feel pretty snug. Takes a bit of effort to turn the lens. I like it that way though, it seems secure. Better than having a bit of play. Can't say whether it the same as yours. There are some very thin waxes that you put on tight threads for various lids that make it smoother and easier to screw a lid on something. Maybe that would help.