How good is a Rolleiflex Planar 3.5E lens?

[kymtman]

Here is a test that I did with my recently aquired machine. I shot

this photo on a pod using Kodak TMax 100 f/8 @125. I developed in HC

110. Then scanned the neg and then croped the red dotted area and

sized it as shown below. The tower is aproximately 1/2 mile from the

camers.<div></div>

[kymtman]

Here is the crop of the same negative.<div></div>

[h._p.]

I can't see getting that much enlargeability with a digital camera. Interesting experiment, Ron.

[tito sobrinho]

Very nice Ron! Due to its distance, the cropped image is excellent.

[david_m]

It looks good but I'm sure many camera lenses would give equal results at that aperture with a centrally placed object.

[frank_scheitrowsky1]

I have found that results from the f3.5 Planar lens on my Rolleiflex E, surpassed (in sharpness) what I was getting with the 80mm Planar lens on my Hasselblad.

[georg_scheck]

A picture made on Efke 25 film would probably show even finer grain

 

Georg Scheck

[pensacolaphoto]

I have a Rolleiflex 2.8D with a Planar taking lens. It was super sharp until recently when I started getting softer images back. It took an overhaul with focus adjustment before it got back to me in a shape that gave me sharp images. When Rollie TLR cameras are well adjusted, their lenses really are sensational.

[kymtman]

Forgot to mention that the film expired in 2002. Here is another shot on same roll. No flash, don't remember f/stop but the time was one second.<div></div>

[charles_stobbs3]

On my monitor the interior shot looks very sharp. Nothing looks sharp in the first picture or the enlargement. Ar both pictures cropped to the same dgree? What scanner did you use?

[jd_rose]

Wonderful fireplace image. I've rarely seen that nice tonality on my computer monitor.

 

--- JDR

[kymtman]

The first shot was taken with a killer frost on and it was 15deg.F that morning.I may not have focused well enough. The fireplace shot was taken on a tripod with great care and I think it was at f/8 for one second. The scanner was and Epson 3200. Boys it's hard to focus when your-a-shivering like a dog eating razor blades out there in the cold.

[mike_earussi1]

A Modern Photography test in 1968 rated the 3.5F Planar as 80LPM in the center vs 65 LPM for the Hassablad 80mm planar. Rangefinder and TLR lenses are simpler designs and so tend to be sharper.

[james_elwing]

Did they make a 3.5/80 Planar for the Hasselblad? I thought they only made 2.8?