f16sunshine
Moderator
Recently I traded for a Rollei AFM 35 P+S Camera.
It's a nice little thing and I'm very much looking forward to testing it out.
The lens is a Rollei S Apogon 38mm f2.6.
I'm slightly puzzled with this. Rolled uses this same name for other lenses with a Double Gauss scheme (The Rolleiflex FX for example has an S-Apogon f2.8 80mm).
My undertstanding is my little P+S is a Tessar.
Does anyone know for fact the S Apogon designatin is anything other than a new trade name?
Does Rollei just name anything with glass in a barrel S-Apogon or is there something else to it?
Am I mistaken and my new P+S has a DG rather than Tessar in it?
Anyone?
It's a nice little thing and I'm very much looking forward to testing it out.
The lens is a Rollei S Apogon 38mm f2.6.
I'm slightly puzzled with this. Rolled uses this same name for other lenses with a Double Gauss scheme (The Rolleiflex FX for example has an S-Apogon f2.8 80mm).
My undertstanding is my little P+S is a Tessar.
Does anyone know for fact the S Apogon designatin is anything other than a new trade name?
Does Rollei just name anything with glass in a barrel S-Apogon or is there something else to it?
Am I mistaken and my new P+S has a DG rather than Tessar in it?
Anyone?
farlymac
PF McFarland
Looks like a modified Double Gauss to me http://www.manualslib.com/manual/315122/Rollei-Afm-35.html?page=47#manual
PF
PF
btgc
Veteran
Fuji Klasse which is sister camera of AFM has 4el/3gr lens, but I can't say if it is same lens and how big differences are (coatings or construction as well).
jschrader
Well-known
This appears to be a marketing issue only, Apogon does not specify a construction type if this is correct:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=83164.0
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=83164.0
iamzip
Ambitious, but rubbish
That thread is dated 2013, wheras the Rollei AFM35 is quite a bit older - so it may not apply.
This appears to be a marketing issue only, Apogon does not specify a construction type if this is correct:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=83164.0
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
It is just a trade name. Not really a new one either. Rollei built their own lenses, for long enough that the formally Zeiss and Schneider named lens designs had grown into something independent and unique not covered by patents any more - but name rights don't expire like patents. The current makers (DHW) did not inherit and could not re-purchase the name rights F&H once had licensed from Zeiss and Schneider. So they had to make do with a name from the Rollei back catalogue not owned by anybody else - which did not give them that many choices, probably nothing beyond Heidosmat for Triplet types (the TLR finder lenses) and Apogon for anything else (originally used on projector lenses), these being the niches where they did not license from Zeiss or Schneider.
f16sunshine
Moderator
So it's just a marketting name used for a avriety of optical schemes.
The Diagram in PF's link looks like a Tessar to me.
The Diagram in PF's link looks like a Tessar to me.
The same lens is used in the Klasse S as well. Fantastic lens. The Klasse S has a max. aperture of f2.8 rather than f2.6 due to a redesigned shutter/aperture mechanism which allows higher shutter speeds and a rounded aperture shape. If you look at the aperture shape on the original Klasse/Rollei AFM 35, you'll see it's pretty funky and a long way from being circular, but works just fine nonetheless.
farlymac
PF McFarland
Oops, I didn't take a good enough look, it is a modified Tessar.
PF
PF
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
It might be a modified Protar variation or a variation on H D Taylor's triplet...
Regards, David
PS, Yes, I do know a little about it and feel Taylor should get the credit for coming up with a revolutionary design, that others modified, advertised and sold by the million. As I see it, lens design is a form of evolution until computers got involved.
It might be a modified Protar variation or a variation on H D Taylor's triplet...
Regards, David
PS, Yes, I do know a little about it and feel Taylor should get the credit for coming up with a revolutionary design, that others modified, advertised and sold by the million. As I see it, lens design is a form of evolution until computers got involved.
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.