Rollei Lenses

[Jack]

Jack,

Of course I wish you to be more direct, instead of "turning around the pot": I like to know what I am speaking about, not speculating about somebody (in this case you) telling me this or that does not work without background information and clear picture of the situation.

This being said, I can only imagine that there was an issue with the AF mode chosen (spot, center weighted or average), and I believe this issue has been explained and addressed in David's case.

As for your dealer where you tried this out and where you had this problem: it would be nice to know which Sinar dealer this was, that we can contact him and ask about this problem with this body, which I suspect to be an early prototype with the very early firmware: those cameras are from the o-series and should have returned to Sinar. If you feel not appropriate to post the dealer's name here, you can PM it to me, but in any case I wish to know that we can have a look at it.

Thanks and best regards,
Thierry

Thanks Thierry,

I will tell the dealer to contact you directly and that you will correct his camera.

As re David, his camera is still not working in any pattern mode, so perhaps you can contact him directly and get HIS camera fixed for him as it's been inoperable since day one -- I'm sure he'd appreciate your help!

Finally, there is no offense intended here as I'm sure it's a native language issue, but it still sounds like some waffling on the Sinar focus issue in general. For the sake of our readers here at GetDPI, can I ask you to make a firm reply for the record: Is the Sinar camera in its current form free of AF defects?

Thanks!

 

[thsinar]

Nothing to thank, Jack.

I am a bit surprised that this dealer did not contact us (or our distributor SBI) yet, with such an issue: it would be normal to think that they would do so when having a product not working.

As for David: I don't think it is up to you to play the intermediary here, and I believe David is mature enough to contact me (or anybody else) if he still has a problem, which he did not do up to now.

I don't understand the word "waffling", sorry for that, but I can imagine that you may mean that I am hiding some kind of problem: am I right? If this is the case, than my answer is "no". And I will return the question to you:

Is the Mamiya AFD (II or III) in its actual form free of AF defects, for the sake of your readers and for the record? If you tell me yes and you believe so, than I must say that you are not serious, without any offense intended.

Best regards,
Thierry

Thanks Thierry,

I will tell the dealer to contact you directly.

As re David, his camera is still not working in any pattern mode, so perhaps you can contact him directly and get HIS camera fixed for him as it's been inoperable since day one -- I'm sure he'd appreciate your help!

Finally, there is no offense intended here, but it still sounds to me like you're waffling a bit on the Sinar focus issue in general and for the sake of our readers here, I would like a firm reply from you for the record: Is the Sinar camera in its current form free of AF defects?

Thanks!

 

[David K]

Jack, you do remember correctly that I had an issue with close AF focusing with the 80mm lens (and only that lens) in San Juan. This problem manifested itself as well when close focusing manually but relying on the AF confirmation. No such problem with manual focusing "by eye" alone, i.e. focus is very precise when used that way, or when using AF at a distance of more than a few meters. I no longer have my original camera body as it went back to Sinar for a checkup. This was done at the same time I picked up my new back from Steve Hendrix and Dave McRitchie. I am now using one of Sinar's service units until mine is returned. I have not tested for this issue with the new camera as I find manual focusing quite easy thanks to the brightness of the viewfinder (make that plural since I now have the 45 degree prism as well). If memory serves me I was told that this was a firmware issue (also affecting Leaf's and Rollei's versions of the camera) which should be corrected shortly.

 

[Jack]

Nothing to thank, Jack.

I am a bit surprised that this dealer did not contact us (or our distributor SBI) yet, with such an issue: it would be normal to think that they would do so when having a product not working.

As for David: I don't think it is up to you to play the intermediary here, and I believe David is mature enough to contact me (or anybody else) if he still has a problem, which he did not do up to now.

I don't understand the word "waffling", sorry for that, but I can imagine that you may mean that I am hiding some kind of problem: am I right? If this is the case, than my answer is "no". And I will return the question to you:

Is the Mamiya AFD (II or III) in its actual form free of AF defects, for the sake of your readers and for the record? If you tell me yes and you believe so, than I must say that you are not serious, without any offense intended.

Best regards,
Thierry

Thierry:

"Waffling" simply means somebody is avoiding answering a direct question. The direct question I am asking is the one I'll repeat below, and you have avoided answering it directly now for three posts. Another tactic used in "waffling" is answering a question with another question turned around so as to avoid answering the original question posed to you. You did that when you asked me, "Is the Mamiya AFD (II or III) in its actual form free of AF defects, for the sake of your readers and for the record?" In the spirit of fairness, I will happily answer: I can clearly state my Mamiya AFD2 body is free of AF defects with ALL of the AF lenses I own for it, which include the 35, 55, 80, 150, 210 and 55-110 zoom.

So now it is your turn to answer the question directly about the Sinar: Is the Sinar camera in its current form free of AF defects? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Thanks,

 

[Graham Mitchell]

Jack,
I was saying that there was and is no AF problem

I thought Thierry already answered this?

 

[Jack]

Hi Graham:

Unfortunately his full quote was this, "I was saying that there was and is no AF problem, but (light/contrast) situations where the AF does not perform the same as under ideal (light/contrast) situations: I think I had been clear enough."

And to my mind he wasn't clear enough, so I am asking for simpler clarification by him answering the question directly. The rest of the story is I wanted to avoid airing any dirty laundry publicly, but now it seems necessary so everybody understands my concern. The main reasons for my inquiry is that there are two people I know that personally have the Sinar camera, and neither one will AF. (I have since spoken with my dealer and he has returned the camera for a full credit so he is done.) My real issue is I think Sinar should respond to David's issue faster than they have, so was trying to help him get serviced by pushing a little here. Thierry claims there is no problem, while David is being told he needs to wait for a firmware revision -- someone has to be misinformed...

Hope that clarifies,

 

[David K]

Jack,
Check my post above... I do have one of Sinar's service units.

Graham,
I believe that Jack is referring to the issue that I mentioned in my post just above. I did share this experience with Thierry as well as several other folks at Sinar. Thierry's response to me was that he almost always uses the 110 f/2 which is manual in any event and quite easy to focus. It was one of the other support people at Sinar who told me that this was a firmware issue soon to be corrected.

 

[Jack]

And my concern is that Thierry claims there is no problem and David's being told he needs to wait for a firmware revision -- the two answers are in conflict: You can't have one hand telling you all is okay while the other tells you it's a firmware glitch. Somebody is wrong and meanwhile David is stuck in middle...

 

[thsinar]

Jack,

So "waffling" means "hiding" and "lying" about a fact: let's put it clearly. That is a serious accusation, Jack.

I have actually answered your question, and I have even answered it 2 times, very clearly: there is no "problem" like you like to put it and want it to be understood by others. AF is NOT perfect, being it with the Hy6 (Leaf, AFi, Rolleiflex Hy6 or Sinar Hy6), with the H series, with the Mamiya AF(D) II or III, or any other medium format AF system.

I have however registered your clear statement that you find your AF perfect. I guess that I can't believe what you are saying, sorry to say it. But it is your statement, not mine. And let me tell you that I have used a few Mamiya AFD's as well in my professional life, the last time being 3 weeks ago: that was not my experience, not at all.

So I will say it and answer again your question: no, the AF is not perfect in all situations with the Hy6, in the contrary of your own Mamiya AFD. But it does its "job" in most situations, and rather in a fast and accurate way. that is my clear statement. I hope it is clear.

But let me come back to the Hy6, which you seem to not know perfectly. You have seen one person using it, and you speak about your own experience at a dealer's place. I have told you that the issue with David has been explained and it does seem to me that this is solved. If it is not the case, then David would certainly come back to me.
Please don't forget to tell your dealer to contact me, for the issue you have experienced, failing what I shall allow myself to come back to you to ask you more details: you would certainly agree that I have to go behind this issue seriously.

Jack: I think you don't know me by now. I am not used to "avoid" answering nor going to the point, not even in public and in front of thousands of readers. I think I have proven this up to know and don't have to justify myself in front of you. So please leave your comments like "waffling" aside. It would be more appropriate to not use a dictatorial tone when asking me to answer: I really don't need such and have better to do if addressed this way. I think respect in a public forum which you are the co-owner of would be more appropriate and does not serve anybody.

Thanks for your understanding,
Thierry

Thierry:

"Waffling" simply means somebody is avoiding answering a direct question. The direct question I am asking is the one I'll repeat below, and you have avoided answering it directly now for three posts. Another tactic used in "waffling" is answering a question with another question turned around so as to avoid answering the original question posed to you. You did that when you asked me, "Is the Mamiya AFD (II or III) in its actual form free of AF defects, for the sake of your readers and for the record?" In the spirit of fairness, I will happily answer: I can clearly state my Mamiya AFD2 body is free of AF defects with ALL of the AF lenses I own for it, which include the 35, 55, 80, 150, 210 and 55-110 zoom.

So now it is your turn to answer the question directly about the Sinar: Is the Sinar camera in its current form free of AF defects? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Thanks,

 

[thsinar]

Jack,

why do you continue? May I ask not to be wrongly quoted?:

I have never said that "all is okay". Please re-read my answer(s).

Best regards,
Thierry

And my concern is that Thierry claims there is no problem and David's being told he needs to wait for a firmware revision -- the two answers are in conflict: You can't have one hand telling you all is okay while the other tells you it's a firmware glitch. Somebody is wrong and meanwhile David is stuck in middle...

 

[Dale Allyn]

Thierry: "Waffling" does not mean "lying". It normally refers to "not making up ones mind" or making statements that might seem to change with varying conditions or audiences.

It's none of my business and I apologize for stepping in, but I wanted to be sure you knew that the term was not suggesting something harsh as you may have taken it.

To be honest, it's a word that is often used in reference to politicians or others stuck in an awkward position as they try to state their case without stepping on their own team.

Best regards,

Dale

 

[Jack]

Thank you Dale.


Thierry, just want to add that this is a public forum and I am known for being direct when the situation demands it; I will always call things as I see them. So if you can't stand the heat, you'd better stay out of my kitchen...


Now to this very puzzling comment by you:

Jack,

why do you continue? May I ask not to be wrongly quoted?:

I have never said that "all is okay". Please re-read my answer(s).

Best regards,
Thierry

So, you never said "All is okay" -- except that a few posts earlier you clearly wrote and I quote, bold my edit:

I was saying that there was and is no AF problem, but (light/contrast) situations where the AF does not perform the same as under ideal (light/contrast) situations: I think I had been clear enough.

So if we are to understand you, you are claiming there is and never was any AF problem, but all is NOT okay with the AF? Perhaps you could clarify that further for us?


Cheers,

 

[thsinar]

Jack,

If you come up and mention such in a public forum, you rather come to the point and not just throw something in. Another way, if you don't want "airing publicly laundry", would be to PM me: you certainly knew that by reading your initial post I would ask you more for "details" and to be specific: I am sorry, but I won't ever let things stand if they are not the full story or given with all details.

Concerning the dealer you speak about: I am not aware of any dealer having returned a camera, yet. That means in clear that this dealer won't contact me concerning his issue, right?

Thanks to clarify,
Thierry

The rest of the story is I wanted to avoid airing any dirty laundry publicly, but now it seems necessary so everybody understands my concern. The main reasons for my inquiry is that there are two people I know that personally have the Sinar camera, and neither one will AF. (I have since spoken with my dealer and he has returned the camera for a full credit so he is done.) My real issue is I think Sinar should respond to David's issue faster than they have, so was trying to help him get serviced by pushing a little here. Thierry claims there is no problem, while David is being told he needs to wait for a firmware revision -- someone has to be misinformed...

Hope that clarifies,

 

[thsinar]

Alright, understood.

In any case, and knowing the meaning now, I was not "waffling".

Thanks Dale,
Thierry

Thierry: "Waffling" does not mean "lying". It normally refers to "not making up ones mind" or making statements that might seem to change with varying conditions or audiences.

It's none of my business and I apologize for stepping in, but I wanted to be sure you knew that the term was not suggesting something harsh as you may have taken it.

To be honest, it's a word that is often used in reference to politicians or others stuck in an awkward position as they try to state their case without stepping on their own team.

Best regards,

Dale

 

[thsinar]

Jack,

Then we are 2 to be direct and calling things by their name, when the situation demands it.
I can easily take things BUT, they have to be the whole story and with facts: your initial and following posts do suggest that the Hy6 AF does not work, which is simply and purely wrong. I am sorry, but yes, I cannot take and stand this.

Do I understand right that you wish me to stay away from this forum? I am not sure again if I understand it right, but making such a comment rather shows that you cannot take the heat.

Best regards,
Thierry

Thank you Dale.

Thierry, just want to add that this is a public forum and I am known for being direct when the situation demands it; I will always call things as I see them. Frankly, if you can't stand the heat, you'd better stay out of my kitchen...

Cheers,

 

[Jack]

Thierry, what I'm "asking" of you is an answer that isn't confusing, that is all. I repeat myself, but need to do so because you have not yet clarified: you have now in this thread claimed both that there is and never was any AF problem, yet at the same time claim all is NOT okay with the AF. That sounds somewhat contradictory and perhaps you'd like to clear it up. Or not.

 

[Mitchell]

The forum is great. I thank Jack and Guy for it's existence and for their many contributions.

Thierry is a great asset to the forum. I would be very sorry to see him leave.

I watch these squabbles gather form, in small increments of misunderstanding, like some inevitable natural phenomena. The internet, absent of gesture, voice and tone, and so public, hurries the storm.

Best,

Mitchell

 

[thsinar]

Jack,

I think you understood very well, what I was writing and claiming.
The AF works and it works pretty well: I state it again.

But there are situations where it doesn't work as well: I state it again as well. And it is unfair from you to suggest that I have said there is no issue at all: I have said in my very first post and answer to you, that there are situations where the AF struggles.

And I state as well again that ALL AF systems do have situations where they struggle, despite of your claim of the contrary.

What you are doing is using the word "problem" to make believe that the whole AF with this camera is not working. I can quote you as well:

"are the AF lenses actually auto-focusing properly with the digital back mounted on the body now?"

Which in other words is suggesting that it does not: that is absolutely wrong and you cannot write this without expecting a reaction from my side.

This being said, I shall repeat myself once and a last time: yes, we are working on improving the AF further. Will it ever be perfect? I don't know this. But I also know that other brands are facing the same.

Best regards,
Thierry

Now to this very puzzling comment by you:

So, you never said "All is okay" -- except that a few posts earlier you clearly wrote and I quote, bold my edit:

So if we are to understand you, you are claiming there is and never was any AF problem, but all is NOT okay with the AF? Perhaps you could clarify that further for us?


Cheers,

 

[Jack]

Okay, thank you for clearing that up. I now understand what the meaning of your comments were.

Cheers,

 

[David K]

Thierry is a great asset to the forum. I would be very sorry to see him leave.

Ditto that Mitchell and it's a bit painful to see two people who I consider friends going at it...