Rolleinar?

Towermax said:
I just got an interesting Bay 1 set on eBay--there's a Rolleiparkeil and two Carl Zeiss Jena Proxar 1. I'm guessing the Zeiss Jena Proxars will be fairly decent, though probably not up to Rollei standards.
Click to expand...

This would be a wrong assumption. Carl Zeiss has always prided itself on producing top-quality products and has production standards that are second to none. Leica is on equal footing when it comes to attempting to produce the highest-quality optics possible.

If anything, Rollei's standard slipped, particularly in the 1980s when it comes to its line of 35mm SLRs and the Rollei B35/C35/35LED and the somewhat sketchy Rollei XF 35. Even the Rollei 35 models were cheapened when Rollei decided to use a synthetic gear -- which was easily damaged -- in the film advance.
 
ZeissFan said:
I wouldn't be too concerned with quality. This wasn't the usual third-party knockoff crap. Remember, the Rolleiflex was used by both amateurs and pros, often in studios, and for the pros, they couldn't afford to put something on their lens that would degrade the image.
Click to expand...

The Zeiss Proxars aren't third party accessories at all. They are the original close-up lenses for Rollei. No one would call the Zeiss Tessar lens on a Rolleiflex a third party lens. 🙂


http://www.rockycameras.com/ekmps/s...se-up-proxar-set-cased-boxed-8.99-19182-p.jpg

http://www.janboettcher.de/images/PROXARE.JPG

This is one of my Rolleiflex Standards with Proxars and Rolleiparkeil:

http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00H/00H0Ao-30684684.jpg
 
Rolleinar 2 portrait

5640413834_2397cce0eb_z.jpg
 
I picked up a Rolleinar 1 this week myself after posting about getting a higher + closer view point with my TLR, an Autocord (which I like very much indeed) but sadly the aperture has jammed on it over the past couple of days, not sure why, just went to use it one day and the aperture arm is not moving, so it's off to Karl Bryan as I had been planning but had wanted to shoot the one roll of 160NC in the camera and then send it off having got some Rolleinar 1 results in the bag.

Anyway, great little accessory, makes the camera much more versatile for those close in portraits where you don't want to crop and lose detail.

Managed to snag mine in great condition for £25 which seemed a pretty good deal. In the future I may look for a Rolleinar 2 but in no hurry now.

Vicky
 
f16sunshine said:
Anyone using Rolleinar .35 or .7 ?
Click to expand...

I use a Rolleinar 0.35 on my Tele Rolleiflex. Works great and I like the ergonomics of the hinge/swing.

Sanders stacks a Rolleinar 1 onto a 0.35 on his Tele Rolleiflex for his wonderful head shots. I need to get a bay 3 Rolleinar 1 still. Seems to be a magic combo with that 135/4.0 Sonnar.

Cal
 
ZeissFan said:
This would be a wrong assumption. Carl Zeiss has always prided itself on producing top-quality products and has production standards that are second to none. Leica is on equal footing when it comes to attempting to produce the highest-quality optics possible.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply, Mike. I own several Zeiss cameras and lenses, as well as a Zeiss Tessar and Sonnar for my Exakta--and I'm in full agreement with you.

My error was in assuming that these were less expensive East German substitutes for the Rollei close-up lenses. I've heard/read that postwar Zeiss Jena lenses have excellent design, but that manufacturing often left something to be desired. Certainly, my CZJ lenses for Werra and Exakta, while very nice, don't appear to be manufactured to the same standard as my Zeiss-Ikon lenses.

JPD's post stating that these are "the original close-up lenses for Rollei" makes it clear that these Proxars were OEM, not third-party. I'm looking forward to trying them out.
 
JPD said:
The Zeiss Proxars aren't third party accessories at all. They are the original close-up lenses for Rollei. No one would call the Zeiss Tessar lens on a Rolleiflex a third party lens. 🙂
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info in this and the preceding posts. Do you know when the Proxars were first offered for sale? Are they pre- or post-war?
 
Towermax said:
Do you know when the Proxars were first offered for sale? Are they pre- or post-war?
Click to expand...

1929 - 1949. With bayonet mount 1937 - 49. After that they were renamed "Rolleinar".

Carl Zeiss still makes (?) the Hasselblad close-up lenses under the name "Proxar".

Proxar lenses were also used on plate/large format cameras to shorten the focal length as a cheap wide angle accessory. Zeiss also made Distar lenses with negative power, that made the focal length longer.
 
Proxar lenses were also used on plate/large format cameras to shorten the focal length as a cheap wide angle accessory. Zeiss also made Distar lenses with negative power, that made the focal length longer.
Click to expand...

I find that it obvious in the finder that the Xenar on my 'cord gets wider when I use a Rolleinar.

Using a +1, the focal length changes from about 75mm to about 70 mm and about 65 mm for the +2. This is not dramatic, but noticeable.
 
I use both, but w/the Tele-Rolleiflex, as they were intended (to get within "normal" ranges of closeness w/that model for environmental/head & shoulder portraits, etc.). Per Calzone's post, you can use the stronger Rolleinars w/the Tele-Rolleiflex, too, if you want to get really tight.

f16sunshine said:
Anyone using Rolleinar .35 or .7 ?
Click to expand...
 
furcafe said:
I use both, but w/the Tele-Rolleiflex, as they were intended (to get within "normal" ranges of closeness w/that model for environmental/head & shoulder portraits, etc.). Per Calzone's post, you can use the stronger Rolleinars w/the Tele-Rolleiflex, too, if you want to get really tight.
Click to expand...

Ok great to know. I have both with the tele Rolleiflex I bought from another rff member. The .35 seems natural but the .7 is confusing me when I mess about with it. Like there is a gap in the focus range or maybe a gap between my ears 🙂 (more likely)
 
f16sunshine said:
Ok great to know. I have both with the tele Rolleiflex I bought from another rff member. The .35 seems natural but the .7 is confusing me when I mess about with it. Like there is a gap in the focus range or maybe a gap between my ears 🙂 (more likely)
Click to expand...

Check out Sander's work. He does some great head shots using Rolleinars and a Tele Rolleiflex.

Cal
 
^^ Huh?

Do you mean what is the focusing range with the rolleinars?
Look here

Well here's mine. I finally got around to scanning a few negs.

Tele Rollei + stacked 0.35 and #1 rolleinars
Tmax400@400

0ae4b41596f77d56153654653e95b34c
 
So I just picked up a Rolleinar 1 for my rolleicord V. question: Do you see a difference when looking thru the view finder? I did not see a difference

thanks
 
You should be able to get the lens much closer to the subject than usual, and the viewfinder should show a focused image at that close-up range.

Make sure you are using the adapter on both the taking and the viewing lens, and that the viewing lens piece is outfitted with perspective correction, to compensate for parallax.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom