Early or late Rolleiflex 3.5f TLR

I respectfully disagree, it's a subject that has been disscused to death. The lens diagram shown differs significantly from my particular sample.
I would also check the lens serial n., since many early 3.5F Planar cameras have been factory upgraded to a six element Planar - as in my Rolleiflex TLR.

Can you show us your 3,5F and its Planar? I doubt that owners had their Rolleiflexes upgraded with a six element lens. That would have been very expensive for minimal gain.
 
I emailed Carl Zeiss and asked about the reason behind the redesign of the 3,5/75 Planar to a six element one. This is the reply I got:

Dear Patric,
Thank you for your inquiry to Carl Zeiss.
Well, the reason for the change of the lens design was an improve of the lens performance (less vignetting, more consistent performance across the image field) as well as an easier production. The splitting of the second lens element into two cemented elements with a plain surface in between is easier in production than the meniscus element.
Hoping to be of service to you we kindly ask you to contact us again should you need further assistance.
Sincerely,
Bertram Hoenlinger
That is an impressive level of customer service in response to an enquiry about a legacy product. Thanks for passing the information on, too.
Regards,
Brett
 
Hi,

I'll see if I can post a picture over the weekend. From the Serial numbers Mark James Small confirmed to me that it was a factory upgrade.

Regards,
Robert
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FS: Hand Made Leather Camera Wrist Straps
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...a-wrist-straps




Can you show us your 3,5F and its Planar? I doubt that owners had their Rolleiflexes upgraded with a six element lens. That would have been very expensive for minimal gain.
 
Hi JPD,

As promiseds Rolleiflex TLR 3.5F type2 w/ 6-element Planar (factory upgrade).

Regards,
Robert
 

Attachments

  • TLR 1.jpg
    TLR 1.jpg
    97.5 KB · Views: 0
  • TLR 2.jpg
    TLR 2.jpg
    156.1 KB · Views: 0
  • TLR 3.jpg
    TLR 3.jpg
    104.8 KB · Views: 0
Riouzan, that's the antireflection coating. Is the front element purplish?

The Planar on my 3,5F has the warm coating on the front element and the rear element has a purplish coating.

Here you can see a 2,8F with the warm coating on the front element:
http://johnsrolleionlypage.homestead.com/2.8F_type_1._large.JPG

And this has the purplish coating:
http://johnsrolleionlypage.homestead.com/2.8F_type_2__2476704_front_view_no_cap.jpg

This was before multicoating, so the explanation may be that the warm and cold coatings would cancel each other out.
 
Hi JPD,

Taking lens SN 2.986.XXX:

*Front element exhibits both a magenta and orange multi coating 'of sorts'.
*Rear element is orange-yellow, similar to the color cast of a radioactive Summicron, could be lens coating ...

However, this still doesn't explain why the rear element is completely flat, not even close to the lens cut shown in #15.

Regards,
Robert
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FS: Hand Made Leather Camera Wrist Straps
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...a-wrist-straps



Riouzan, that's the antireflection coating. Is the front element purplish?

The Planar on my 3,5F has the warm coating on the front element and the rear element has a purplish coating.

Here you can see a 2,8F with the warm coating on the front element:
http://johnsrolleionlypage.homestead.com/2.8F_type_1._large.JPG

And this has the purplish coating:
http://johnsrolleionlypage.homestead.com/2.8F_type_2__2476704_front_view_no_cap.jpg

This was before multicoating, so the explanation may be that the warm and cold coatings would cancel each other out.
 
Hi JPD,

Taking lens SN 2.986.XXX:

*Front element exhibits both a magenta and orange multi coating 'of sorts'.
*Rear element is orange-yellow, similar to the color cast of a radioactive Summicron, could be lens coating ...

However, this still doesn't explain why the rear element is completely flat, not even close to the lens cut shown in #15.

The rear element is less curved than the front element, but the reason to why it looks flat is the angle you're looking from. You can't look at it from the side when it's deep inside the camera, and it will probably also feel flat if you touch it with a finger (don't, that's unecessary!). You can cut a ca 2 cm piece of thick paper and hold it with a pair of tweezers against the lens surface and see that it's not exactly flat.

I took a picture of mine, and it does look "flat", but you can see the reflections from my lightsource that they bend a little.

331zijd.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom