[rollei_list] Rollei 35S, SE and the Sonnar on the Rollei XF?


I think many of us go the Medalist route at one time or
another, along with 6x9 folders, Fuji 6x9 etc. I enjoyed
the camera because it was a pretty compact package with a
good rangefinder, though it had funny focusing because the
double helical lens extended so far. But I came to feel
that the lens was also a little too soft and lacked
contrast. But then, I really like biting contrast. I used
Tech Pan in my Minox for 20 years and loved it so perhaps
that tells you something. And perhaps why I like the Tessar
on the Rollei T. 

I have another question related to our discusson. The
Rollei XF had a f2.3 Sonnar lens. I know many peole felt
disappointed in the camera, it was totally automatic after
all with no real over-rides. But I remember also hearing
that the Sonnar lens was not as good as it should have
been. Anyone have any experience with this camera?  They
are up on ebay fairly regularly. 

Jerry Friedman



--- aghalide@xxxxxxx wrote:

> sometimes it ain't the fault 0f the lens. This applies to
> non-rollei lenses as well. Many moons ago I  purchased a
> Kodak Medalist 6x9 to go along with my stable of Rolleis.
> Again, I reference Schwalberg, the maven of Wetzlar. We
> breakfast and lunched almost every day from 1972 to 1985
> or so, when we officed at 1 Park Ave " at Popular
> Photograhy. I wish I had my tape recorder going, but
> instead I must rely on memories. According to Bopp or as
> known by non-Wetzlar people, Bob, Kodak's best lens is
> the 100mm f/3.5 Ektar on the Medalist. "it's a great
> Tessar", I remember him saying. My new-old Medalist Ektar
> was a bit foggy. I brought it to Professional Camera
> Repair in NYC. Marty handed it to Buddy for cleaning. Got
> it back in about one-week. Every thing took one week,
> unless it was an overnight and the photographer was going
> to Selma or whereever the next day. I remember Marty
> repairing cameras  used by photographers documenting the
> March for free. I got the Medalist back the n
>  ext we
> ek and then ran a roll of 120 (I had it changed from 620
> to 120 by the Bald Mountain guys. Wide open it wasn't so
> good. Could Schwalberg be wrong? Could that Tesssar-type
> lens be not so good?
> A few months later I stuck my finger inside the back of
> the camera and found  the rear elements were loose. Could
> Buddy have not tightened it all the way in? So I did. And
> the frog became a Prince.  This could be the case with
> Xenars, Xenotars, Planars and even Tessars.  Ed Meyers



      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, 
and more!
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658 
---
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
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: