One small point I'd never realised they changed with the E & F models, is the sliding depth of field scale which adjusts as you change the aperture. For landscape images I will often use hyperfocal focussing. Sometimes I will set the focus at one stop larger aperture than the one I have set (or perhaps, two stops) to ensure adequate sharpness. It is actually easier to do this with the earlier models that have a printed depth of field scale next to the focus knob. The later ones only show you the DOF for the aperture you've set, so I suppose you would have to actually change the aperture, to display the DOF points you wanted to set hyperfocally, and then change it back. Or use a DOF table, of course...
I don't want to buy into the relative qualities of the earlier versus "modern" Rolleis (as I have never seen or used a newer one), except to say that I think the older ones are more beautiful than the new models, which is fortunate for me as I could not afford to buy many late examples.
Regards,
Brett
I don't want to buy into the relative qualities of the earlier versus "modern" Rolleis (as I have never seen or used a newer one), except to say that I think the older ones are more beautiful than the new models, which is fortunate for me as I could not afford to buy many late examples.
Regards,
Brett
DaveO
Member
I have heard that the earlier models were built better than the GX's. I have the 3.5F with a Planar, but have heard the Xenotars were up there in quality too. I bought mine with a working meter about 15 years ago and paid about $ 700 or so. I use a handheld Sekonic meter so I could have saved a bit by getting one without a working meter.
DaveO
DaveO
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Good, get a 2.8D.
The wider max. aperture *matters* especially when we are talking about lenses that are as sharp as these Planars.
valdas
Veteran
without any doubt - 3.5F. why? coz i have two of them...
River Dog
Always looking
There is really something special about a 1956 piece of metal, leather and glass. It's like driving a classic of the period, so I would go for an older model like the 2.8 Planar (handheld meter) - that glass is wicked.
Doesn't mean it's the best of course, but you can have mine from my cold, dead hands.
Doesn't mean it's the best of course, but you can have mine from my cold, dead hands.
RedLion
Come to the Faire
The "best" ? If I had to choose, it would be the 2.8F
Here's some shots of mine:
Here's some shots of mine: