[rollei_list] Re: Rollei 35S, SE

  • From: "Richard Sintchak" <rich815@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:30:39 -0700

Ok, Roland.  Give us a list.  Which 8 do you have?  :-)

On 9/26/07, Roland Smith <roland.dnai@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> I discovered the Rollei 35 about twenty years ago and have always had good
> results with the 2.8 Sonnar and the 3.5 Tessar even at wide apertures.
> Guessing the distance and setting the camera has not been a problem for me.
> I own eight of them and, unless I want a Leica with lens interchangeability,
> use them most of the time.
>
> Roland Smith
> Dublin, California
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jerry Friedman
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:50 AM
> To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Rollei 35S, SE
>
> The problem you will find using a separate range finder is
> that it will not be in agreement with the settings on your
> camera. With greater distance, past 30 feet, this is less
> of a problem because DOF can help compensate and the
> differences going out from 20 to 30 feet to infinity dimish
> with distance. At close distances, a rangefinder is crucial
> but, you will notice, the distances between each
> additiional foot on the 35S is significant at closest
> distances. Hence, differences between a separate
> rangefinder and the Rollei focus scale will be emphasized.
>
> If you want a good separate rangefinder, seek out a
> Watameter. I have used these and they are not only well
> made but can be adjusted to the focus of your camera if you
> use a ground glass on the camera to set each distance.
>
> The biggest problem is that a separate rangefinder is very
> awkward to use and to carry about. Not impossible,  just
> not pleasant, esp. if your camera already has a built in
> meter.
>
> I have never felt that differences in optical resolution
> are that important, compared to proper focus. This is less
> true at inifinity, of course. I would rather have an
> accurate means of focusing than a lens of finer quality
> that has so much space between each foot setting at close
> focus on the camera lens as is true with the Rollei
> cameras.
>
> There is one additipnal problem with a Rollei 35 camera,
> though it may seem incidental. Have you noticed how many
> are sold on ebay with dented corners? This is the result of
> the satisfying but awkward weight and shape of the camera.
> simpl,y stated, the corner's of the camera manage to catch
> the flat sides of larger objects. The dent itself is less
> important than what the original  bump means to the
> accuracy of the meter and to the oh so precise shutter to
> body linkage that the camera uses to remain compact. Please
> keep in mind what must be done before the camera can be
> closed down and put away.There are so many separate steps
> and stages between the various body, lens tube, shutter and
> film advance parts that it is quite easy to throw off the
> optical alignment with a good corner bump or, in other
> circumstances, to even be able to collapse the lens.
>
> Rollei 35 cameras are excellent picture takers. Period. But
> they are an ergonomic nightmare which leads to a series of
> complications with years of use. They are lovely, and, for
> the mid 1960s, even well designed. Think of the elephants
> that were SLR cameras at the time. The Contax T2,T3 are
> excellent, far more durable and certainly more capable than
> the Rollei 35. And if additional camera size is not a
> problem, greater size further removes the Rollei 35 from
> serious contention.
>
> And this does not even begin to address the problem of
> using electronic flash.....
>
> Jerry Friedman
>
>
>
>  --- FG <fuktighet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Thanks again guys,
> >
> > I've been also looking around for the T2 and T3 and, even
> > if small and
> > light,  they simply don't appeal to me as much as the
> > Rollei.
> >
> > I have also considered the Konica Hexar (not really
> > pocketable but w/ a
> > beautiful 35 f2) and the leica Minilux (fantastic
> > summarit 40 f2.4).
> >
> > But there's something about these Rolleis that keep me
> > coming back.  And I
> > know that sooner or later I'll end up with one.
> > It's just a matter of time.
> > Has anyone of you used (read succeeded in using) an
> > external rangefinder on
> > the Rollei?
> >
> >
> >
> > By the way, nice shots with that T Carlos.
> >
> > flickr.com is packed up with amazing shots made with
> > Rollei 35's
> >
> >
> > regards,
> > Juan
> > 2007/9/26, Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > >
> > > That's an excellent point. If Jerry was referring to
> > the Contax T, T2
> > > or T3, I'd say the same about those cameras, too.
> > Further, the Sonnar
> > > on those cameras is excessively contrasty and not
> > terribly rewarding
> > > to print from...
> > >
> > > I know the XAs and while they are fine cameras, to say
> > that the 35S/SE
> > > and XA are comparable from f/8 on misses the point of
> > shooting the
> > > miniature format. I can certainly get good sharp focus
> > on my 35 German
> > > at f/4 and if f/2.8 on a Sonnar shooting close in is a
> > problem, than
> > > an cheap aux rangefinder on the hot shoe (hung upside
> > down!) will get
> > > you where you need to be. The focus travel from 3 feet
> > to infinity on
> > > the XA is about an inch and the focus patch is about as
> > precise...
> > >
> > > I traded my user 35S for a beautiful German many years
> > ago, and
> > > speaking as a shooter rather than a collector/fondler,
> > I'm sorry I
> > > did. The Sonnar on that camera is really very
> > exceptional...
> > >
> > >
> > > Eric Goldstein
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > On 9/25/07, Mike Kovacs <mskovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > Very well put Jerry.
> > > >
> > > > I have a Contax G1 with its wonderful Planar 45/2
> > lens that I tend to
> > > > use more often than my Rollei 35 these days, but I
> > also have no
> > > > illusions that this Kyocera Contax and Hoya Planar
> > will probably long be
> > > > relegated to the trash heap before my Rollei 35
> > quits!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > > > > I have used the Rollei 35S and SE and found them
> > fine
> > > > > cameras. But they are not light and convenient to
> > use for a
> > > > > variety of reasons well known to all. Most
> > important, it
> > > > > has no rangefinder and the 40mm lens does not
> > really
> > > > > compensate for the lack of focus imprecision.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want a more convenient camera that is much
> > lighter
> > > > > and somewhat smaller and also has no rangefinder
> > but is
> > > > > much much cheaper, try a Minox 35 GT or later
> > series such
> > > > > as the ML.  Same problems and strengths as the
> > Rollei but
> > > > > for less money and it is lighter and intuitive in
> > use.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want a small package and a good rangefinder,
> > look
> > > > > for the also very cheap Olympus XA. Again, similar
> > quality
> > > > > lens, very small and light package and it uses
> > small button
> > > > > batteries too. Wide open, the lens is not as good
> > as the
> > > > > Sonnar and probably equiv to the Minoxar. Closed
> > down past
> > > > > f/8 and there is little difference between the
> > cameras. The
> > > > > Olympus also has a very fine electronic shutter.
> > And it
> > > > > closes up inside it own clam shell case.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do not get any of the other Olympus X series
> > cameras as
> > > > > they do not have the same lens or the rangefinder.
> > There is
> > > > > an XA4 with a very sharp deeply wide angle micro
> > lens but I
> > > > > do not believe this is a flexibile camera.
> > > > >
> > > > > The best thing about an Olympus XA is that they are
> > sooooo
> > > > > available and for soooooo little money. You will
> > buy three
> > > > > of them for the same price as a Rollei SE.  It is
> > > > > polycarbonate and hence not as lovely as the
> > Rollei, but if
> > > > > you are going to use such a tiny image size and
> > would like
> > > > > any sort of quality enlaregement, Rollei design
> > quality is
> > > > > nothing when you can have a rangefinder and as good
> > a lens
> > > > > as well and all for one third the price. With
> > available
> > > > > cheap button batteries.
> > > > >
> > > > > But you really have not asked the right question at
> > all. If
> > > > > you want a small high quality 35mm and price is no
> > object,
> > > > > there are Contax autofocus cameras that will strip
> > the
> > > > > paint off of the Rollei 35. They are not costly,
> > have
> > > > > exceptional lenses and can even close focus to
> > about 13
> > > > > inches. Indeed, Zeiss has produced a series of
> > excellent
> > > > > small 35mm cameras with excellent lenses.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Rollei is a landmark camera. It buried half
> > frame and
> > > > > submniature cameras......over 40 years ago. The
> > Rollei TLR
> > > > > of that age may still be hard to beat but the
> > Rollei 35S or
> > > > > SE is not.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jerry Friedman
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > Rollei List
> > > >
> > > > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> > 'subscribe'
> > > > in the subject field OR by logging into
> > www.freelists.org
> > > >
> > > > - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > with
> > > > 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
> > www.freelists.org
> > > >
> > > > - Online, searchable archives are available at
> > > > //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
> > > >
> > > >
> > > ---
> > > Rollei List
> > >
> > > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> > 'subscribe'
> > > in the subject field OR by logging into
> > www.freelists.org
> > >
> > > - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> > > 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
> > www.freelists.org
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect.  Join Yahoo!'s user panel
> and lay it on us.
> http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
>
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' 
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. rollei_list
  3. Archive
  4. 09-2007