Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,476   Posts: 1,542,629   Online: 959
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 50
  1. #11
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,347
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    444
    The Mamiya lenses are excellent, but if you're looking for something more portable than the Bronica, that rules out the Mamiya - the C2x/3x series of cameras are pretty big and bulky, especially if you start carrying around more than one lens set. Look at a Rollei, or a Minolta Autocord.

  2. #12
    jovo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,085
    Images
    191
    I am able to carry a Mamiya C220 with prism finder, a 65, 80, and 135mm lens, and a Soligor (Adorama branded) one degree spot meter in a Lowepro Micro 100 backpack which is the smallest backpack they make I think....it's damn light anyway. The lenses are quite good. All the recent pics in my gallery were made with the 135mm. I doubt the web is a fair arbiter of lens quality, but you can take a look if you want to.
    John Voss

    My Blog

  3. #13
    naturephoto1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Breinigsville, PA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,819
    Images
    84
    I can not say which is the sharpest. However, as mentioned by Roger, my Rolleiflex 3.5F Planar is exceptionally sharp.

    Below is a hand held shot taken with my Rolleiflex 3.5F Planar 12/24 camera.

    Rich
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails LATTICEWORK2.jpg  
    Richard A. Nelridge
    http://www.nelridge.com

  4. #14
    wilsonneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Northern NJ
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    578
    Images
    17
    Some suggest that the Xenotar lenses are sharper than the Planars. This is an ongoing debate.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Joshua_G View Post
    Thanks.

    Okay, please let me rephrase my question. I'd like to add a TLR for better portability at times. Out of those TLRs out there, which are considered having extremely sharp lenses, including wide open?
    But TLRs aren't portable. And if you're going to shoot handheld tremor will beat any increase in sharpness you might gain by going to a better(?) lens. If you want light, get a Fuji fixed lens RF.

    You might want to look here http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html

  6. #16
    bjorke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    SF & Surrounding Planet
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,032
    Images
    20
    Roger is right.

    Wear may make a difference, as will f/stop actually in use.

    Above f/8 many have a hard time spotting the Rollei from a Yashica (flare in the Yashica will always reveal it, though).

    --

    Because someone has to make an inane comment, I will also suggest the Mamiya 6 rangefinder as a lightweight high-quality 6x6

    "What Would Zeus Do?"
    KBPhotoRantPhotoPermitAPUG flickr Robot

  7. #17
    Bandicoot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eastern England
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
    f/3.5 Planar, followed by f/2.8.

    But who is doing the 'considering'?

    Betcha plenty will argue with the above.

    Cheers,

    R.
    No argument at all from me.


    Peter

  8. #18
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    In real-world terms (i.e. differences you will actually notice) an older coated Tessar-type lens will have slightly higher contrast and worse edge definition compared with an older Planar/Xenotar. Older f3.5 Planar/Xenotar more contrasty than older f2.8. Newer Planar/Xenotar more contrasty than older.

    In practice, you are unlikely to be disapointed by any post-war Rollieflex with a coated lens which is in good order (a dirty screen and a tarnished mirror can make a Rollei very unpleasant to use). Yashica/Minolta cameras can offer good optical performance but not the mechanical reliability of a Rollei - at today's prices, why bother?

    As others have said, MF rangefinder cameras arguably are more portable and easier to use than a Rollei - Rolleis were designed as fast-working portable miniature cameras, but our definitions of these terms have changed since 1928!

    Finally, if I wanted the best optical quality, without regard to portability or cost, I would buy a new or late-model Hasselblad. As I already have Mamiya RB67, which I consider optically virtually equal, I am not going to switch to Hasselblad just to save a few hundred grams!

    Regards,

    David

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    7
    Images
    1
    TLRs are portable. As Dan suggests, much of the lens sharpness may be lost handheld depending on the situation. How large do you want to enlarge the neg/tran? - up to 10x10 I doubt you will see a difference between Rolleiflex 3.5, 2.8, Mamiya C lenses etc. I have a Rolleiflex 2.8 (1959) and my Voigtlander Brillant (Skopar 4.5, from about 1938) is its match in many circumstances (up to 10x10).
    If I were you I would focus on the ergonomics - which feels better to you? The Rolleiflexes for me are the best handling cameras.
    Good luck,
    Nick

  10. #20
    Jersey Vic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Columbia County NY
    Shooter
    Holga
    Posts
    3,919
    Images
    187
    Rolleicords are smaller, simpler and lighter and come with Tessars and Xenars. Great carrying-around cameras and cheap. I have a IV with the Xenar and the 16x20's look great. And I agree with John Voss than the Mamiya c220 is alot lighter and a good bit more compact than a c330.
    Holga: if it was any more analog, you'd need a chisel.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin