Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,962   Posts: 1,558,315   Online: 1004
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35
  1. #21
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,200
    I believe that "crappy" was referring to close up filters that are available for many lenses and cameras. These close up filters are no match for the Zeiss lenses that Rollei and Hasselblad owners might put the close up filters on. [I think that something was lost in the translation].

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    I think that it was well understood, and that Rolleiflexible and i disagree quite a lot about how good these close-up lenses are.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by karl View Post
    Those links all work for me.
    Just an aside: all i get is "You must be signed in to see this content."
    I have no Yahoo/Flickr account, so can't sign in.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pasadena, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    813
    Images
    9
    Don't forget a Mamiya RZ with 110/2.8. The bellows focusing gets you in amazingly close, if your subject doesn't mind and the results are amazing...just thought I'd throw that out there since the OP was thinking about a different camera anyway.

  5. #25
    Mark Antony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    East Anglia,UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    772
    Images
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    Just an aside: all i get is "You must be signed in to see this content."
    I have no Yahoo/Flickr account, so can't sign in.
    Strange I have no Yahoo or Flickr account but I can see them...

    Anyhow I have to agree with Sanders, those close up Rolleinars are way better than they would at first seem- I use them often. They are in no way 'crappy' and certainly fall in the precision instrument category.
    Possibly you are confusing them with cheap converters?
    I have no problem with them 'distorting' faces so can't really advise.
    YMMV

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    42
    Sanders, on that last shot, were you using a .35 and 1 Rolleinars with the Tele? And how far do you have to stop down in order to keep the face in focus? I'm experimenting with this combination (per some of your other posts) and haven't yet had that much success.

  7. #27
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    Peter, yes: A 0.35x Tele Rolleinar on the camera,
    and a Rolleinar 1 on the Tele Rolleinar. I do not
    remember the aperture I used with that photo but
    it was probably wide-open, at f/4. At times I would
    stop down as far as f/8. But my lighting required a
    1/15 shutter at f/8 and I found that restrictive. I
    find it easy to refocus continuously as I shoot, and
    the faster shutter permits more spontaneity without
    fear of losing an image to motion blur.



    What sort of problems are you having? If you can
    be more specific, and perhaps post an image or
    two, I might be able to offer suggestions.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    42
    I'm trying to figure out the depth of field. I shot some wide open and all that was in focus was an eyelash (subject facing 1/3 away). I'm not at my office, but will try to post a pic or two. I appreciate the help. BTW, I bought the tele because of your portraits -- good work.

  9. #29
    loman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    469
    Images
    1
    If you want to go cheap and like tlr's why don't you get a mamiya c330 with the 135mm or 180mm lens?
    That will save you a lot of money compared to either a hasselblad or a tele rollei plus the quality of the mamiya c lenses are very very good.
    Regards
    Mads

  10. #30
    viridari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina [USA]
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    330
    Images
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by loman View Post
    If you want to go cheap and like tlr's why don't you get a mamiya c330 with the 135mm or 180mm lens?
    FWIW, these bodies commonly come with 80mm lenses which aren't half bad at all.


Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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