Rolleiflex 80 vs 75 planar, how much difference in portrait photos

[simus]

Hi,

 

 

I own a rolleiflex with 75/planar lens. Might there be any improvements in using an 80 / 2.8 instead in

potrait photographs?

 

 

Antonio

[bueh]

Only if you believe in it...

<p>

Seriously, if you want a different perspective on a <abbr title="twin-lens reflex camera">TLR</abbr>, save your money and get a mundane Mamiya C330/C33/C220 with interchangeable optics.

[jrjacobs]

5mm difference won't equate to much at all. If you are trying to get a tighter portrait, get a +1 Rolleinar - allows you to get in much closer.

[antonio_a.1]

Yes, there is an improvement. The 80/2.8 Rolleis are generally superior to the 75s.

[simus]

thank for your help,

 

 

as for the rolleinars, they should distort the view. With 75 itself, focus distance is not a

problem for composition. It's that at minimum focusing distance it already distort faces,

so with rolleinars, will be worse. I have used it sometimes for some portrait and it is not

so bad, but it must be used not as a standard option, in my opinion.

 

As for the mamyia, I know it would be better for the interchangeable optics and I took

some photo some time ago but I prefer the rolleiflex for the light weight, smoothness,

and friendly feeling.

 

So an option I was thinking about is the telerolleiflex. but it is quite expansive, and

someone told me there could cause a problem with planearity of the film. So a good one

mught have been the 80. 2.8 max aperture, should also be an improvment over the 3.5.

 

Antonio, why the 80 should be an improvement over the 75?

 

 

Thank again,

 

 

Antonio

[d_purdy]

I have compared side by side the 75 and the 80 when I owned both and you would be

surprised the difference that 5mm makes in perspective. If you want to use a normal

length Rollei and want the less distortion then the 80 is difinitely better. You will still need

a Rolleinar. the Telerollei is an excellent camera and is very sharp. The problem is that as

you say the camera and accessories is expensive and also the close focus is quite distant

which means you pretty much need to get an expensive Mutar to use with it.

[jorge_jimenez1]

""Yes, there is an improvement. The 80/2.8 Rolleis are generally superior to the 75s."" WHAT ?? This forum has become a joke!

[antonio_a.1]

Hi Antonio,

the 80mm Rolleiflexes have better resolution, less distortion, faster maximum aperture, etc.

 

They dont cost more than the 75s, 40 years after many of them were made for no

reason....

 

The Tele Rolleiflex is also better than the 75 for portraits.

[golden]

I agree with the above concerning the mamiya c330, 2 lenses is what you need: the 80 black S for general photography, very sharp lens, and the 180 super for portraits. good luck

[jrjacobs]

"""Yes, there is an improvement. The 80/2.8 Rolleis are generally superior to the 75s."" WHAT ?? This forum has become a joke!"

 

 

I'm with you Jorge -

 

I own both a 2.8e (80mm Planar), and a 3.5e (75mm Planar). Both professionally callibrated (i.e. focus is accurate, lenses aligned, etc.). The only difference I can see between the two is that the 2.8 model can go 1/2 stop more open. Both lenses are equally sharp, and it is near impossible to tell which camera shot what photo - Planars (and Xenotars) are 6 element, well-corrected lenses. I would daresay if anyone thinks one is sharper than the other, they should have their lenses aligned and focus callibrated.

 

As to the OP - the difference in focal length (75mm vs. 80mm) is negligable. That equates to the difference between a 50mm and a 52mm lens in 35mm format - not enough to make much a difference at all.

[simus]

Hi,

 

Hi have done some trial just to view how much difference there is field of view. 80 field of

view has a easy visible narrower field of view than I would have ever tought. So I completely

with what Antonio A. and Dennis told. The great improvement is easily constatable on

distortion.

 

Antonio