Mablo
Well-known
I've had my Tessar equipped Rollei 35 for a couple of weeks now and since I learned those few tricks of how to use the camera I've been really happy with it.
One thing I'd like to know is how much better do you think the Sonnar lens is compared with Tessar?
One thing I'd like to know is how much better do you think the Sonnar lens is compared with Tessar?
btgc
Veteran
Sonnar could be interesting wide open? Most probably I'm wrong, but I think for daily usage it doesn't mean a lot. Yeah, there are differences, but...
petronius
Veteran
If the Sonnar is used wide open the photographer should have a perfect skill in estimating the distance or use an external rangefinder.
The prices that are asked for a 35 with Sonnar here in Germany let me not often think about getting one.
There is a german word for wide opened lenses that one doesn´t really need:
"Renommierblende": "show off-aperture" ;-)
The prices that are asked for a 35 with Sonnar here in Germany let me not often think about getting one.
There is a german word for wide opened lenses that one doesn´t really need:
"Renommierblende": "show off-aperture" ;-)
Last edited:
konicaman
konicaman
The Tessar seems sharper to me - just a bit.
The Sonnar has better colors - just a bit.
My 35 is equipped with the Tessar. I borrowed a Sonnar model from a friend for a couple of weeks. The difference is hard to explain, but to give it a shot I would say that the Sonnar has a more dreamy quality to it, whereas the Tessar is more factual in representing your motives. Don't know if this makes any sense to you?
The Sonnar has better colors - just a bit.
My 35 is equipped with the Tessar. I borrowed a Sonnar model from a friend for a couple of weeks. The difference is hard to explain, but to give it a shot I would say that the Sonnar has a more dreamy quality to it, whereas the Tessar is more factual in representing your motives. Don't know if this makes any sense to you?
Mablo
Well-known
Thanks! it makes perfect sense to me.
Just for the heck of it I shot three frames yesterday to end a roll. All shots are from the same distance, around one meter from the subject: two lamps on the table. I used f/3.5, f/5.6 and f/8 and changed the shutter speed accordingly. Neopan 400@400, Rodinal 1+25, 6min.
f/3.5:
Larger size: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4038/4394719396_c75a1659eb_b.jpg
f/5.6:
Larger size: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2777/4394718986_19f24ea7f1_b.jpg
f/8:
Larger size: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4027/4394718682_94c3fcf430_b.jpg
My first impression is that the Tessar performs quite well wide open from short distance even though corners are a bit soft. But it's certainly an usable aperture value. DOF isn't too shallow for scale focusing.
..
Last edited:
Dwig
Well-known
Not surprising.
Unlike the Sonnar, the Tessar focuses by moving the font cell only. This disturbs the optical corrections. The general trend, which the Rollei's seem to exhibit, is that classic lenses like the Tessar design suffer a bit on the edges at close distances when front cell focusing is employed. This is somewhat aggravated by the Rollei's use of a rather short FL relative to the film size. Generally Tessar designs need to have a FL at least as long as the image diagonal (35mm FF = 43mm) if not 10% or so longer.
Focusing by moving the complete optical unit, as the Rollei Sonnar does, has its flaws also, but they are more modest when minimum focus is limited to something in the range of 10x the focal length.
Sonny Boy Havidson
Established
Both are good and have their own identity. The only factual criteria can be flare as the Tessar is more prone to.
whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
I have both. I like the Sonnar for color and the Tessar for B/W.
Vincenzo Maielli
Well-known
Recently, at Photoshow 2010 in Rome, i have bought a very mint Rollei 35S, the HFT Sonnar is fantastic. The finder of the Rollei 35 is better than my Minox 35 GTE or Leica CM. Only my Canonet GIII QL 17 is quite comparable, as finder (of course, have a RF patch...).
Ciao.
Vincenzo
Ciao.
Vincenzo
Instantclassic
Hans
I have both. My photo habits is B&W centered. The Tessar does it and the Sonnar is seaching a new home.
/Hans
/Hans
micromontenegro
Well-known
You can actually use 2.8 with the Sonnar:
Other than that: the Sonnar is sharper (more so at the corners) above f8. The Tessar is more contrasty. I have them both and love them both. Heck, I even love the Triotar!
Other than that: the Sonnar is sharper (more so at the corners) above f8. The Tessar is more contrasty. I have them both and love them both. Heck, I even love the Triotar!
lawrence
Veteran
You can actually use 2.8 with the Sonnar:
Other than that: the Sonnar is sharper (more so at the corners) above f8. The Tessar is more contrasty. I have them both and love them both. Heck, I even love the Triotar!
Congratulations on getting this sharp! I tried a similar shot with my Sonnar version and couldn't judge the distance exactly...for me, this is a problem with the Rollei 35.
cliffpov
Established
Could someone tell me about the Xenar lens on this camera? Is this a different name for the Tessar lens? It is a 3.5 maximum aperture so I am assuming (possibly falsely) that this is a different name than the Tessar or possibly a variation of the Tessar by a different manufacturer - Schneider-K___. Thanks for any clarifications.
andredossantos
Well-known
I've read and been told multiple times that Zeiss' Tessar and Schneider's Xenar are the same design. I've tried both iterations on Rollei TLR's and could not tell any difference in sharpness. I do see a slight difference in color rendition (the Xenar seemed a bit warmer--maybe due to different coatings?) but that could totally be a figment of my imagination.
enasniearth
Well-known
Rollei35
Rollei35
The xenon is made by Schneider , if I remember correctly it was used as rollei 35 was very popular , and zeiss could not meet the supply of lenses . Rollei builds only cameras and relies on zeiss and Schneider for optics .
Some zeiss lenses on rollei 35 state made by rollei so not German manufacture made in Singapore to zeiss formula
I think the tessar does not have a front focus group , only the triotar is front element focus .
I would select the sonnar - the color rendition is beautiful and black & white can always be printed as you like . The rollei had a light meter and on the 35 s I had it was fairly accurate for color slide film . The lack of a rangefinder , well the camera would not be so small and the 40mm lens has adequate depth of field even wide open to guess distance as you get used to it .
Rollei35
The xenon is made by Schneider , if I remember correctly it was used as rollei 35 was very popular , and zeiss could not meet the supply of lenses . Rollei builds only cameras and relies on zeiss and Schneider for optics .
Some zeiss lenses on rollei 35 state made by rollei so not German manufacture made in Singapore to zeiss formula
I think the tessar does not have a front focus group , only the triotar is front element focus .
I would select the sonnar - the color rendition is beautiful and black & white can always be printed as you like . The rollei had a light meter and on the 35 s I had it was fairly accurate for color slide film . The lack of a rangefinder , well the camera would not be so small and the 40mm lens has adequate depth of field even wide open to guess distance as you get used to it .
Edward C. Zimmermann
Nerd
The Xenon is not a Tessar-type but a double Gauss variation. It competed against the Zeiss Biotar to which it was superior. The Leitz Summarit 50/1:1,5 was a Xenon.
Among Schneider's model line-up the closest to a Tessar is the Xenar. Both have their defenders and its wholly subjective to suggest that one is better than the other.
The Sonnar Rollei 35S and 35SE are better. The later Classic models were all based upon the 35SE--- a design that lets one use PX27 sized non-mercury batteries. The light meter on these are better than the matching needle of the older models.