[rollei_list] Re: Rolleimot...first Rollei SLR
- From: CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 20:24:46 -0300
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
Other related posts:
