The six element 3,5 Planar has a slightly improved corner sharpness at the largest apertures, according to Zeiss. But it should not matter much, since the Planar, and Xenotar, are not razor sharp fully open anyway (but it is at 5,6).
The six element 3,5 Planar has a slightly improved corner sharpness at the largest apertures, according to Zeiss. But it should not matter much, since the Planar, and Xenotar, are not razor sharp fully open anyway (but it is at 5,6).I had forgotten about the E3. It has a 6-element taking lens like the late-model 3.5F. Probably the best if you can find one. The E2 has the 5-element, like all the other Planars/Xenotars.
I am not a Rollei aficionado by any means, but I was in your shoes 4 years ago and decided to get both, the 2.8F and 3.5F and both are Xenotars. There are no image quality difference vs Planars, but folks who repair them suggested that Xenotars are less prone to separation.
Personally I agree with those who say that condition is more important than the model, with one caveat: the screen needs to be user-replaceable. Stock screens aren't bad, BTW. In fact, under bright light I prefer them, but they are on the dim side, that's why my 2.8F has a screen from the 2.8GX
RB67 screen are thicker and also bigger. How challenging is that to get it in correct size without scratching it.Mine (Automat) had a Mamiya RB67 screen fitted, and I do not find it an annoyance that I can't change it myself.
I agree.
I have an Automat with a f3.5 Tessar, sans meter, and I like it a lot. The Tessar isn't as contrasty as the Planar or Xenotar, but you can always add contrast in processing (but you can't take it out).
Spend as much $$ as makes you happy, but the condition of the camera is far more important than the model or lens.
RB67 screen are thicker and also bigger. How challenging is that to get it in correct size without scratching it.
Agreed Wish I had never sold my Rolleicord V. But considered the ability to get reasonable sharpness at wider lens openings at times to be worth the extra weight and cost of the 3.5F.I have an HFT Planar in the FX and a Xenotar in the 2.8F and they are great and I can't see a difference I also have a Rolleicord V with a Xenar and in my opinion, stopped down a bit, it is just as good as the Planar and Xenotar. I have tested them against each other.
I also have a Rolleicord V with a Xenar and in my opinion, stopped down a bit, it is just as good as the Planar and Xenotar. I have tested them against each other.
I agree. For me the option to move to a Rolleiflex is the IMO awkward ergonomics on the Rolleicord. Particularly the shutter.
As a new owner of a Rolleicord V, I am curious to know more about how the prism works with that model. Can you please comment on any of the following?I agree with you on that. I can't get used to the left handed shutter. Plus I always use a prism.
As a new owner of a Rolleicord V, I am curious to know more about how the prism works with that model. Can you please comment on any of the following?
Does using a prism help any with the dark edges and corners I am seeing with the factory screen of my Rolleicord V?
Is the overall screen brightness better, worse, or about the same when using a prism on a Rolleicord V?
Does the prism provide as much magnification as I would get using the flip up magnifier on the waist-level-finder?
Are there many different models of Rollei prisms, and if so, will any or all fit my Rolleicord V?
Thank you.
BTW, I am finding the shutter lever at the bottom of the taking lens to be somewhat awkward when hand-held. Still trying to decide if adding a short cable release makes it any less awkward.
The prism adds weight and bulk to the camera, making it taller and in my opinion, clunkier. If you want a prism, go for a MF SLR like the SL66.I don't think there is a way to use a prism with a Rolleicord. I meant that as a reason I like the F better. Using a prism on an F allows you to see the image oriented properly and is much easier to focus. Though it seem most people don't like a prism on a TLR, I do.
I don't think there is a way to use a prism with a Rolleicord. I meant that as a reason I like the F better. Using a prism on an F allows you to see the image oriented properly and is much easier to focus. Though it seem most people don't like a prism on a TLR, I do.
I love my prisms on my Rolleis and wouldn't use a Rollei otherwise. I have used it this way for more than 35 years. So your opinion is your opinion. I find the weight comfortable. I find the balance comfortable. It gives options as to how to hold my camera, sideways or upside down or normal. Upside down makes me just a bit taller. Sideways is easier to hand hold at very slow speeds and is great for looking straight down.The prism adds weight and bulk to the camera, making it taller and in my opinion, clunkier. If you want a prism, go for a MF SLR like the SL66.
It is certainly my opinion. Have you ever tried a MF SLR with a 45º prism? You might just find it easier and more enjoyable than a TLR with a prism finder.I love my prisms on my Rolleis and wouldn't use a Rollei otherwise. I have used it this way for more than 35 years. So your opinion is your opinion. I find the weight comfortable. I find the balance comfortable. It gives options as to how to hold my camera, sideways or upside down or normal. Upside down makes me just a bit taller. Sideways is easier to hand hold at very slow speeds and is great for looking straight down.
It is certainly my opinion. Have you ever tried a MF SLR with a 45º prism? You might just find it easier and more enjoyable than a TLR with a prism finder.
Well certainly I have used a Hasselblad that way. If I want to use an SLR I use my Pentax 67. The Rolleiflex is a special camera that I love for many reasons. The prism works well and I don't even bother carrying a WLF in my camera bag.
We should end this discussion because it is off track from the OP. We can agree to disagree and your opinion doesn't change mine.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?