New Rollei 35AF Coming Soon...

[das]

The one thing that the Hexar AF got incredibly right was collapsing parallax framelines that would give you instant feedback as to the actual focus point. Not just some green light that tells you that the AF is locked onto something, but you will have to wait and see what that actually was.

Fun fact that I'm sure many of you folks know - the original Konica C35AF had a small scale to show you the focusing distance of the photo you just took. Better than nothing I guess.

I'm also not a fan of scale focus. I want all of my photos to be in focus, not just within a general DOF. When you scan negatives you instantly see when you are even the tiniest bit out of focus. Drives me nuts. 🙂.

 

[TenEleven]

As said with the Rollei 35 I seem to be able to hit focus pretty confidently. Even for moving targets (people approaching me) and with big enlargements such as 12x16" wet prints and scans (on a Coolscan 5000). The thing where it gets dicey with scale focus for me is ironically static subjects which are more than 6m (19feet) away... infinity or not? Hmm...

Regarding the Contax G - I think (I may be misremembering) the main complaint was that the autofocus was "slow". I used one briefly and despite this time having no complaints about the focus itself, I still felt uncomfortable to be partially excluded from the cameras decision making process. (Yes I know I can override most everything, but then again what's the point of having automation?) Basically I guess automatic cameras are just not for me ...

I shot street with both the Rollei 35 and the Contax T3 ... the Rollei hit rate was better...

 

[splitimageview]

Regarding the Contax G - I think (I may be misremembering) the main complaint was that the autofocus was "slow"

I guess slow is relative and an individual evaulation, it was never slow for me. Always faster than using a rangefinder in the same manner (i.e., not using zone focus, trying to focus on something specific.)

I shot street with both the Rollei 35 and the Contax T3 ... the Rollei hit rate was better...

Curious what the the hit rate would be with the T3 if shot in same manner as the Rollei. 🙂

 

[TenEleven]

Curious what the the hit rate would be with the T3 if shot in same manner as the Rollei. 🙂

On a technical level? The same or better since the lens is slightly wider permitting larger DOF.

In the real world? Probably a bit worse since using it like that would require monkeying around in the menu whenever you want to change the set focal distance since there is no direct control for the focus. Meaning someone approaching you as you walk is virtually a "game over". It's kind of funny since this is the one aspect where the camera is inferior to it's predecessor - the T2.

Edit: Minolta realized this was a problem and thus added a physical "go back to autofocus" button to their TC-1. Not a perfect solution, but at least you can take your chances with AF over the focus being very obviously wrong.

 

[Godfrey]

I have to say that the scale focus issue on the Rollei 35 is way overblown in my personal view. I have gotten good enough to hit even at f/2.8 and f/4.0 most of the time, and I am not someone with terrific depth perception.
...

I agree: the notion that there's something "wrong" with the traditional Rollei 35's scale focus is absurd—the only thing wrong is an inexperienced user who doesn't know how to use it.

I think most people (looking at Reddit and YouTube commenters especially) would balk at a hit rate of ‘most of the time’, one stop down, considering how often they complain about AF systems that hit 95% wide-open. 🙂

Seriously though, film costs are not cheap. This is why when I’m shooting film I want an accurate exposure and accurate focus.

Yes, film is not cheap—never was!—and you want to try to get accurate focus and proper exposure on every shot. Has it ever happened? Don't be silly... Not to mention: "Does anyone here on a photography forum ever expect to always achieve a 100% keeper rate with any camera, film or digital, even IF the focus and exposure are absolutely perfect?" It's just plain fantasy if you do.

The camera missed on several occasions in these YouTube reviews, as I pointed out in a previous message. It absolutely is not immune to flubbing focus. In fact I would have been utterly shocked if it was. I guess we have to see what the real world hit rate works out to be, when more "serious" people get them into their hands.

And that is what makes me hesitate and also generally reluctant to use any AF camera. Basically, if there is a mistake in exposure or focus I'd rather it be on me - I can learn something from it, perhaps. With an autofocus miss or screwy exposure you can do nothing but grumble ..

I have no problem using AF, it is a very useful convenience on occasion. I have a problem when the camera does not provide me a way to say "I want the focus right there, regardless of what you think..." That puts the camera in control, not the photographer, and as far as I'm concerned that is no longer Photography.

How the heck do you even do a lens resolution test without explicit manual control of focus setting?

G

 

[splitimageview]

Yes, film is not cheap—never was!—and you want to try to get accurate focus and proper exposure on every shot. Has it ever happened? Don't be silly... Not to mention: "Does anyone here on a photography forum ever expect to always achieve a 100% keeper rate with any camera, film or digital, even IF the focus and exposure are absolutely perfect?" It's just plain fantasy if you do.

More than likely I'll be dissatisfied for some other reason...framing, composition, blur, or whatever. But I'd rather have a camera that gives me the best chance at accurate focus and exposure, so the equipment isn't to blame, just me. 😀 I'm perfectly ok with that!

 

[JohnGellings]

It seems strange for the lens to be just a "Rollei Lens.". I'd like it to be a Zeiss Sonnar or Zeiss Tessar like the original Rollei 35. So that there could be more of a feeling of continuity with the original ones, some idea of the imaging. I'm sure it's good, perhaps a Cosina; but "Rollei Lens" seems unsatisfying.

This camera was simply lent the Rollei name. It is not a Rollei made by Rollei.

 

[JohnGellings]

I dunno about this. Seems a bit like a brick in handling. The original Rollei 35 felt and handled great.

I still like my X100S. I know--not a film camera. But it's really good.

What am I missing? Both the new one and old are / were bricks. Why would the old one handle better?

 

[Godfrey]

More than likely I'll be dissatisfied for some other reason...framing, composition, blur, or whatever. But I'd rather have a camera that gives me the best chance at accurate focus and exposure, so the equipment isn't to blame, just me. 😀 I'm perfectly ok with that!

What can be more accurate than a properly calibrated focusing mount and the ability to set focus, shutter time, and lens opening to exactly what your meter and your experience warrant as "accurate"?

G

 

[Retro-Grouch]

What am I missing? Both the new one and old are / were bricks. Why would the old one handle better?

They'll be coming for you with torches and pitchforks, even though you're absolutely correct. The Rolleis completely sacrificed ergonomics for compactness, and I get that. But if compactness is/was not your first criterion, then they are awkward bricks.

 

[Godfrey]

What am I missing? Both the new one and old are / were bricks. Why would the old one handle better?

The Rollei 35 is not a "brick" ... or if it is, it is such a small brick that the term doesn't apply: the whole camera fits in the palm of my hand.

The only ergonomic issue I see with the Rollei 35AF is that the shutter release is positioned closer to the edge of the body than it is on all the prior Rollei 35 family models (35, 35S, 35T, etc). That actually might make a difference as your right hand is grasping a somewhat smaller part of the camera body. The Rollei 35S may be small, but the controls on it are not at all cramped and the shutter release is at a distance from the right edge of the body such that my forefinger falls very naturally into place on it, and with the camera held vertically (rotated to the right) it is again in just the right place to release with my right thumb. This difference in placement on the 35AF might cause a little bit of unsteadiness.

G

 

[Godfrey]

They'll be coming for you with torches and pitchforks, even though you're absolutely correct. The Rolleis completely sacrificed ergonomics for compactness; and I get that. But if compactness is/was not your first criterion, then they are awkward bricks.

I've never found a Rollei 35 awkward to hold and use, not even the first time I picked one up. Maybe I'm special... 🤷‍♂️

 

[valdas]

I have two 35S (black and silver) and now ordered 35AF. I know it’s not the “real” Rollei, but hey - it’s new film camera!

 

[splitimageview]

What can be more accurate than a properly calibrated focusing mount and the ability to set focus, shutter time, and lens opening to exactly what your meter and your experience warrant as "accurate"?

This is why I shoot test rolls with all new film gear. Gotta know if the gear is up to snuff before I commit to $$$ of film and dev on an important event or subject.

 

[splitimageview]

 

[Godfrey]

This is why I shoot test rolls with all new film gear. Gotta know if the gear is up to snuff before I commit to $$$ of film and dev on an important event or subject.

Fine, sure. I test *everything* I buy (certainly all film and digital cameras, and lenses) as soon as I get it to be sure they work to spec and as expected.

But what it have to do with the notion of a camera that only supports auto-focus?

G

 

[splitimageview]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here, so I don't know how to respond.

 

[trix4ever]

Marketing rubbish...

"Tailor the ISO settings to your unique style and shooting conditions. By adjusting the ISO allows you to control the sensitivity of your camera's sensor, giving you flexibility to achieve the desired look and mood in your photos."

Seriously, they 'might' know how to make a camera but their promotional effort is total garbage, this is a film camera after all.

 

[Godfrey]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here, so I don't know how to respond.

I think we're equally befuddled.

G

 

[Jonathan R]

lol

Marketing rubbish...

"Tailor the ISO settings to your unique style and shooting conditions. By adjusting the ISO allows you to control the sensitivity of your camera's sensor, giving you flexibility to achieve the desired look and mood in your photos."

Seriously, they 'might' know how to make a camera but their promotional effort is total garbage, this is a film camera after all.

That caught my eye too. Looks like they copied this from somewhere else.