[rollei_list] Re: Rollei 35S, SE

  • From: Jerry Friedman <tinycameraco@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 03:49:51 -0700 (PDT)

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

Other related posts:

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