View Full Version : Rollei 35 RF
Anyone on this site use one before?
High-quality 35mm range finder camera with metal body and interchangeable German made Carl Zeiss lenses
(lenses which also fit Leica M Bodies)
Click here for a brochure (PDF)
Rollei 35 RF
Rollei 35 RF: A camera with convincing classical qualities
Photography has a new highlight the Rollei 35 RF. A camera in a class of its own. There are few phenomenal technical concepts that never lose their validity. One of them is the classical rangefinder camera with high-end features. Its success is based on its mechanical and optical perfection valued by true aficionados and accomplished photographers. Its brilliant viewfinder image, the compact design and precise distance measurement are traditional values explaining the popularity of this type of camera. Add to this the features of modern high-performance lenses that are certain to retain this appeal in the future. But at the bottom line it is a well-known and well-established marque that ultimately gives a rangefinder camera its treasured cult status. The Rollei 35 RF with Sonnar 40mm f/2.8 HFT will be available during the 1st quarter of 2003.
The Rollei 35 RF is an uncompromising embodiment of this trend. Rollei of Brunswick/Germany has historically been a pioneer of high-end 35mm photography. The company proved with the introduction of its legendary Rollei 35 as early as 1966 that it can achieve great results in the development and making even of small cameras. Today, several decades later, this glorious past is projected into a promising future by an impressive new development.
And these are the pillars of the Rollei 35 RF concept:
Professional 24 x 36mm format
Featured to satisfy the accomplished photographer
Cutting-edge performance of interchangeable ZEISS lenses
Durable, high-quality metal body
Well-balanced, timeless design
Complete functional range even if batteries are low (except for
exposure metering)
The Rollei 35 RF is a camera designed by shutterbugs for shutterbugs. That's something you will feel the first time you look through its viewfinder and press its shutter release. Precise trigonometric focusing in a permanently brilliant viewfinder ensures pin-point focus even in critical lighting conditions.
Its range-viewfinder is an optical tool of the utmost precision and guarantees a precise manual focusing.
The laminar metal focal-plane shutter makes shutter release an aesthetic pleasure. A very exact sounding shutter release tells you that your picture has been recorded on film. A wide range of shutter speeds from a slow 1 second to a fast 1/2000 s covers even demanding shooting situations. And what is more all this simply based on top-notch precision mechanics.
When it comes to exposure metering, the Rollei 35 RF is a true child of its times: Center-weighted TTL average metering is activated by lightly pressing the shutter release and combines high metering accuracy with truly simple operation. Correct-exposure display and warnings against over or underexposure are very user-friendly.
There will be three interchangeable lenses for the Rollei 35 RF
(all lenses can also be used for Leica cameras)
Sonnar 40mm f/2.8 HFT SILVER Carl Zeiss design made in Germany
The famous candid lens of the legendary Rollei 35, with its ideal focal length for outdoor and indoor photography. A lens ideally suited for news photography. Its initial aperture of f/2.8 gives it a wide margin for shooting in low light with excellent focusing results.
Sonnar 40mm f/2.8 HFT BLACK Carl Zeiss design made in Germany
The famous candid lens of the legendary Rollei 35, with its ideal focal length for outdoor and indoor photography. A lens ideally suited for news photography. Its initial aperture of f/2.8 gives it a wide margin for shooting in low light with excellent focusing results.
Planar 50mm f/1.8 HFT SILVER Carl Zeiss design made in Germany
The typical standard lens, with outstanding correction and sharpness, light in weight and very compact. A focal length well adapted to available-light photography. Well-suited for a wide range of subjects, from interiors up to half-length portraits, without or without artificial lighting or flashlight, even in unfavorable lighting conditions. (in preparation for the first half of 2003)
Planar 80mm f/2.8 HFT SILVERCarl Zeiss design made in Germany
A medium focal length for portraiture, also well-suited for landscape details and candid shots from a certain distance. In medium-format photography, it became famous for its excellent flatness as the standard focal length of the well-known twin-lens Rolleiflex. Experts consider it one of the best available lenses for creative photography.
Further interchangeable lenses are in preparation.
Rollei 35 RF that's photography at its best, high-end technology for great pictures. A camera that keeps alive an important part of our photographic heritage.
Precision mechanics and high-performance optics for the purist a high-class counterpoint to mass-market products.
Technical specifications
Rollei 35 RF
Negative size: 24 x 36 mm on size 135 film
Lens mount: M bayonet
Shutter: Vertical-travel laminar metal focal-plane shutter; 1 s 1/2000 s and B
Camera body: Made of die-cast aluminum
Focusing: With coupled coincidence-type rangefinder
Exposure display: Overexposure warning, correct exposure, underexposure warning
Metering system: Center-weighted TTL average metering upon light depression of shutter release
Metering range: EV 1 19 (ISO 100/21°; 1 s at f/1.4; 1/2000 s at f/16)
Flash synchronization: PC terminal and hot-shoe contact; sync speed 1/125 s and slower
Film advance: By one or several turns of advance lever; double-exposure lock; optional T Winder can be attached to bottom plate
Film rewind: By crank in rewind knob
Frame counter: Additive, with automatic reset when camera back is opened
Film-speed setting range: ISO 25/15° - 3200/36° in one-third increments
Exposure-meter power supply: Two 1.5V alkaline-manganese (LR44) or silver-oxide button cells (SR44)
Dimensions (mm/w x h x d): 135,5 x 81,0 x 25,5
Finish: Metal cover plates silver-finished
Subject to change without notice.
It looks like a Voigtlander Bessa R2 and I am quite sure Cosina made the body to the specification of Rollei.
I looked at this camera recently. The body is made by Cosina and is essentially an R-2. The lens is made of Zeiss elements (made by Rollei under a license from Zeiss) in a Cosina built metal lens body.
In the U.S. the price for the body and lens is $1800, and the Sonnar 40 mm lens (Leica M mount) is sold separately at $ 1000.
It seems like a lot of $$ for an R-2 with a Zeiss lens (assembled by Cosina with elements made by Rollei under license from Zeiss.
I have seen no reviews of the camera. I wonder if any one else has??
Initially, I thought that this would be a worthwhile addition (Zeiss lens in a Leica M mount). However, the price seems to me to be a big deterrent.
I believe that sales in the U.S. are poor.
Martin
Love the idea of Zeiss lenses too- in an 'M' mount, but it's too expensive for my blood.
Picture Guy
12-31-2003, 07:03
Seems like the ONLY difference from the Bessa R 2 is that it has a 40mm frameline to the Bessa R 2's 35mm frameline.
Picture Guy
12-31-2003, 07:05
Oops!
And a 80mm frame line to the Bessa R 2's 75 (duh!)
SolaresLarrave
01-06-2004, 17:30
I read about it a while ago, at the Rollei website, when it came out about two years ago... Again, price is a big deterrent. Plus, if someone is really itching for a Rollei, it's easier (and cheaper) to get a C/V body and a bunch of lenses, cut out the Rollei logo from a web printout and stick it on the camera body.
Just a thought;
Given the frameline 'accuracy' of rangefinders, would the difference between 35 vs. 40 and 75 vs. 80 really matter?
And as an afterthought;
Is anyone sure that the framelines are really different, or are they just labeled differently?
PP&I's review this month is the basic stamp of approval. Other than the frame lines there is no difference from the R2. Surely Cosina will have an accessory viewfinder with twin 40/80 brightlines. Then there will be more of a reason to buy an R2, Leica, and Zeiss glass to go along with the CV glass.
Huck Finn
05-03-2004, 10:56
Originally posted by rover
PP&I's review this month is the basic stamp of approval. Other than the frame lines there is no difference from the R2. Surely Cosina will have an accessory viewfinder with twin 40/80 brightlines. Then there will be more of a reason to buy an R2, Leica, and Zeiss glass to go along with the CV glass.
I thought I'd pull out this old thread because of Rover's comment. Actually Cosina does make a 40mm accessory viewfinder, but more importantly they make a 40mm lens! I saw this on their Japanese website, but I don't see it offered by any of the American dealsers. Does anyone know why you can't get the ful range of Voigtlander lenses outside japan?
Yes, I have the Voigtlander 40mm f/2 Ultron, a very nicely made item. But these are made only in various SLR mounts, and in several longer focal lengths too. See the Cameraquest webpage. I got mine from B&H, but it took them over a month to deliver, not too surprisingly.
I am not aware of any Voigtlander RF lenses that aren't available in the US. Can you point them out?
Huck Finn
05-04-2004, 03:18
Thanks, Doug for the information. Since I don't read Japanese, I couldn't tell anything about the lenses on the Voigtlander website other than their focal lengths & maximum apertures. I assumed that they were all rangefinder lenses. I didn't know that Cosina produced anything else under the Voigtlander name. i'll have to assume that the other lenses that I saw on their site were also non-RF lenses. I learned something today. I never noticed this information on cameraquest, so I'll go back & check it out. Thanks for the tip.
Cosina is very resourceful in their product development. They have marketed and used the same basic body numerous times. Like a Detroit car maker, change the fit and finish of a Chevy and call it a Buick. In the case of Rollei, they are charging premium prices for a product who's development cost was zero. Hopefully Cosina's cost controls will allow them to keep developing and introducing new Voigtlander products.
Huck Finn
05-04-2004, 18:04
Rover, I agree with your comments on the resourcefulness of Cosina.
In regard to the Rollei 35 RF, however, I think that they have gotten a bad rap on the pricing - to a certain extent. I agree that they are overpriced - but not to the extent that the critics claim. I found a kit for $1600 new, so that's my frame of reference. Here's my thinking :
Word out of Photokina a year & a half ago when this camera was announced was that it was developed for the Japanese market but that eventually Rollei decided to make it available world-wide. "Make it available" is the operative term. In the USA, Rollei has done nothing to advertise or promote the camera. Heck you can't even find it in the B&H catalogue. And yet unlike CV products it comes with a 2-year manufacturer's warranty & is imported through established corporate channels. Voigtlander products are essentially grey market products. Cosina has no corporate presence in countries outside Japan. Service, repairs, & availability of parts have been an ongoing problem. Many Voigtlander users have been happy with their purchases, but these are the ones who have not had to access such services - yet. Look at the price of a comparably priced Nikon FM3A & compare USA price with a 1-year warranty vs "import" price (grey market). Throw in an extra year on the warranty & you're talking a difference of $100. You have a choice - grey market vs USA. Depends on your risk aversion level.
IMO, the fit & finish of the Rollei is an improvement over the Bessa R2 models & worth another $50. Rollei includes a lens adaptor with the kit - another $50 item (minimum price from CV dealers) & an upgraded leather camera strap - a $25 item. So add on the $225 (upgrade from grey market, higher grade finish, strap, & adaptor) to the B&H price of $500 & the cost should be $725. The body is half of the $1600 kit, so the price you pay is $75 higher @ $800. Color alone can sometimes account for such a price difference that remains. The blue Bessa T Heliar 101, for example, sells for $100 more than the same camera in any of 3 other colors. There are many other examples of cameras by various companies that sell for different prices depending on whether they are black, chrome, silver,etc.
The other half of the kit is the Carl Zeiss designed Sonnar lens at $800 - again "USA" with a 2-year warranty & much more expensive than a CV lens of comparable focal length & speed, but comparable in price to a Leica 50 Elmarit, for example. I've done a lot of research on the lens & users tell me that it is superb. Is it worth $800? To fans of Zeiss lenses it may be since it allows them to use Zeiss optics with solid metal construction on a manual focus rangefinder camera. It is the lenses that are the key to the appeal of this package - to the extent that it has appeal.
It seems clear to me that the price of this camera is driven at least in part by the fact that it is a limited edition release. As such, its price cannot be brought down by the economies of scale & mass production that accompany a camera which will sell 100,000 units - or even 10,000 units. The limited release blue Bessa T Heliar 101, for example, sells for $1050 - this for a camera with no rangefinder, a slow f/3.5 lens, & a body that is not on par with an R2.
Ultimately the market will determine the price as it does for anything else. Remember that the list price for the Bessa R when it was released was $1210. Street price was quickly down to $650 & now it goes for about half that. Those who want the Rollei now & are willing to pay a premium for it will do so. Others who want a "silver R2" but not at the current cost will wait for the price to come down. Others won't care.
To me, the good news is that the combined efforts of Rollei & Cosina have opened up an established corporate channel through which to bring in the R2 in whatever form & to guarantee parts availability & other services. This will benefit all Voigtlander owners. In fact, now that Photo Village has become one of the USA distributors, they are using the same repair service that Rollei-USA contracted with. This has enabled Cosina to begin to offer a manufacturer's warranty with new purchases now that there is reliable service & parts availability. We will see if the new USA Voigtlander distributorships (Photo Village & Cameraquest) last since Cosina has had an uneven relationship with past USA distributors, which ultimately led to the demise of these partnerships. The future prospects of Rollei, of course, are not as tenuous.
The other piece of good news is that the lens line for M-mount cameras has now expanded to include 2 classic Zeiss designs with plans for a third to be announced at Photokina this fall. Regardless of the current prices, these will eventually work themselves onto the used market at lower prices & will be available to anyone who would like to try Zeiss optics of modern manufacture on a true rangefinder & see how they compare with Leica, Cosina, or Konica built rangefinder lenses.
On balance, I think there is more of an upside to the Rollei 35 RF than might appear at first glance.
Hi Huck -- Cameraquest's site is such that it's hard to pinpoint a page with a URL... If you go to the Price List at http://www.cameraquest.com/inventor.htm and then look at the panel to the left, under Voightlander Price List see the next-to-last item "SL SLR Lenses" and click there to take you to the page with the SL serices of premium SLR lenses I think you saw on the Japanese Cosina site.
I think as I ordered my 40 f/2 last summer B&H was just forgetting about this stuff after nominally offering it, if you could find it on their site! I say nominally, since even if you could find it, there was no way online to specify which SLR mount you wanted for your order. I got it in Pentax K mount through a telephone order, and by that time the SL lenses had been removed from the B&H site.
There's a pair of Voightlander Bessaflex threadmount SLR bodies too, and a "re-creation" of the 58mm f/1.4 Topcor, so not all modern Voigtlander gear is RF-oriented! :-)
Great post Huck. In the end we are all better off having yet another RF option in the market. As a Hasselblad owner I can't state strongly enough my confidence that the Zeiss lenses will prove to be at least the equal to the best of their competition at each of their focal lengths.
Huck Finn
05-05-2004, 05:31
Rover, thanks for the kind words. You noted in your comment last summer that Rollei only had to change the framelines to match the focal lengths of their lenses. I'll bet all they did was remove the 90mm framelines. Since the R2 framelines only give 87% coverage, I would think that the existing 35mm & 75 mm framelines work just fine for the 40mm & 80mm lenses - maybe even better. Ahhh . . . the ingenuity of old wine in new bottles. But I actually do like some of the things that Rollei & Cosina have done to give the R2 on a new look.
BTW, how are spring photo ops in Connecticut this year?
I think I noticed in one of your post a mention of Camera Wholesalers in Stamford and thought that you must be somewhere close.
Recently I have combined my photo trips and explorations with my son. Last Saturday we had a great day at Mystic Seaport. He really likes looking down on the focusing screens of my Hassy and Yashica Mat, so I have been shooting a lot of medium format, some exposures are nothing more than snap shots, but he really is having fun. I hope that some day he will appreciate that he is learning photography at 4 years old with a Hasselblad. I am actually comfortable in saying that he will realize this, because that Hassy will last a lot longer than I will.
Huck Finn
05-05-2004, 08:58
Although originally from New York, I live southeast of Hartford. I'm itchy to get out & do some shooting. At times like this I miss all ot the opportunities for great street photos in New York. Nothing like it in CT. When things get busy, Mystic can be a great spot. Maybe the UConn campus at this time of year. Any other ideas?
Then we are neighbors Huck.
Lets see, photo spots?
UConn will slow down very soon, only a week or so left in the semester, but try the barns and Dairy Bar during the summer.
Street shooting, The village of Mystic and Essex hopping with visiters, with a lot of nice shops. West Hartford Center, the Center of Putnam.
Then all of the tourism stops, Mystic Seaport and Aquarium, Gillette Castle, Sturbridge Village in MA.
State parks, Harkness Park in New London, Mansfield Hollow Dam, Goodspeed Opera House, Devil's Hopyard, Roger Williams Park and Zoo in Providence.
Nature, any place along the shore or CT River.
Late summer there are Fairs every weekend.
Night life, for the first time in many many years I was in New Haven last Friday night. It is hopping! Lots of clubs attracting the young and beautiful all around Yale University. A walk around New Haven and Yale during the day is nice.
I don't have time right now to go out to photograph at all these places, but I normally have a camera with me when I go there for other reasons. I stop a lot along the road while driving when I see something that looks intersting. How far southeast of Hartford? Have you been up around the apple orchards in Glastonbury off New London Turnpike? Lyman Orchards in Middlefield?
Huck Finn
05-06-2004, 09:27
Wow! And to think I was stumped. I'll have to get my head out of my a**. Thanks for all the great ideas. Actually we have family up from the city every fall to pick apples in the Glastonbury orchards. I got a whole set of spectaular pictures there last October. Billiant, sunny, autumn day. Thanks again.
Huck Finn
05-10-2004, 07:53
The price for the Rollei 35 RF with Rollei/Zeiss Sonnar lens has just dropped to $1499 at Adorama!
Yes, it's just a re-badged Voigtlander Bessa R2, but it's not a grey market import. It comes with 2-year manufacturer's warranty, deluxe camera strap, M-mount adapter, & a cool silver body, making it a deluxe, limited edition R2 worth a couple of hundred $$ more than the $500 R2 (body only) - all in all, a nice introduction to the world of Zeiss lenses & now at a more reasonable price than the $1900 that it sells for at B&H
This is Adorama's second price reduction in the past 6 weeks. It will be interesting to see if the press continues to come down. It will be a great buy if it gets to $1200, IMHO
Huck Finn
05-24-2004, 13:51
I came across a dealer in Japan who has dropped his price on the camera/lens kit by 40% from $1712 USD to $1020. Likewise, price on the 40mm & 80mm lenses have been cut by 45% & 33% respectively. This leads me to expect more cuts by American dealers in the near future.
Since Japan & Southeast Asia were the marketing targets for this camera, it is possible that they are more overstocked than American dealers with expectations for sales being much higher there. If so, price cuts could be more drastic there than here in the states.
It should be interesting to follow the progress of future developments.
Taipei-metro
05-24-2004, 15:46
If someone wants a Leica mount w/40mm(one 40mm on Canonet GIII is enough for me now) Sonnar Rollei RF,why not Leica CM($995)? both auto or manual focus. You want to change lens? get a used CLE or R2 body all around $400..
Zeiss,Leica 40mm,probably have the same character in performance.
How about Rollei AFM 35?
Just my 2 cents.
Huck Finn
05-24-2004, 17:10
No reason not to buy a Leica CM or Rollei AFM 35, Taipei-metro. Of course, each is a whole different beast than an all manual, mehanical camera & you cannot change lenses. A CLE? 25 years old. No quality control when buying used. Harder & harder to find parts.
Now the real question is: why not an R2? If you're are budget conscious, buy the R2 - although you'll pay closer to $500. And buy a Voigtlander lens to put on it - & you will be very happy with it. However, if you want to try Leica or Zeiss quality optics in a moderately wide lens & if you prefer to buy your equipment new, this is the best deal around. A 35mm Leica lens at f/2 costs at least $1700. Leica does not provide a lower cost f/2.8 alternative in this focal length. You can get f/2.8 in a 50mm lens for $745, but then you live with the narrower point of view. If 50mm is what you want, then you can do that for $1245 with an R2. But if you want something a little wider, the price for a Rollei is $1499 & dropping.
Furthermore, buying an R2 from B&H or Adorama means buying a grey market import with a one-year store warranty. The Rollei comes with a 2-year manufacturer's warranty & Rollei's backing for parts availability to service the warranty or future repairs. Grey market is a great way to save some money, but given the choice, I'd rather pay extra & buy the "USA" model.
Thanks for pointing out the alternatives. It's good for rangefinder fans to have some alternatives. For a long time theri were few if any.
Taipei-metro
05-26-2004, 15:24
Thanks Huck,
I'm looking at a full page ad in this Japanese magazine on the 35 RF,on the top is a faint picture of the Rollei 35S,the S stands for Sonnar of course, sugesting this camera decended from the 35S.
On this same magazine is a 22-page test report on the different Rollei 35.And when compare to Sumicron C40, this Sonnar is no Leica.
My 2 cents is,why pay over $1,400 for a silver R2? and one has plenty of chances to handle a totally manual camera other than this 35RF.
If a small viewfinder don't bother you,a good used Minilux is about a half of a thousand dollars,and at least a Leica Sumarit f2.4...
Huck, you are doing a good job watching this for us. In the short time that they have been offering the Voigtlander line, Cosina has been notorious for introducing an attractive product at a premium, but less than Leica, price, only to reduce that price in short time (the 35/1.2 lens comes to mind most recently). I know there is a "gotta have it now" RF crowd that pays this premium for the new best thing, but I wonder how strong the marketplace really is for RF equipment. We are quite a niche group when you think of it. On the CVUG Bob Shell speculated that Konica-Minolta may introduce a new RF camera in the fall. I would think that right now the attraction to them would be to fit into the gap between the Bessas and Leicas like the Rollei RF. They may be at an advantage too now in not having to immediately offer a full line up of lenses. They can capitalize on the quality and acceptance of CV glass and do their best to sell a body. With the formal discontiuation of the Bessas L, R and T, and naming of official US distributors, it seems that the time is right for Cosina to introduce a new body too. All interesting stuff.
Huck Finn
05-26-2004, 20:34
Originally posted by Taipei-metro
Thanks Huck,
I'm looking at a full page ad in this Japanese magazine on the 35 RF,on the top is a faint picture of the Rollei 35S,the S stands for Sonnar of course, sugesting this camera decended from the 35S.
On this same magazine is a 22-page test report on the different Rollei 35.And when compare to Sumicron C40, this Sonnar is no Leica.
My 2 cents is,why pay over $1,400 for a silver R2? and one has plenty of chances to handle a totally manual camera other than this 35RF.
If a small viewfinder don't bother you,a good used Minilux is about a half of a thousand dollars,and at least a Leica Sumarit f2.4...
Taipei-metro, there is absolutely no reason to spend $1400 for a silver R2. How one spends his money is entirely a personal matter. I find it interesting to watch the price come down. For a year, the price was $1900 - still is at B&H. Now it's under $1500 at Adorama & a little over $1000 at m-camera in Japan.
Yes, the 40mm Sonnar, which is the the standard lens for the Rollei 35 RF, is the same Zeiss design that was used on the Rollei 35S.
I'd love to see the test report. Is it a recent article or from the archives? Can you post a reference?
Thanks for your information. :)
Huck Finn
05-26-2004, 20:40
Originally posted by rover
Huck, you are doing a good job watching this for us. In the short time that they have been offering the Voigtlander line, Cosina has been notorious for introducing an attractive product at a premium, but less than Leica, price, only to reduce that price in short time (the 35/1.2 lens comes to mind most recently). I know there is a "gotta have it now" RF crowd that pays this premium for the new best thing, but I wonder how strong the marketplace really is for RF equipment. We are quite a niche group when you think of it. On the CVUG Bob Shell speculated that Konica-Minolta may introduce a new RF camera in the fall. I would think that right now the attraction to them would be to fit into the gap between the Bessas and Leicas like the Rollei RF. They may be at an advantage too now in not having to immediately offer a full line up of lenses. They can capitalize on the quality and acceptance of CV glass and do their best to sell a body. With the formal discontiuation of the Bessas L, R and T, and naming of official US distributors, it seems that the time is right for Cosina to introduce a new body too. All interesting stuff.
Rover, thanks for your observations. I think you may be onto something. In my research, I learned that the impetus for this camera emerged from conversations between Rollei's Japanese distributor & Cosina. So the initiative may be as much from Cosina as it is From Rollei in Germany. Marketing/pricing strategy too?:confused:
SolaresLarrave
05-27-2004, 08:07
I'm still not quite interested on investing on a Rollei. Nice finish and looks, and clever idea that of making it compatible with M-mount Leica glass. However, another way to get Zeiss glass in a rangefinder is through the Contax G system. In fact, the G1 bodies are selling for peanuts now... when they show up for sale.
Sorry, don't want to appear like a curmudgeon but this isn't really a new option in the rangefinder market. I'd give credit for that to the CV people instead.
Huck Finn
05-27-2004, 11:25
Agreed, Solares, that Rollei has not provided a new option in the rangefinder market. CV deserves all the credit for coming out with both a camera that is geared to the needs & budget of the recreational user instead of the professional & then backing it up with a full system. The Rollei 35 RF is, in fact, a CV body with different cosmetics & different framelines. So, again CV deserves credit here as well because this Rollei entry into the rangefinder niche is really a joint venture between Rollei & CV.
No need for you or anyone else here to invest in a Rollei. I happen to like it & think that it was written off early on because of its price & because it is a re-badged R2. In the process, some of its positive attributes were overlooked. Now that the price is coming down, I believe it is worth a second look.
In regard to the Contax, it is IMHO a high level point & shoot, using rangefinder principles. This allows it to do some special things with Zeiss optics. If you're looking for a P/S with exceptional optics, then this is the right camera. While you can focus manually, I didn't find it comfortable to do when I looked at it. If you're looking for a traditional rangefinder with manual operation, I don't see Contax as the way to go. Rollei, on the other hand, does bring Zeiss optics to a traditional M-mount camera.
I don't mind you being a curmudgeon. Different opinions make the world go 'round. Well, at least they make conversations like this go 'round. :)
Huck Finn
05-27-2004, 12:36
Originally posted by Taipei-metro
when compare to Sumicron C40, this Sonnar is no Leica.
Taipei-metro, I have a few more minutes now than I did last night, so allow me to respond to your comment.
The Sumicron C40 is a superb lens. The test results I saw from Modern photography back in the '70s (posted on another Forum some time ago) rated it as excellent at every aperture, both center & edge! These are spectacular results - very rare even for a Leica. So, I have no argument with your praise for it. I will only say that it is no longer in production & has not been to the best of my knowledge for over 20 years. So bargain hunters can search the used equipment market & hope to find a jewel. If they do, great! Even one that has fungus can be cleaned & restored to like new condition. Folks who prefer to buy new will have to look elsewhere.
I cannot compare test results on the Rollei 40mm Sonnar to the Modern Photography results because I haven't seen a report of tests under the same conditions. In order to compare apples & apples, I looked at the Popular Photography test report for the Leica 50mm Elmar (11/96) & compared it with the PP report for the Rollei/Zeiss 40mm Sonnar (2/04). This is the closest focal length in a Leica lens that I could find with a maximum aperture of f/2.8. Results for the 2 lenses were very close. SQF data showed that the Rollei was slightly better at f/2.8 & f/4, while the Leica was slightly better at f/5.6 through f/16. The fact that there were only slight differences between the 2 lenses is a significant plus for the Rollei because of the increased difficulties in lens design & construction with a lens wider than normal - when compared to one at 50mm. My read on the reports was that the 2 lenses were very comparable.
Amateur Photographer also tested the Rollei 40mm Sonnar (3/03). Liuke Popular Photography, they found it to be an outstanding lens. "The 40 mm Zeiss optic offers fantastic sharpness . . . (and is) ideal for general photography either on location or in the studio . . ."
But test reports only tell part of the story. What about real world users? You commented on the old Rollei 35S, which used the same lens design. I have seen numerous postings by owners of this camera, raving about the lens. Let me call your attention to two. Godfrey DiGiorgi is a professional photographer who posts frequently on photo.net. He said that he was able to take "stunningly beautiful photographs" with this lens. You can judge for yourself by viewing pictures he took with the Rollei 35S at www.bayarea.net/~ramarren/. Second, visit the website of John Lind, another frquent poster on photo.net. He has devoted an entire section of his website to the Rollei 35 series & has no end of praise for the Sonnar lens. You can find him at http://johnlind.tripod.com/.
What about the latest incarnation of this lens, built for the 35 RF? I spoke with several of its owners in my research. None of them had a bad word for the lens; all feel that it is superb. One with whom I spoke is also an owner of Leica equipment & he feels that the 40mm Sonnar is far superior to any of his Leica lenses. (He was equally high in his praise of the 80mm Planar, which he also owns.) Another owner, Mike Elek, has posted his review of the 35 RF on his website with a sample photograph. You can find it at http://host.fptoday.com/melek/pages/cameras.html. Finally, Rollei-USA will make available photos taken with this camera so you can judge for yourself.
You say: ". . . this Sonnar is no Leica." No, it is a Zeiss designed Rollei. Is it of Leica caliber? Ultimately, after the lab reports, these evaluations are subjective judgments. Folks will disagree. I can only say that after doing my research, I recently purchased this lens & I haven't been disappointed!
SolaresLarrave
05-27-2004, 12:54
Huck, you're a very patient man! :)
The Rollei looked like the holy grail to me... and then I realized why it looked strangely familiar; the CV gang strikes again!
Now... I do own a Contax and it is, as you say, a very high level P&S. Just a fancy shooting machine... However, it does bring with the precision of Zeiss-designed optics, which are wonderful even wide open. A rangefinder it is not, of course, but a close approximation, sure. And it's not built on a CV platform at least! :)
Curmudgeonly writing from his studio in the midwest...
Taipei-metro
05-27-2004, 13:49
Is there ANY possibility that this Sonnar was designed by Yashica-Contax and assembled in Germany?
Is there a proof that this is a German-Rollei design?
Is part of Rollei owned by Samsung?
Francisco, I think the Contax G bodies are made by Cosina, in fact I think it is the platform that the Bessas are built on. Same platform too with a different top plate as the Olympus OM10 and Nikon FM 10.
I don't understand your questions Taipei-metro. Surely the Ziess Rollei relationship is strongly documented. I read in fact that Rollei has a modern lens plant which produces Zeiss lenses in exactly the same manner as Zeiss, with the same machines, same glass, same coatings.....
edit
I just found this
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0047xt
SolaresLarrave
05-27-2004, 15:10
Another familiarity case! No wonder! It's the CV invasion! You're only safe if you have Canonets or Leicas!
JK :) Thanks for pointing it out, Rover.
Taipei-metro
05-27-2004, 15:41
Rover my man,you are wrong...
Contax G was and is design and made by Yashica-Contax,not Cosina.
Good relationship does not mean the 40mm Sonnar was made by Rollei,for the 6x6(120 to US) lenses,yes, but may not be the same story on 135(format,35mm to US) lenses.
When you read,ON THE LENS, S-Apogon 1:2.6 f=38mm HFT Rollei Germany,do you think this lens must be designed and Made in the Germany by Rollei?
Wrong!
Do you think Zeiss on Sony digitals was Zeiss Germany made?
I know they have great relationships too..
Marketing and truth, maybe a little bit different.
I believe the body was provided by Cosina to Contax who added all of the electronics, finder and the good stuff that makes it a G.
I know that you are correct that the Sony lenses are made by Yashica. My point is that regardless of its heritage, the 40mm Sonnar is reportedly a very high quality optic. The fact that it doesn't say Leica or Leitz on it does not change that. Look at it this way, what is the difference between the single coated and reportedly not fully compatible with the M line 40/2 C Summicron, or multi-coated, traditionally cammed 40/2 CLE Rokkor? Both very sharp lenses capable of excellent results.
Huck Finn
05-27-2004, 23:28
Originally posted by Taipei-metro
Is there ANY possibility that this Sonnar was designed by Yashica-Contax and assembled in Germany?
Is there a proof that this is a German-Rollei design?
Is part of Rollei owned by Samsung?
Taipei-metro, There is absolutely NO chance that this Sonnar was designed by Yashica-Contax. None. Zero. These questions are answered on both Zeiss & Rollei Worldwide on their websites. The latter can be found at www.rollei.de. See Services, then FAQ. Zeiss also specifically addresses this under its FAQ at www.Zeiss.de.
The lens barrel is made by Cosina. The glass is from Schott in Germany. Rollei finishes the glass in its plant in Germany. Rollei assembles the components in its plant, making sure that the glass is properly centered. Rollei has manufacured this lens design under license from Carl Zeiss on & off for 30 years. Zeiss maintains a close working relationship with Rollei, insuring that Zeiss designs built by Rollei are made to the same exacting standards that Zeiss maintains for the lenses it builds for Rollei & other customers.
Rollei was bought by a Danish group a couple of years ago. The era of Samsung ownership was only for a brief period in the 1990s.
The Zeiss lenses built for Contax in Japan are still Zeiss designs. Kyocera owns Contax, and they are very capable of building high quality optics. Carl Zeiss is a separate corporation, building optics for a wide variety of photographic & industrial purposes. They maintain a relationship with Kyocera, who builds their designs for Contax cameras.
Huck Finn
05-27-2004, 23:31
Originally posted by SolaresLarrave
The Rollei looked like the holy grail to me... and then I realized why it looked strangely familiar; the CV gang strikes again!
Now... I do own a Contax and it is, as you say, a very high level P&S. Just a fancy shooting machine... However, it does bring with the precision of Zeiss-designed optics, which are wonderful even wide open. A rangefinder it is not, of course, but a close approximation, sure. And it's not built on a CV platform at least! :)
Curmudgeonly writing from his studio in the midwest...
Solares, I like what CV has done for the world of rangefinders. At first I was going to buy a Konica Hexar RF, but I didn't want any automation - & then Konica discontinued it. They never really made the 35mm lens available in America - or did so on a very limited basis. I couldn't find one & that's the focal length I wanted. I didn't feel that they really made the commitment to support this product & it seems to have gotten lost in the Konica - Minolta merger.
Then I was going to buy a Leica - almost did a couple of times. But I'm a nervous guy & I have a hard time shelling out $2000 for a camera with a 50mm lens with a store warranty that counts its life expectancy in days, not years. Although it's a Leica, it's still a piece of used equipment with a history that is unknown to me. Not every Leica is perfect, some are lemons & get sold, then re-sold.
I realized that Leicas are high quality pieces of equipment with very tight tolerances, built for professional use. They can be finicky, needing periodic tuning & adjustment to maintain their high performance level. I don't need a professional camera.
I own 3 Nikon cameras. None are from the F line. I don't need what an F5 or an F4 or even an F3 can do. I'm very happy with my FM3a, etc. I have the option of mounting professional quality lenses on my consumer body or I can save money & buy a consumer grade lens if my usage needs don't dictate a more expensive lens. Nikon is a company that provides a very comprehensive line of equipment to meet a wide variey of needs.
Leica failed to do what Nikon has done. Since it abandoned the CL project back in the '70s, it has ignored the consumer end of the market except for its line of high quality point & shoots. Now Leica is being ignored by the professionals to whom it once catered. They have all gone digital & Leica has been slow to adjust to the changing market.
Into the vacuum of the consumer grade rangefinder niche stepped Cosina. Its Bessa cameras are far from Leica quality. Their shutters, for example, are not quiet. But their shutter speed does go up to 1/2000 & Leica has been unable to get a cloth shutter to do that. I can think of a number of situations for which I want 1/2000; I'm hard pressed to think of a situation for which I need the sound of a Leica shutter. After all, they're not silent.
Cosina is almost single handedly responsible for the rangefinder revolution. Unlike Konica, they have produced a full product line to support their cameras. And they have done so at a price/quality compromise that is reasonable for the amateur. While the Leica customer base is shrinking, the customer base for Cosina rangefinder products is expanding - still within a niche.
My only complaint with Cosina is that it hasn't developed the corporate infrastructure outside Japan to support its products in the area of parts & service. I don't live in Japan & I don't read or write Japanese. I don't mind buying lenses without service support, but a camera has a lot of moving parts. It can break & need repairs. Remember I'm a nervous kind of guy. So this is where I became interested in Rollei.
Rollei essentially went into partnership with Cosina on this project, with Rollei lending its corporate support & distribution network - as well as its name - to the sale of a version of the Bessa R2. This is very similar to what Leica did with Minolta to produce the CL 30 years ago. Back in the '70s, the traditionalists were not singing the praises of the CL. They were dismissing it as "made in Japan." Three decades later astute consumers see its merits & it has become a collectible. Leica optics in a Japanese-built, consumer grade body. Rollei/Zeiss optics in a Japanese-built, consumer grade body.
No, the Rollei 35 RF is not the Holy Grail. (I'm actually searching for the Holy Grail, but that's a whole different subject. :D ) The Rollei 35 RF has been wildly overpriced. More power to them if they can get that kind of money from the collectors in East Asia where the Rollei name carries a certain cachet. But unrealistic pricing does not make it a bad product. In fact, it's a very good product. The recent 20% price drop at Adorama puts it right on the edge of being worthy of consideration, so people like me will bite. If it ever gets to the $1000 range, for which it's now selling in Japan, it will be a bargain - as it already is in Japan.
Huck Finn
05-28-2004, 01:02
Originally posted by Taipei-metro
.Good relationship does not mean the 40mm Sonnar was made by Rollei,for the 6x6(120 to US) lenses,yes, but may not be the same story on 135(format,35mm to US) lenses.
The 40mm Sonnar was originally designed for use on 135 & was put into production in 1974 on the legendary Rollei 35 S. This design has now been bult into a removable lens barrel for the Rollei 35 RF. It is, in fact, made by Rollei in Germany. It says so on the lens. It says so on the website. Rollei said so at Photokina a year and a half ago when this question was asked. They said so when I called them in Germany & asked this question.
There is no subterfuge or misrepresentation about this product by Rollei. None. The body is built in Japan. It says so right on the body. They will tell you that if you call & ask them - either in Germany, or in USA, or in UK, etc. The lenses, on the other hand, are built in Germany. You also have the assurance of Carl Zeiss, a separate corporation, who is very strict about how their name & licenses are used.
The 80mm Planar lens, also for the Rollei 35 RF, was originally designed for the medium format Rollei TLR. This design has been adapted for use on 135. It is also a Zeiss design, built in Germany.
Huck Finn
05-28-2004, 01:27
Originally posted by Taipei-metro
Do you think Zeiss on Sony digitals was Zeiss Germany made?
I know they have great relationships too..
Marketing and truth, maybe a little bit different.
In the 21st century corporate relationships & production systems are more complex than they were in a simpler time.
From the Zeiss website (www.zeiss.de):
Where are ZEISS lenses for Sony cameras produced?
Sony produces various digital cameras in extremely high numbers in Sony factories in Japan. The lenses for these cameras have to come from lens factories near the Sony camera factories to assure reliable deliveries and minimize the huge economic risk of an interrupted supply.
ZEISS lenses for Sony digital cameras are developed by lens designers at the Carl Zeiss plant in Oberkochen, Germany. This includes designing all required quality assurance measures (test methods, test criteria, test devices, test procedures, lens performance target values, etc.) The lenses are then made in a lens production facility jointly chosen by Sony and Carl Zeiss. Quality assurance specialists from the Carl Zeiss plant in Oberkochen implement the quality assurance system in the chosen facility. ZEISS lens test systems are installed in that factory, which Carl Zeiss audits on a regular basis.
All these measures ensure that ZEISS lenses in Sony digital cameras meet the expectations demanding users associate with ZEISS lenses. Numerous positive test reports in photo and video magazines validate this point.
We gotta go out and shoot some time Huck.
By the way, it is a little known fact that the Holy Grail is actually currently held in a monastery in the Bronx. It has been since 1920, when a young pitcher named Babe Ruth enjoyed a sip of wine from it and had a single wish granted. It also alleged that that goat from Chicago who was thrown out of Wrigley Field was served as a quite meal at this monastery. The goat's spirit also made a wish. Powerful stuff.
Too much talk about good lenses, I am going back to baseball season.
SolaresLarrave
05-28-2004, 20:35
rover, I'm going to steal your signature.
Wait a second! Now that I remember, you own a digital camera. Sorry, but you can't qualify as a Luddite.
Huck, thanks for your extensive and instructive post. It was a pleasure to read it! I mean it; hardly does one come across something decently written in the web! :)
Now, let's get out and shoot some flowers! :p They're in bloom around here!
True, I do own a digital camera, Minolta F100. It was a present for my wife who wanted something small to use. Just like the EOS IX she wanted but never used, it hangs with the rest of my cameras on the coat rack. But that thing hasn't seen the light of day in at least 6 months. I have a couple things I want to sell on ebay, so it will get some use soon. It actually has help convince me that I want to stay with film. Now, if I had the means to get the Canon 1d mark II, my mind may change.
My advancement in the digital age actully will take another step in July. I am going to take a Photoshop Elements class at the local community college. That will help me get a handle on scanning film and adjusting images.
Huck Finn
06-01-2004, 04:15
Hi, guys! Just returned from the holiday, spending it at a family reunion.
Rover, it sounds like a Yankees-Sox game is in order. We could do some real street shooting in the Bronx! I also bought a digital camera for my wife a couple of Christmases ago.
Solares, thanks for the kind words. I guess I'm willing to put some effort into sharing what I learned from my own research because there is so much bad information passed around on the web. Inuendo helped to kill the Konica Hexar RF - a real shame. It seems that marketing departments have not yet figured out how to adjust to the stream of information that runs over the internet. Other than adding websites to their repertoire, they simply proceed in the old ways as though these cyber-conversations don't take place. They need to be more frank & open with their consumers & give real answers to real questions. On the other hand, the constant hype which rises to the mystical level helps keep Leica going despite ownership's (no longer Leitz) best efforts to kill their product. I remember once reading a terrific quote from Dante Stella about how Leica, which once made its reputation with stellar cameras like the M3 & truly groundbreaking innovations like the first 50 Summicron, now makes money "by casting metaphysical doubt into the heads of the weak minded." Because of the low profile of the rangefinder market, it seems even more important to make good information available to potential buyers.
Huck, I think you're right about the companies' inability to effectively deal with the flood of misinformation spread on the internet. Or even unwanted disclosure of fact! But this is really nothing new (except for the scale of it, I suppose), as before it was the spread of rumor and misinformation across the counter at the camera shop. :-)
I'm put in mind of the publicity damage suffered by Bronica with the RF645 when they recalled bodies and 135mm lenses.
For the combination of body and 135mm in some instances the manufacturing tolerances stacked in such a way as to cause poor focus at wide apertures and close distances.
I think this black eye, along with the coincident decline of the medium format market, has doomed this dynamite system to a very minor market position. I'd love to see a 30mm lens offered for it, but that seems unlilkely now.
But I also think Bronica erred in not giving it a wider-based RF, opening up possibilties of faster and longer lenses. Likewise, it seems Konica erred in not making darn sure their lens and body mounts adhered closely to the Leica specs!
Originally posted by Doug
.. Likewise, it seems Konica erred in not making darn sure their lens and body mounts adhered closely to the Leica specs!
I think the Hexar RF failed for quite another reason, at least where I live. I believe it's mayor fault was the price point at which it was marketed.
It's too expensive to really take a bite out of the camera market as a whole. Most first time buyers would go for a nifty AF-SLR ($350) for less than one fifth of the price of a Hexar RF kit ($1750 at the time).
This relegates it to a niche market, a niche market that is already mined by the L-company. And many people that are willing to cough up the price of the Hexar-RF will be able to go all the way and buy a veritable M6 for no other reason than that they can.
I think Voigtlander/Cosina got this right, for less than twice the cost of an AF-SLR you can have a rangefinder with lens.
I chose the Hexar RF for no other reason than that I had prior exposure to Konica lenses...
You are right there Peter, it is simple supply and demand. At the Hexar RF's price point they were competing for the small loyal army of Leica customers while there was a larger group of us wanna-bees waiting for the answer supplied by the Bessas. And we don't want to really look at those AF SLRs because you can't beat them when it comes to bang-for-the-buck. Luckily, photography is so simple you can do it by pushing a hole in a shoe box and some math, so we can survive without all of that wonderfully amazing electronic stuff in the Elan 7ns of the world if we want to.
Huck Finn
06-02-2004, 05:15
Originally posted by pvdhaar
I think the Hexar RF failed for quite another reason, at least where I live. I believe it's mayor fault was the price point at which it was marketed.
This relegates it to a niche market, a niche market that is already mined by the L-company. And many people that are willing to cough up the price of the Hexar-RF will be able to go all the way and buy a veritable M6 for no other reason than that they can.
I think Voigtlander/Cosina got this right, for less than twice the cost of an AF-SLR you can have a rangefinder with lens.
I chose the Hexar RF for no other reason than that I had prior exposure to Konica lenses...
A niche within a niche . . .
Good point, Peter, but here's the thing. The Hexar RF offered features that the M6 did not - as you know being an owner of one. Enough Leica owners wanted these features for Leica to eventually come out with the M7 - staying behind the curve as usual. The issue of incompatibility with Leica lenses killed the Hexar RF with this group.
I had no trouble with Leica lens compatibility; I might be lucky in that regard.
I didn't like my Hexar because I couldn't quite tell when stuff was in focus. Just because it lined up in the rangefinder didn't mean that when I shifted my eye just a bit in the low-magnification finder that the images would stay lined up- and that was a problem for me. If I held the camera just so then I was certain of focus. If I tried a vertical composition, I could never be sure.
I said "to heck with it," sold it to someone with a better vision than I (and who has already taken wonderful pictures with it) and continue to use a camera with a BIG rangefinder (the Mamiya Universal) and an M3, where the focusing is far more certain (and DOF is indicated in the RF!)
Huck Finn
06-02-2004, 07:34
Addendum to my post above . . .
After thinking about this Hexar RF conversation a little further this morning, I remembered an article by David Stella that I read some time ago. He actually agrees with both sides. (Like most things in life, it's usually not an either-or question - but it's that both sides have a valid point. A friend of mine likes to say: "I feel strongly both ways." ;) )
Interesting to read . . . His points about the Hexar RF's demise are actually contained in a nice review of the Hexanon 50/2 lens, standard on that camera. He also points out that the incompatibility issue was refuted & was certainly contested by numerous users - like jdos.
www.davidde.com/articles/konica50.html
Huck Finn
06-02-2004, 07:36
Jdos2, can you tell us non-Leica users more about how DOF is indicated in the RF. Sounds neat! :)
Huck, it's the same with the RF spot on the Leica M2... There's a small projection upwards in the middle of the top border of the RF spot, and a narrower one along the bottom border. The width corresponds to an offset of the two parts of the double image when out of focus. THIS amount out of focus for that item in the scene... And THIS amount, equal to the width of the projection is the DOF limit for a certain lens at a certain f/stop. Since there are two projections of different widths, that gives two reference amounts for two different f/stops on a given lens.
I admit not using this quick reference, but it's there... :-)
Huck Finn
06-03-2004, 04:20
Originally posted by Huck Finn
Jdos2, can you tell us non-Leica users more about how DOF is indicated in the RF. Sounds neat! :)
Thanks, Doug. Sounds like a neat feature. I wish they had kept this.:(
Huck Finn
06-03-2004, 04:53
Originally posted by Taipei-metro
So Sonnar 40 2.8 is a full blood German breed which deserves premium price tag.
Hi, Taipei:) -
The 40/2.8 is a premium German lens. Does it deserve the price tag? I don't know that any of these high end products deserve the price that is charged. Pricing is determined by anticipated sales & desired profit. Costs of production are spread over the expected number of units to be sold & then balanced against the manufacturer's best guess of what potential customers will be willing to pay. From anything I've read, sales have been slow, so Rollei guessed wrong about what customers would be willing to pay. (Or Rollei anticipated small volume sales & figured that the only way they could make money was to start out at a high price.) So either way the market place has said that this product does not deserve its premium price tag. From the point of quality, it is as good as some other products (Leica) which do command this premium price tag. Go figure. Ultimately an individual buyer has to decide what it is worth to him. As prices come down, I think that it becomes more attractive. Since it was dismissed as overpriced when it was released, it has become overlooked within the rangefinder community. At the current USA price of $1499 for the kit, it is worth considering - especially for fans of Zeiss lenses. If it comes doen to the $1000 - $1200 price range, currently available in Japan, it will be a jewel. I was interested in Joe's (backalley photo) post this morning about the lousy strap & the instruction manual that was a mess that accompanied his new Voigtlander Bessa R. In contrast, everything I received with my Rollei was first class - from the deluxe camera strap to the glossy manual printed on durable, heavy stock to the 2-year manufacturer's warranty. It's simply another alternative.
Your reunion of high school mates sounds like a lot of fun! Certainly a good example of how digital has taken over the camera market. I read a year ago that Kodak is no longer doing R&D on film. They will continue to produce the film products they have already developed, but all future research will be on digital products. Sign of the times. So, you're certainly right about digital contributing to the demise of the Konica Hexar RF.
Cheers,
Huck:)
Huck Finn
06-04-2004, 13:36
Originally posted by Taipei-metro
Hexar RF is one of the most beautiful camera.
I don't think you are going to mail order your Rollei from Fujiya Camera of Tokyo,$1 only worth 113 Yen today.
Rollei could've put out a better lens than that 40 2.8 old design.For $1,400(B&H),the photographers deserve better.
What's so difficult about new lens?Yeah...the frame lines..
The 35mmf2.8 on the Nikon 35ti is,a re-designed,all new, all ED glass 6-element lens.
Taipei, I agree with you that the Hexar RF is a beautiful camera. I fell in love with it first time I saw it.
In regard to the Nikon 35 ti, I don't care how new the lens design is, what matters is the pictures. See the websites I listed above & tell me what you think of the pictures. Regardless of how old it is, that 40 mm Sonnar takes beautiful pictures.
Kyocera makes Contax cameras with Zeiss lenses. They used the same Sonnar design on the Contax T2 as Rollei used on the 35 RF except that they modified it slightly to 38mm rather than the original 40mm. They were dissatisfied with the results, so they refined it for the T3, the next version of this camera. It's safe to say that the Rollei 40 mm Sonnar is better than the original effort on the Contax T2. Nonetheless, when "foto magazin" of Germany did a side-by-side comparsion of the optics on the T2 and the Nikon 35 Ti, they rated the T2 better. Here are the results of that test:
Contax T2 (Sonnar 38/2.8):
Resolution (smaller is better) - .015 center, .016 edge
Contrast (higher is better) - 78% center, 50%edge
Optical Performance - 9.4
Rating ****
Nikon 35 Ti:
Resolution (smaller is better) - .015 center, .018 edge
Contrast (higher is better) - 72% center, 45% edge
Optical Performance - 9.2
Rating ***
Even with an inferior version of this lens design, the Contax T2 showed superior edge-to-edge sharpness as is characteristic of Sonnars.
Cheers :)
Huck Finn
06-05-2004, 08:59
Hi, Taipei -
I agree with everything you said. First, the R6 was a piece of junk at any price. Second, 38mm vs 35mm is a big difference; the wider you go, the harder it is to get excellent results. Third, German lenses are overpriced & I too hate to spend money on overpriced products.
I can't rationalize splurging on this camera/lens combination. It is an indulgence for me & not as bad as had I gone Leica. I'm usually pretty frugal. For example, a car for me is basic transportation, so I buy a car that gets good gas mileage & doesn't cost a lot. Yet, I see people spend $10,000 more on a car than they need. I decided I could spend a few hundred dollars extra on my hobby. When I looked at it that way, it didn't seem so bad. Besides, I had read so much about German lenses, I just had to find out for myself. In that context, the cost seemed fairly reasonable. It will probably be the last German lens I buy - . . . unless I can get a good buy on a 50 Sumicron. Damn! There I go again; I've been bitten by that bug!
You make great points. I think you are becoming my conscience.
Rich Silfver
06-05-2004, 10:23
I still think Zeiss is damn good - regardless if it's 1950 or 2004.
Huck Finn
06-05-2004, 15:17
I'm sure those 50mm lenses tested by Popular Photography were all razor sharp. Its the lens characteristics that interest me. What I've noticed with my Zeiss (Rollei) lens is its rendition of color. Nice warm tones . . . and flare is just a non-issue.
Where Leica lenses - especially the 50mm Summicron-M - seem to excel is at full aperture. Although the Contax Zeiss G 45/2 has the highest photdo MTF rating, The Leica 50 Summicron-M is substantially better shot wide open. This is great for rangefinder enthusiasts who love to shoot available light. Interestingly the photodo runnerup at f/2 was not Zeiss but Konica Hexanon 50/2.
BTW, in the Popular Photography shootout all were SLR lenses.
Huck Finn
06-07-2004, 11:16
Today B&H dropped the price on the Rollei 35 RF kit (body + 40mm lens) to $1199.
With the kit now discounted to $1,199 USD it is almost to the point where they are giving the camera away for free with the lens. The stand alone cost of the lens, silver version, as I checked it this morning was $1,000. If bought in the kit, that means the body is $199. Wow!! It would be nice to see the cost of the lens come down some. I have not seen any of the lenses offered second hand yet.
Huck Finn
06-07-2004, 13:24
Rover, on the B&H website, the body alone is still listed at $1250! My best guess is that the lens was priced where it was to make it unattractive to buy the lens alone & mount it on a Voigtlander body. Now that the price has dropped, that is no longer relevant.
I believe that B&H is clearing inventory & probably making little or no profit on this. On their website, the body & lens, each listed separately, are a "special order" item. So I expect that they have no inventory to clear on these as separate items - just the kits. The price of the lens by itself would therefore be controlled by Rollei. Same for the body.
IMO, this is the neighborhood where this camera should have been priced all along. Priced under $1200, this is a very nice package for a Rollei camera with a Zeiss lens.
I agree. Actually, it is a nice package price for a CV camera with a Zeiss lens too. I mentioned the rumors about Konica-Minolta re-entering the RF market. There is a pricing point here, a little above CV and below Leica, where a very high quality camera/lens can be offered and be successful. I think there are people who just won't buy CV for what ever reason, but can never step up to Leica. Kinda like the Canon EOS 3 or Nikon F100, just a good solid camera that is all what you need, but not necessarily all that you can have.
Huck Finn
06-23-2004, 08:07
B&H has dropped prices on the 2 Rollei RF lenses. 40mm f/2.8 Sonnar is now $650, 80mm f/2.8 Planar is now $1400. Both are now listed as "In Stock" rather than "Special Order." It would appear that Rollei International has dropped its wholesale price, moving these out of the "clearance sale" category at B&H.
It has been interesting to review this thread again :) Mainly now that Robert White has the 35 RF + T winder + 40/2.8 + hood for a special price of 489 pounds, and 450 without lens.
That's almost throwing in the lens for free !? :eek:
I asked them about the lens alone, but they ran out. Probably nothing more than dangerous curiosity, but I'd love to see the silver 40/2.8 on the Canon P... :rolleyes:
From B&H website 2/4/05 - Rollei body - $599
Kit - $1099
40 lens black - $679
40 lens silver - $549
...I'd love to see the silver 40/2.8 on the Canon P...
but for those prices for the lens alone, I'll do with the Voigtlδnder 35/2.5 (which is in fact an excellent lens).
Huck, how do you like your 40 Sonnar ?
Huck Finn
02-07-2005, 06:31
I'm very happy with the 40/2.8 Sonnar, Taffer . . . & I've yet to see anyone else post a bad word about it either.
Now that Cosina has come out with the 40/1.4 & rekindled intrest in this focal length, the real advantage of the Rollei body is that its 40 mm frame lines are so much more viewable than those on the R3A. Despite the fact that Cosina reduced the coverage of the 40 mm frame lines to 85%, they are still barely discernible for most people & just about impossible for eyeglass wearers. This eliminates one of the features of rangefinder photography vs SLR - the ability to see outside the picture area.
Huck
Well, you're right, most opinions I read seem to agree that the 40 lines on the R3a are almost useless with glasses, and not that visible without them, that in some way confirmed by the amount of barely used R3as I've seen so far maybe the interest in the 35RF will wake up again. For me the Sonnar advantadge is clearly the screw mount, it opens a vast world of options and again as you say, common agreement is that it's an excellent lens.
That said, I'd be tempted, but with prices around $500, no way... :(
PS: Jorge thanks for the ol' style smilies !!!!!!
Huck Finn
02-07-2005, 06:56
Taffer, I understand your aversion to the price. Hopefully it will start showing up on ebay or other sites as a user for sale. The fact that it hasn't been showing up kinda shows that people like it. I've been surprised to see R3A's & 40 Noktons showing up for sale already. I don't know what this says - if anything??
You're right about the advantage of the screw mount - & not just because it can be mounted on LTM-mount cameras. The comment from so many people about the other 40's is: "Nice lens, but my camera doesn't have 40mm frame lines & the lens brings up 50mm frame lines. Can it be modified in some way to bring up 35mm frame lines?" The Rollei 40 will bring up whatever frame lines you choose, based on the adapter that you fit to it.
Even thought the price is higher than the Voigtlander line, it doesn't look so bad these days in the context of the prices of the new Zeiss line of M-mount lenses. It is essentially the cheapest Zeiss lens for M-mount on the market. Big difference from where it was a year ago.
In my view, it now holds the same position in the Zeiss line that the 50/2.8 Elmar holds in the Leica line-up. Both are cheaper than anything else from these companies. Both are the most compact lenses in their respective lens lines. Both are not quite as fast as other primes in their respective focal lengths. Both use old lens designs - the Rollei a Sonnar & the Leica a Tessar - that are sharp but not overly so & give a certain look that people just seem to like.
Huck
Yes the option of change framelines by using a different adapter is also a very nice plus, and again, the fact that they are seldom seen for sale used may mean something...
QuillianSW
06-28-2005, 12:27
Note to self - the Rollei "kit" from B&H with f/2.8 lens is now down to $1099. Time for me to buy?
Do you want that f/2.8 lens that badly? :)
Huck Finn
06-28-2005, 20:23
Doug, I feel much the same about this 40/2.8 Rollei/Zeiss Sonnar as Peter feels about his 50/2.8 Leica Elmar. Both are classic designs & both are very sharp, superb lenses with pleasing bokeh. Very well built and compact, too. It is not a low light lens in the sense that an f/1.4 lens is, but at f/2.8, there is no daylight situation that it can't handle. This lens is sought after for its signature & its price in relation to other lenses in its lens line, i.e. Zeiss designs (& the Elmar in comparison to the cost of other Leica designs). If your comparison is with the cost of Cosina lenses, you're talking apples & oranges - especially regarding the quality control that Zeiss requires of its licensees.
Huck
No criticism intented or implied, Huck! That just what would be in my mind if I asked myself the question QuillianSW voiced. The answer might well be "yes!", as I've learned to appreciate a lens's character. Peace... :)
QuillianSW
06-29-2005, 04:01
Not that I want that particular lens that badly - too ignorant to know better; my experience with SLR photography is that I rarely ever stopped below that point (f/2.8) anyway, despite having a few f/1.4 or thereabouts lenses. That package, however, appealed to me as I don't have any RF equipment and am starting from zero. Nothing against used equipment, but...anyway, that's why this looked like a good value to me. I also have a Rollei AFM 35 as my P&S, and have been impresseed with the build quality (it's made in Thailand or someplace as well).
Huck Finn
06-29-2005, 09:40
No criticism intented or implied, Huck! That just what would be in my mind if I asked myself the question QuillianSW voiced. The answer might well be "yes!", as I've learned to appreciate a lens's character. Peace... :)
Actually, Doug, my reply was intended more for Quillian's benefit, so that he might be aware of lens characteristics that are prized other than speed. Didn't mean to snap at you. :)
Cheers,
Huck
Not that I want that particular lens that badly - too ignorant to know better; my experience with SLR photography is that I rarely ever stopped below that point (f/2.8) anyway, despite having a few f/1.4 or thereabouts lenses.This brings up an interesting point to be made about lens speed in the RF world... Here lenses are expected to perform wide open. With an SLR a user may choose to buy the f/1.4 lens never intending to actually shoot wide open, but that wide aperture is still valuable by contributing to accurate focusing and brighter viewing. Of course, for an RF camera, lens speed has no effect on focusing accuracy or viewfinder brightness, so if there's no operational need for an aperture faster than f/2.8, there's little reason to get a faster lens!
Huck Finn
06-29-2005, 21:58
Not that I want that particular lens that badly - too ignorant to know better; my experience with SLR photography is that I rarely ever stopped below that point (f/2.8) anyway, despite having a few f/1.4 or thereabouts lenses. That package, however, appealed to me as I don't have any RF equipment and am starting from zero. Nothing against used equipment, but...anyway, that's why this looked like a good value to me. I also have a Rollei AFM 35 as my P&S, and have been impresseed with the build quality (it's made in Thailand or someplace as well).
Quilian, many rangefinder photographers shoot with available light & don't use flash. This is based on the belief that lack of mirror slap allows the camera to be hand held at slower shutter speeds & the fact that rangefinder lenses seem to maintain their quality at maximum aperture unlike SLR lenses which seem to show a more significant drop in performance wide open. As a result fast & ultra-fast lenses seem to be more popular among RF users. Many shooters also like to use such lenses to reduce depth of field when photographing people, a favorite RF past time.
Huck
QuillianSW
06-30-2005, 04:26
Quilian, many rangefinder photographers shoot with available light & don't use flash. This is based on the belief that lack of mirror slap allows the camera to be hand held at slower shutter speeds & the fact that rangefinder lenses seem to maintain their quality at maximum aperture unlike SLR lenses which seem to show a more significant drop in performance wide open.
Huck
Thanks Huck - couldn't make my fingers type those words - on an SLR lens (for others reading) "max app" is often unuseable, meaning to say that if the lens opens to f/1.4, you probably can't get good resolution that wide open, but you will get a nice f/2.0, etc. Now 'news to me' is that with an RF, I can really get good shots - no distortion, etc., at a lens' maximum app?
Alex Shishin
06-30-2005, 18:56
I've seen and held this Rollei and am not particularly impressed. It is an essentially an R2. The silver is painted on. The lenses are overpriced. The French photo journal Chausser d' Images does not give either the 40 or 80 terribly high marks. The grip material seems considerrably better than than on the R2 or the current R2A-R3A. The crass Rollei logo absolutely is a good aesthetic reason not to get this camera.
The much cheaper R3A is a better deal.
Voigtlander is available in the US. Cameraquest and Photo Village (NYC) are two sources with about equal prices.
Huck Finn
07-01-2005, 02:17
The much cheaper R3A is a better deal.
Voigtlander is available in the US. Cameraquest and Photo Village (NYC) are two sources with about equal prices.
Alex, your comment about price is not correct. The Rollei 35 RF is cheaper than the the R2/3A. Current price at B&H is $499, while the R2/3A is $549.
Yes, it is essentially an R2. What's wrong with that? Plenty of R2 owners are pleased with their cameras. The close focus distance of 0.7 meters is an upgrade over the R2 (0.9 minimum focus distance). As compared with the R3A on which the 40 mm frame lines can't be seen by most people, the 40 mm frame lines are viewable even with glasses. The choice of 40/80 frame lines offers a nice 2-lens travel kit. 80 mm frame lines, in particular, offers the best combination of focal length & lens speed for this base line. It stretches the 75 to a more useful length, but doesn't restrict your longer lens to f/3.5, as is the case with the CV 90. The frame lines are uncluttered since none of them do double duty - unlike the R2. And the grip material is an improvement from the R2, as you mentioned. All of these are nice touches from Rollei in adapting the camera.
I have no idea what the aesthetic appeal to your sensibilities of silver or the Rollei logo has to do with the capabilities of this camera for taking pictures. The silver color means that there is an R2 on which you can mount silver/chrome lenses if that is your preference whereas the R2 comes only in black. I have no idea how Cosina achieved the silver color. If they painted it on, what's the problem? Leica uses black paint on their $3000 cameras.
If Chausseur d'Image didn't like the lenses, that's their problem. Amateur Photographer did like them. But rather than refer to lens tests, you can argue with 30 years of photographers who have been using the 40 Sonnar on the Rollei 35 or the medium format photographers who have been using the 80 Planar. They regard these as superb lenses. Nor have I found a single post from an owner of the current versions of these lenses who would agree with the Chasseur d'Image assessment of the lenses. There have been numerous posts on Photo.net in particular about the 40 Sonnar & they have been uniformly positive.
By what standard are the lenses overpriced - other than that all RF lenses seem pricey due to their limited sales volume in a small niche market? They are not at CV prices, but then they are subject to the same stringent quality control standards that Zeiss requires of all its licensees & which CV lenses are not - the only criticism which I have of Cosina. The 40/2.8 is far cheaper than anything in the new Zeiss lens line & the 80/2.8 is half the price of the new Zeiss 80/2 & cheaper than the Leica 90/2.8.
Since you obviously have not used either the camera or the lenses, I don't understand how you have achieved your negative assessment.
Cheers,
Huck
QuillianSW
07-01-2005, 09:13
I give up. Someone just tell me what to do. Ideally I'd get the Zeiss Ikon but (1) it's not available (2) Lenses will be stupidly expensive, so (3) I'll wait. So I'm trying to decide between the R2A and the Rollei 35 RF. The R2A has more framelines in common with the Zeiss, and AE, but the Rollei has a longer warranty and is bundled with that nice Sonnar lens. I'll probably use the camera primarily for available light "environmental" portraiture, which means eventually I'll want something longer than 50mm - the Planar 80mm (Rollei) or whatever with the Bessa. (I like to take photos of people). So - how's the AE on the R2A? And what are the lens choices in 75mm for the R2A? If I eventually upgrade to the Ikon - I can probably use the Planar 80 easier with it than a 75mm CV, dontchathink? PS, the camera's going to a hot dusty place.
Huck Finn
07-03-2005, 21:15
Stone, I like the Rollei 35 RF very much & the optics are excellent. You can't go wrong with this purchase & at current prices, it is an excellent buy IMHO. However, it was never designed to be a comprehensive system. Rollei only proposed 3 lenses for it & ultimately only produced 2 of them. I think of it as a modern day Leica CL, i.e. a light weight, 2-lens travel kit (40/80) with the option to mount a faster 50 for those who want to do low light shooting. I think that it is perfect for your current needs of photographing your travels in Iraq. In fact, I would substitute the Voigtlander 75/2.5 for the Rollei 80/2.8 because it is cheaper, more compact, & lighter weight and is therefore better suited to the concept of a compact, light weight travel kit. when Popular Photography tested the CV 75/2.5, they found that it is actually about 77 mm long, so the difference between it & the Rollei 80/2.8 is negligible & it will work quite well with the camera's 80 mm frame lines. It is an excellent lens.
If you were to buy the Rollei 35 RF, I would recommend buying it for what it is but not as an introduction to a comprehensive system. Like you, I've been bitten by the ZI bug. The Zeiss Ikon IS a comprehensive system in that the frame lines support lens options from 28 to 85 & Zeiss supports it with a full range of lenses. Its long base length offers greater focusing precision expecially on longer & faster lenses & so is less limited than the Bessa series or the Rollei version. If that is your ultimate goal, then the Bessa R2A would be a better option for getting started because the 35/50/75/90 frame lines offer a broader range of lens selections & you will be able to use these same lenses on the ZI. For your immediate purposes, you'd have more difficult choices to keep your kit small & compact, but a 35/2.5 & the 75/2.5 should prove to be a good combination - compact & light weight. If you think that you'll be in situations where you'll need a longer reach, then the CV 90/3.5 would be a good choice. Although the ZI is not available yet, most of its lenses are, so you could start out with the ZM 35/2, which is purported to be a superb lens although it is not as compact as the CV 25/2.5 or the Rollei 40/2.8.
Finally, an important differemce between the 2 cameras for your purposes in a harsh environment is that the R2A is battery dependent & the 35 RF is not. I don't think that this should be a problem & that you would just have to bring a supply of batteries with you. but you know the environment better than I do & if this is at all an issue, the Rollei would be the better choice.
Good luck with your decision.
Huck
I think you'll find the 35/40mm lenses great for environmental portraits, where you can move into the person's space and still show contextual surroundings. Indeed I often go wider with 28mm for that. The 75 Heliar is a very nice lens, a good companion to the 40, and great for when you cannot get right into your subject's face. :)
I live in an area that is pretty hot, windy, and dusty in season; in fact I'm adjacent to a huge Army training area dedicated to simulating the operating environment of Central Asia and SW Asia. My cameras are surviving it well; just a good idea to find a bit of shelter when changing film or lenses. Battery dependency is a modern fact of life; not so hard to carry a few spares.
Listen to Huck; he's one of the most rational guys in RFF. :D
Just discovered that the price of the Rollei 35RF has come down to $499.99 at Adorama! I want it so badly! I must complete the circle of my Bessa R2 collection! (Olive, Black and Silver) :p
jeffrey kane
08-18-2007, 12:39
I'm pretty sure I just bought the last one at Adorama ... I think B+H has one but upon inspection I felt that the rangefinder was off a bit.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.