Questions regarding Rollei 35

P

pauld111

Well-known
Local time
3:11 AM
Joined
Sep 5, 2010
Messages
203
Don't you think it would have been interesting for them to have designed a Rollei 35 that instead of the c35 had the Sonnar or Tessar lens and the original viewfinder magnification (viewfinder in proper place unlike c35), and no light meter it would be like the 'Leica M-A' of Rollei's?

Along those lines I wonder why they never implemented a lens with an f2 stop. Was the area too small for that sort of lens design?

Just something I have wondered about.
 
I would go with the more common Rollei 35 for the viewfinder placement.
An f/2 lens using zone-focus only would be kinda sketchy. Even if it had a rangefinder I'm not sure how accurate it would be given the width of the body. The Rollei is more of a zone type focus kind of camera IMO.
 
Fjäll said:
I would go with the more common Rollei 35 for the viewfinder placement.
An f/2 lens using zone-focus only would be kinda sketchy. Even if it had a rangefinder I'm not sure how accurate it would be given the width of the body. The Rollei is more of a zone type focus kind of camera IMO.
Click to expand...

Thanks, didn't think about how the accuracy would be affected. Would still like a Rollei 35S built without a light meter. Think it would be cool.
 
f2 lens is bigger than 2.8 and 3.5, smallest one I'm aware of is Summar. You can't toss in f2 like this on this body.

Plenty of R35 with no meter (crapped out), it is cheap to get one. Try it. Come back and let us know why no meter is better in such a small body.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
f2 lens is bigger than 2.8 and 3.5, smallest one I'm aware of is Summar. You can't toss in f2 like this on this body.

Plenty of R35 with no meter (crapped out), it is cheap to get one. Try it. Come back and let us know why no meter is better in such a small body.
Click to expand...

Maybe not back then, but my iPhone 8 has a 28mm f1.8 lens that is 7 element and tack sharp corner to corner, and it is a fraction of the size of any Rollei 35 lens.
 
DMA1965 said:
Maybe not back then, but my iPhone 8 has a 28mm f1.8 lens that is 7 element and tack sharp corner to corner, and it is a fraction of the size of any Rollei 35 lens.
Click to expand...

iPhone 8 has a very small sensor compared to the 24x36mm image size of the Rollei 35. So they can build a fast, small lens. Look around at f/2 lenses designed to cover 24x36mm and you'll see how big they must be. The M-Rokkor 40mm f/2 on the CL/CLE is about the most compact I can think of.
 
Yashica Electro 35 CC has a 35mm f/1.8. But it is not half as compact as Rollei35's 40/2.8.

DMA1965 said:
Maybe not back then, but my iPhone 8 has a 28mm f1.8 lens that is 7 element and tack sharp corner to corner, and it is a fraction of the size of any Rollei 35 lens.
Click to expand...

An iPhone with a 24*36 sensor in the pants pocket would be phenomenal.
 
The meter in the Rollei 35 is about as unobtrusive as could be. Is there an advantage to be gained if it weren't there? I suppose the meter display could be covered with tape if so desired, appropriate silver or black to match the camera.
 
R35 meter isn't TTL, film M is. So R35 meter is like Viightlander meter on M-A. :)

Also, how good OP is on 40/2 scale focus?
 
I love the meter in the Rollei 35. Perfectly placed for the whole scale focus process.
I don’t tend to use mine with the viewfinder all that much, i prefer just extend the lens, meter, scale and pop.

f/2.0 seems totally unnecessary, not like I’m looking through the lens. A little late in the day to offer Rollei advice on this one anyhow.

I have other cameras without meters but they mostly have some kind of focusing mechanism to concern myself with. The nearest i can think of is the Hasselblad SWC, but id happily stick a needle meter on top of mine, I already have to watch the bubble level so...
 
As mentioned, scale focus and 35mm cameras are not going to play well together. My only experience with this is with the Retina 1A cameras that were scale focus and mostly had 50 3.5 lenses. You really needed that 3.5 to cover focusing errors.
 
How I came up with this idea of no meter was looking at the Rollei c35 as a concept and also the Werra 1 (which I own)...I just like the sleekness in design of the Werra and wanted to see if this would translate well in a Rollei.

With regard to the f2, I was just curious if this was possible, because then surely the Rollei would have been able to compete fully with a Leica M with Summicron lens attached.
 
Hello everyone:

I've inherited a black Rollei 35. It has a Tessar 40mm f/3.5 lens. Engraved on the back reads "Made in Germany by Rollei." There is also a sticker on the back reading "Rollei, Honeywell." It came with its leather case, although with a broken zipper. It also has a Rollei filter on the lens, marked "Rollei H1, Germany, R 00." FWIW serial number is 3115868.

I've been dry-shooting it, and the various mechanisms seem to work okay, but without a battery I don't know if it meters. I plan to get a CLA for the camera, and have found a couple of places on the web that service them. I'd appreciate any recommendations along that line. Also, given that the 1.35 V batteries are no longer available, is it worth it to have the camera adjusted to use a 1.5 V battery? I have a hand-held meter, but it would be nice to have a meter on board.

Any suggestions or information very much appreciated.
 
DMA1965 said:
Maybe not back then, but my iPhone 8 has a 28mm f1.8 lens that is 7 element and tack sharp corner to corner, and it is a fraction of the size of any Rollei 35 lens.
Click to expand...

Your iphone has a 28mm FOV equivalent lens in it. Due to the small size of the sensor the actual focal length of the lens is a little less than 4mm. Aperture is a ratio of focal length to diameter and when the focal length is tiny, needed image circle is tiny than it doesn't take a very large lens to have a fast aperture.

The Rollei's lens is literally 10x the focal length and needs to have enough glass to cover film with dramatically more surface areas. The Rollei's lens is tiny for what it does.

Shawn
 
ASA 32 said:
Hello everyone:

I've inherited a black Rollei 35. It has a Tessar 40mm f/3.5 lens. Engraved on the back reads "Made in Germany by Rollei." There is also a sticker on the back reading "Rollei, Honeywell." It came with its leather case, although with a broken zipper. It also has a Rollei filter on the lens, marked "Rollei H1, Germany, R 00." FWIW serial number is 3115868.

I've been dry-shooting it, and the various mechanisms seem to work okay, but without a battery I don't know if it meters. I plan to get a CLA for the camera, and have found a couple of places on the web that service them. I'd appreciate any recommendations along that line. Also, given that the 1.35 V batteries are no longer available, is it worth it to have the camera adjusted to use a 1.5 V battery? I have a hand-held meter, but it would be nice to have a meter on board.

Any suggestions or information very much appreciated.
Click to expand...

Try shooting it with a 1.5v battery before bothering to get it adjusted. Compare it to your handheld and see how close they match. You can likely get it to match up close enough by adjusting the ISO setting by some multiplier. Great little cameras.

Shawn
 
When Heinz Waaske of Wirgin designed the camera, beginning in 1962, his aim was to make it as tiny as possible, even down to a "trick" shutter to allow a collapsible lens. He succeeded: arguably, it's the camera that destroyed half-frame. It's so crowded and intricately fitted together on the inside that there's not much scope for changes, even when you take out the meter.

Of course you can fit an f/2 lens onto a rangerfinderless Leica, and if you try, you soon learn why it isn't a good idea: depth of field is just too small at even 5 metres/18 feet that few people could judge it accurately. Even f/3.5 (the Anastigmat/ Elmax/ Elmar) is quite demanding under about 3 metres/10 feet.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
When Heinz Waaske of Wirgin designed the camera, beginning in 1962, his aim was to make it as tiny as possible, even down to a "trick" shutter to allow a collapsible lens. He succeeded: arguably, it's the camera that destroyed half-frame. It's so crowded and intricately fitted together on the inside that there's not much scope for changes, even when you take out the meter.

Of course you can fit an f/2 lens onto a rangerfinderless Leica, and if you try, you soon learn why it isn't a good idea: depth of field is just too small at even 5 metres/18 feet that few people could judge it accurately. Even f/3.5 (the Anastigmat/ Elmax/ Elmar) is quite demanding under about 3 metres/10 feet.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Thanks Roger for your input. As an aside, I find your website really informative. I am trying to find a working SEI meter to really get to grips with light.

Cheers

Paul
 
Well Roger, I’ve owned a couple of Rollei 35’s, a model B and a model S. For many years now I’ve also had a Oly Pen, the original all manual viewfinder type. And, although the Rollei indeed was smaller, and with the 35S much better specified, the Pen has always been much more pleasant to actually use. No pulling out the lens to operate and despite being larger much more sleek with no protuberances to catch on cargo pockets and such.
The original 2 blade Copal although limited in range is whisper quiey and does not suffer from being gummed up near as much as the later 5 blade Copal in the Pen S models. The projected bright frame .5X viewfinder also is a improvement over Rollei’s.

As for trying to use up 75 exposures, well if I really want to look at what I have then I go in the darkroom, snip off the exposed film and load it straight away onto a reel, and then just reload the remaining film.

Just my take/experience and, as is always the case, YMMV.
 
If it would be too unwieldy for the Rollei 35 to support an f2 lens, how is it possible that a Robot Star comes with a f1.9 40mm Xenor? Is it because the Robot is a 24mmX24mm format? And then the only reason the Robot Royal 36 was able to support the Sonnar 50 f2 is because of the rangefinder?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom