Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,971   Posts: 1,558,588   Online: 1106
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    NW Chicago 'burbs
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    11

    Rolleiflex 2.8C vs. 3.5E

    Greetings all! I am currently looking for a good old Rolleiflex camera to get into medium format. I am debating between a 2.8C or 3.5E, and i need some opinions.

    1st, I have a question- I saw someone on Photo.net say the 2.8C has 10 aperture blades... can anyone confirm this? This is one of the main reason's im interested in this camera, aside from the price. I'm looking to compare the bokeh from the C with that of my friends F, which has 5-6 blades, if i remember correctly.

    I'm drawn to the 3.5E with a Planar because i've heard that the 3.5 Planar is the sharpest of all the rolleiflex lenses, and there is a dealer in my area selling one for $425, which seems reasonable.

    I guess i want to know people's opinions on these cameras.. which models you have/own, how they handle, ect. Also, if you were me what would you go for? i'm positive i'm getting a Rollei, i just need a bump in the right direction at this point.

    Thx,
    Mike

  2. #2
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    I have both. The 2.8C is pretty but
    I prefer to shoot with the 3.5E. The
    shutter and aperture are a bit easier
    to set, and the viewfinder magnifier is
    much better-designed. I am completely
    reliant on the magnifier, so this is a big
    issue for me -- maybe not for you.

    If it's a newer "E" with a removable view-
    finder hood, that is an added plus. The
    removable hood permits you to upgrade
    the viewscreen yourself, without sending
    the camera out to a repair shop.

    I've not seen any useful difference in bokeh
    between the two models, but others might
    have a different experience.

    Sanders
    Last edited by Rolleiflexible; 06-09-2008 at 05:30 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    NW Chicago 'burbs
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    11
    hmm, so which would you say produces sharper photos?

  4. #4
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Master_of_Reality View Post
    hmm, so which would you say produces sharper photos?
    Toss-up. User error, manufacturing variances, and state
    of repair will obliterate any discernible difference between
    Rolleiflexes fitted with a 2.8 and a 3.5 Planar or Xenotar.

    Conventional wisdom has it that the 75mm f/3.5 version is
    the original, that the 80mm f/2.8 was adapted from it, and
    that the original is the better design. But I've yet to see it
    in my own photography.

    Another thing to consider when choosing is accessories.
    The 3.5 series takes Bay 2 filters and hoods, while the 2.8s
    take Bay 3 accessories. The Bay 2 accessories are more
    plentiful and less expensive.

    Sanders

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    NW Chicago 'burbs
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    11
    ok, makes sense. i guess it'll just come down to price at this point.

    thx,
    Mike

  6. #6
    luvcameras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    381
    Yes, Rolleiflex's with a Compur Rapid shutter have a round aperture opening due to more blades being used. However, most people do not see bokeh differences, mainly because without Rolleinars, Rollei's dont focus close enough to emphasize bokeh. If you want a great Rollei with a meter, get an F model with coupled meter. The early meters are a pain to transfer settings to the aperture and shutter. Frankly, I think the 3.5F planar's are the best lens in the line up, not the 2.8 lens

    See my Rolleiflex Price and Info Guide
    http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/rolleitlr.htm


    Thanks
    Dan
    Antique and Classic Camera BLOG
    www.antiquecameras.net/blog.html

  7. #7
    JPD
    JPD is offline
    JPD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    772
    The 3,5 Planar on my late 3,5F is sharper and contrastier than the 2,8 Planar on my 2,8F. But my 3,5F has the six element Planar, and there are small variations between lens samples...

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,066
    I have a 3.5T that I enjoy using, along with other formats. I followed this thread out of curiosity. What is bokeh? Never heard that one.

  9. #9
    RobertP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,130
    Images
    8
    George, Its a Japanese word that means "fuzzy"

  10. #10
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by George Collier View Post
    What is bokeh?
    For our purposes, it refers to the manner
    in which a lens renders out-of-focus areas.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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