[rollei_list] Re: Rolleimot...first Rollei SLR
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 17:00:28 -0700
I agree in part about Singapore. I disagree on the others. All you have said
here you heard from Prochnow. He probably glamorized it. I still think
Heidecke screwed up and Victor simply outsmarted him.
Hasselblad had ZERO interest in a TLR. That is a dream created by Rollei
somewhere. Prochnow was daydreaming about that one. Victor used that threat
as a means to convince Heidecke not to build an SLR. Heidecke took the bait
and Rollei eventually failed. Hasselblad never considered a TLR even AFTER
Rollei came out with an SLR. So I stand by my comments.
Numbers are numbers. You can produce 1000 cameras but if you only sell 500
then you are at a 50% loss.
Your turn. I know you will not let me have the last word.
Peter K
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 4:24 PM, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This issue is very simple Peter, Heidecke never ordered to put in
> production the finished SLR prototype, he was keen about it initially,
> he knew about Hasselblad cameras and he knew about the lenses and
> magazines, Richard Weiss was his second Technical Manager and Heidecke
> ordered him to dedicate his time for the SLR prototype developing
> leaving any other task.
> Heidecke mind was not a suicidal one, his numbers were right and he
> lost interest on the SLR, he did not want to cause a Hasselblad TLR as
> a reaction to a Rollei SLR beyond any "gentlemen agreement". The
> technical term for F&H situation was "TLR cameras produced a good
> turnover", it means a good relationship between production and sales.
>
> BTW Peter, I really don't think Heidecke errors in the fifties(we saw
> them as errors today) were decisives for the future of Rollei, Rollei
> survided two decades after Heidecke death and the bankruptcy had
> nothing to do with the TLR, it happened because they wanted to compete
> with the Japanese industry at the same production level taking money
> from the banks to install and to produce in the Singapore plants, but
> they had a lot of commercial success with the SL 66, the Rollei 35 and
> slide projectors sales, with a different industrial and commercial
> strategy F&H Rollei Werke could avoid the bankruptcy as others
> companies like Leica avoided it. Post Heidecke management took good
> decisions as the SLR and 35mm cameras production, but Singapore was a
> plan ambitious too much.
>
> Carlos
>
>
>
>
> 2010/4/11 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > I think the nice term is gentlemens' agreement. Sorry I disagree. He was
> fat
> > and happy and making money so this is the alleged reason, I think it is a
> > legend not really fact.
> >
> > My post is not THAT different. He was "talked out of it" by Rollei. They
> > allege a genetlemens' agreement. Just because it is written that way does
> > not make it true.
> >
> > I think production #s are meaningless. Sales are what is important. Two
> very
> > different things. GM produced many cars, but sold fewer. Hence they went
> > bankrupt. Same for F&H.
> >
> > Your turn Carlos. I mean, I am not trying to step on your ego here. I
> know
> > you are a big fish in our little pond. :-)
> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 3:33 PM, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Peter, this is the time machine, we already discussed this topic, we
> >> agreed on the TLR with interchangeable lenses, but now you added the
> >> SLR prototype within the same causes for the SLR no production in
> >> 1957, you wrote:
> >>
> >> ".. From what I have read, Heidecke did not lose interest. He was
> >> talked out of the idea of producing an SLR by the management of
> >> Rollei. These were the same geniuses who talked him out of putting the
> >> interchangeable lens TLR
> >> that he developed into production. They were comfortable and making
> >> money so they did not want to change..."
> >>
> >> Your post below is saying now a different thing regarding the SLR
> >> prototype, you now writes that "he", Heidecke ABANDONED the SLR
> >> project in 1957 quoting the meeting with Hasselblad, now you are
> >> separating the facts regarding the TLR and the SLR, "to ABANDON" and
> >> "to LOSE" interest are different ways to say similar things To abandon
> >> the SLR production with the protype ready to do it was a Heidecke
> >> personal decision.
> >> If you compare the production for Hasselblad and for F&H from 1948 to
> >> 1958, the fact a few pros started to use Hasselblad to replace
> >> Rolleiflexes did not affect Rollei sales very much, this fact was one
> >> of the causes for Heidecke error about the SLR no production, if
> >> Rollei was losing a lot of market there was not a meeting Heidecke/
> >> Hasselblad, but businesses were good for the TLR, Heidecke only wanted
> >> to avoid Hasselblad could make a TLR, it was right for the Rollei
> >> numbers in the fifties.
> >>
> >> Carlos
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2010/4/11 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
> >> > Carlos,
> >> >
> >> > No I am not mixing facts. I guess the easiest way to rebut what I say
> is
> >> > try
> >> > to discredit the source as many lawyers do. But I will not go away
> that
> >> > easily.
> >> >
> >> > My source is the same as yours, Prochnow. The only difference is I do
> >> > not
> >> > believe everything he writes verbatim. I wrote an article for
> Shutterbug
> >> > maybe 12 years back and corresponded with Prochnow and also Rollei
> >> > Fototechnic. The latter provided some copies of old documentation and
> >> > loaned
> >> > me several books dealing with Rollei. Prochnow was kind enough to
> clear
> >> > up
> >> > some questions I had and allowed me to use some photos.
> >> >
> >> > This is from the article:
> >> > "With Mamiya’s introduction of a TLR with interchangeable lenses in
> >> > 1957, F
> >> > & H experimented with the idea of converting a Rolleiflex 2.8 E.
> >> > Reinhold
> >> > Heidecke approved the plan for a prototype , PR178 in 1958 which was
> >> > created
> >> > with 3 interchangeable twin lenses (see Photo). They were the
> standard
> >> > 80mm
> >> > F2.8 Planar, a telephoto 135mm F4 Sonnar lens, and a wide angle 60mm
> >> > F5.6
> >> > Distagon lens. Technical management convinced Reinhold Heidecke that
> >> > there
> >> > would be too many drawbacks with interchangeable lenses and F & H
> >> > abandoned
> >> > the project. Even so, this was the basis for the development of the
> >> > Tele-Rollei of 1959 with a 135 F4 Zeiss Sonnar lens, and the
> Wide-angle
> >> > Rollei of 1961 with its 55mm F4 Zeiss Distagon lens."
> >> >
> >> > Reading between the lines, basically Heidecke was older and wealthy
> and
> >> > did
> >> > not need or want to fight this. his health was also not very good.
> >> > Remember
> >> > he passed away less that two years later in 1960. Ten years after
> Franke
> >> > who
> >> > died in 1950.
> >> >
> >> > As to the SLR, it was SLR development originated in 1955 (this was the
> >> > original SLR Prototype) and abandoned in 1957. The reason he ABANDONED
> >> > the
> >> > SLR was he and Hasselblad allegedly had some sort of gentlemens
> >> > agreement.
> >> > Rollei would not make an SLR and Hasselbald would not make a TLR. I
> >> > think
> >> > Victor was a much smarter business man. Hasselblad had no need to make
> a
> >> > TLR
> >> > as his SLRs was selling exceptionally well and replaced many Rolleis
> >> > pros
> >> > were using at that time. Two years after Heidecke's death Rollei began
> >> > development on the SLR again. This was 1962 and the start of the SL66.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Peter K
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 11:16 AM, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Peter , I noticed now that you are mixing the facts completely, the
> >> >> first SRL prototype and the interchangeable lenses prototypes were
> two
> >> >> different cameras, they were not produced for different reasons and I
> >> >> don think to repeat those different causes.
> >> >> It's very difficult to discuss with someone mixing facts, it does not
> >> >> make sense to continous this topici if you don't distinguish between
> >> >> 1955, 1957, 1958 and 1962/63.
> >> >>
> >> >> Carlos
> >> >>
> >> >> 2010/4/11 CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>:
> >> >> > What is your source Peter? Where did you obtain that info? Who was
> >> >> > better informed than Prochnow that integrated the team that
> developed
> >> >> > the prototype?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Carlos
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 2010/4/11 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
> >> >> >> Carlos,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> All this is interesting but have to say that a lot of this is what
> >> >> >> one
> >> >> >> would
> >> >> >> call romanticizing the past. I read that management convinced
> >> >> >> Heidecke
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> abandon the interchangeable lens TLR.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Now I am sure you have been in executive meetings. The term "he
> lost
> >> >> >> interest" reminds me of one where after an hour of discussion, the
> >> >> >> President
> >> >> >> of the company I worked for listened to what myself and a
> colleague
> >> >> >> had
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> say, then turned to us and told us "This is not open for
> discussion,
> >> >> >> you
> >> >> >> will ...." And believe me I am using very nice language to
> describe
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> discussion much like Prochnow does in his book. Of course the
> press
> >> >> >> release
> >> >> >> read that we had reached an accord in doing...." This is what I
> call
> >> >> >> romanticizing.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Bear in mind, Heidecke was older, tired and his health was
> declining
> >> >> >> at
> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> time. It was only a few years before he passed on and not long
> after
> >> >> >> later
> >> >> >> Rollei was in financial troubles. So I for one do not buy the
> claim
> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> Rollei TLR sales were good. At that time you had immense
> competition
> >> >> >> from
> >> >> >> Mamiya, Minolta, Yashica, and others. Granted the Rollei was the
> >> >> >> pro's
> >> >> >> choice, but Mamiyas sold well and were eating away at Rollei's
> >> >> >> market.
> >> >> >> They
> >> >> >> had a very good quality camera at a lower price point with
> excellent
> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> interchangeable lenses. So you could buy the TLR and 2 lenses for
> >> >> >> what
> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> Tele Rollei would cost.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Peter K.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 9:23 AM, CarlosMFreaza <
> cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> He lost interest Peter. A team of three engineers developed the
> >> >> >>> 1955
> >> >> >>> SLR prototype, two of them were Richard Weiss and Claus Prochnow,
> >> >> >>> they
> >> >> >>> finished the camera for 1957 and according Prochnow, Heidecke
> lost
> >> >> >>> interest in the SLR production for two reasons: 1) The TLR sales
> >> >> >>> were
> >> >> >>> very good; 2)Viktor Hasselblad and Heidecke talked on the issue
> >> >> >>> during
> >> >> >>> their 1955 meeting in Göteborg: " After its completion in 1957,
> >> >> >>> _Reinhold Heidecke lost interest in the 6x6 SLR_. There was a
> good
> >> >> >>> turnover from the Rolleiflex and his colleagues persuaded him
> that
> >> >> >>> they could develop other cameras... The decision was also a
> result
> >> >> >>> of
> >> >> >>> a meeting between Reinhold Heidecke and Victor Hasselblad in
> >> >> >>> Gothenburg..." (Report 2, page 26-538 and SL 66 brochure).
> >> >> >>> BTW the SLR production in 1957 would mean a continous improvement
> >> >> >>> for
> >> >> >>> the model 10 years before the SL 66 regular production and an
> >> >> >>> earlier
> >> >> >>> competition regarding Hasselblad when the market was still
> >> >> >>> different,
> >> >> >>> but as a results of that decision, Rollei R&D became only
> dedicated
> >> >> >>> to
> >> >> >>> design improvements and accesories for the TLR including the
> >> >> >>> Rolleimot, it only changes in 1962, after Heidecke death in 1960,
> >> >> >>> when
> >> >> >>> Rollei new management decided to develop the SL 66 and to
> >> >> >>> manufacture
> >> >> >>> a 35mm camera, but it's necessary to say things were good for the
> >> >> >>> Rollei TLR up to about 1960
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> We commented several times on the interchangeable lenses TLR
> >> >> >>> camera,
> >> >> >>> the prototypes were ready for production in 1958, this time the
> >> >> >>> Rollei management had a stronger influence on Heidecke to decide
> >> >> >>> the
> >> >> >>> camera no production, deviating from the original design towards
> >> >> >>> the
> >> >> >>> Tele and Wide Rolleiflexes. Anyway, "it was clear that this was
> not
> >> >> >>> a
> >> >> >>> substitute for a single-lens reflex camera" writes Prochnow on
> the
> >> >> >>> TLR
> >> >> >>> with interchangeable lenses in the previous page, but it was a
> >> >> >>> direct
> >> >> >>> competition against the Mamiya TLR with interchangeable lenses,
> >> >> >>> they
> >> >> >>> started to lose their own market.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> 2010/4/10 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
> >> >> >>> > From what I have read, Heidecke did not lose interest. He was
> >> >> >>> > talked
> >> >> >>> > out
> >> >> >>> > of
> >> >> >>> > the idea of producing an SLR by the management of Rollei. These
> >> >> >>> > were
> >> >> >>> > the
> >> >> >>> > same geniuses who talked him out of putting the interchangeable
> >> >> >>> > lens
> >> >> >>> > TLR
> >> >> >>> > that he developed into production. They were comfortable and
> >> >> >>> > making
> >> >> >>> > money so
> >> >> >>> > they did not want to change.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > If you think about it, these idiot managers thought the
> Rolliemot
> >> >> >>> > was OK
> >> >> >>> > to
> >> >> >>> > develop but not an SLR? Talk about stupidity. The Rolliemot is
> >> >> >>> > odd
> >> >> >>> > or
> >> >> >>> > maybe
> >> >> >>> > useless but it was what I would call the Edsel of accessories.
> I
> >> >> >>> > am
> >> >> >>> > sure
> >> >> >>> > there are odd accessories things developed by other cameras
> >> >> >>> > makers
> >> >> >>> > throughout the years. Even Leica (are they still in business
> >> >> >>> > these
> >> >> >>> > days?)
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > --Peter K
> >> >> >
> >> >> ---
> >> >> 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
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Peter K
> >> > Ó¿Õ¬
> >> >
> >> ---
> >> 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
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Peter K
> > Ó¿Õ¬
> >
> ---
> 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
>
>
--
Peter K
Ó¿Õ¬
Other related posts:
