Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/02/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]goldman@math.umn.edu writes: > The main point of my message was to find out what Alastair and > others thought of the Rollei 35 QZT. Instead I seem to have touched a non > Leica nerve by have the nerve to quaestion Rollei service. > In fact my friend sent in the camera twice for autofocus problems. > The second time they said they couldn't fix it and would replace it. > They sent the wrong > camera (a QZW). After he returned it they sent the correct one. I call > that "less than efficient". It's not the end of the world, but I think I > used an appropriate phrase. If others take umbrage, its their problem, > not mine. > Meanwhile, Rollei may be the cat's meow for professional level MF, > but not for amateur 35. I don't thing the dramatic price drop is due to > its success (as Bob Schell, the industry shill, claimed in shutterbug). > Jay > I must have missed the query earlier. I like the QZT. It is solid, well built, has a fantastic lens, produces high quality contrasty images, focuses quickly (relatively) and has been reliable and accurate. For a snap point and shoot camera, the lack of on board flash is a bit of a pain, but the flash images are much better because of having an off camera flash. I worry that the flash will stop working and will not be repairable in the future, but that is in the future. I do not use it enough to really have justified its purchase, but it is a wonderful piece of machinery. Not quite "good" enough to be a serious camera (ie it cannot challenge the M6) as it does not allow filters etc, relies solely on autofocus (no manual rangefinder) and too good for a simple point and shoot. Takes nice snaps though ;-) Cheers