[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Rollei] RE: Rolleinars vs. bellows



> I don't understand the difference between the use of bellows and the
> rolleinars. I also use a Mamiya TLR, and you have to admit the
> inclusion of bellows into the design was great.

As far as the final magnification is concerned, there is no difference
except that you need 3 Rolleinar sets where the Mamiya will
close-focus as standard. As far as image quality is concerned, on one
hand with Rolleinars you loose quality because you add an additional
lens element that re-introduces some optical aberrations, on the other
hand with a bellows on your Mamiya you can "force" the standard lens
to be used in the close-up range, a range of magnifications for which
the lens is not optimized. So little difference there also (to be
discussed more in detail, probably). I would see the difference in
terms of bulk and weight, a Rolleinar set (even 3 rolleinar sets)
being so compact and light with respect to a bellows unit. Plus the
fact that you do not need to compute an exposure factor.

But I've used a Mamiya 220 occasionnaly and I like very much the
built-in bellows capability, although the 220/330 camera is
significanty heavier and bulkier than my Rolleiflex T. Rollei
introduced this bellows feature on the SL66 SLR. May be they were
inspired by the Mamiya TLR ?

- -- 
Emmanuel BIGLER         
<bigler  

------------------------------