About
All feedback (224)
- c***i- Feedback left by buyer.Past yearVerified purchaseGood seller! item as described.
- l***1 (2407)- Feedback left by buyer.More than a year agoVerified purchaseItem just as described, well packaged and quickly shipped.
- 4***j (58)- Feedback left by buyer.More than a year agoVerified purchaseGreat seller and smooth communication!
- delnortecolorado_7 (111)- Feedback left by buyer.Past monthVerified purchaseThank you for 🤝 your purchase! And Prompt payment! Enjoy!
- olbluizthriftz (826)- Feedback left by buyer.Past monthVerified purchaseAmazing buyer. Thanks
- remarkablebooks (11647)- Feedback left by buyer.Past 6 monthsVerified purchaseHope to deal with you again. Thank you.
Reviews (2)
May 01, 2007
Rolleiflex 2.8 FX vs. 2.8 GX
1 of 1 found this helpful I have own three Rolleiflex GX but only carefully examined Rolleifelx FX. The difference I see is that FX has exquisite exterior leathering and the originally-styled neckstrap. Other than that, GX and FX are identical in terms of their lenses, mechanic components, and funcationality. My GX's have produced great prints, no other twin-lens cameras can surppass. I started out with taking my kids' portraits and soon brought my GX to my field research in eastern Tibet (I'm an anthropologist). It has taken awe-inspiring ethnographic photos. GX makes me feel like an artist rather than a social scientist. What I don't like about GX (FX) is that it's a bit too light. It could be made heavier like how I feel about Leica M6. Currently GX is also over-priced. I'm sure I would not treat my GX as a collector's item sitting on shelf. I sold the Rollei 60th year commemorative version because it just looked too pretentious and gaudy, and it hindered my intent not to attract unnecceary attentions on the road. So, now I use a black GX made in the 1980s.
Aug 08, 2018
Great book! Thanks, will buy again!
Great book! Thanks, will buy again!