CI Photocommunity

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Planar 35F Planar not that sharp

jeff

Active Member
Hi,
Alright, I'll go first.
I have a 3.5F Planar, and it's doesn't seem to be as sharp as everyone else says their's is. My Mamiya RZ kills it. Even my Contax 35mm has been know to make better 16x20's (for sharpness not grain). Yes, both were on tripods shooting exactly the same thing at the same time. It's not bad for sharp just not what everyone raves about.
Thanks,
Jeff
 

dirk

CI-Founder
... sorry, just saw that you wrote Planar, so it is a Zeiss lens. But the serial number of the lens would be interesting.

The Rolleiflex 3.5 F Planar was made in 3 different versions.

From December 1958 til February 1960, the 3.5/75 Planar was coated, although I do not think that it was multicoated at that time. And it had not yet the option for the glassplate included, to keep the film more flat.

The second generation was produced from 02/1960 til 11/1960. It seems to have the same lens as far as I know it. But there have been some minor modification. The most important one is the glassplate for a better filmposition on the back. This might help for better sharpness, but I never used one myself.

The third generation of the 3.5F was offered with a new 3.5/75 Planar. Production from 11/1960 til 1965. The Planar has now 6 lenses (from number 2.753.002 on) and is also coated. According to other ressources, this new lens design improved the image quality.

But in general it is obvious, that dramatic improvements with the usage of computer models have been made in lens design. The same counts for the film industry. So if both parts improved so much over the last 40 years, it is normal that the differences are not that big anymore between the old Rolleis and a 135.

The current Rollei models use all multicoated lenses (HFT), which are all of a newer design. Additionnally there have been made many improvements for the filmfeed and to keep it plane and the construction of the body to improve image quality. So a modern Rollei with modern film should give this advantage of Medium Format over 135 again.

Dirk
 

jeff

Active Member
I'm pretty sure it's a late model II or early III. I thought the glass plate was an accessory. Mine doesn't have 220 ability, but does have as far as I can figure (through books and serial #'s) a 6 element lens. The lens
serial # is 4095694.
Thanks,
Jeff
 

butlp

Active Member
Because Dirk brought it up, I'd like clarification on which Rollei TLR lenses were computer-designed, and which ones weren't. I know the 2.8 Schneider Xenotar lenses were among the first to be computer-designed when they came into production in 1952. I don't know, however, about the equivalent Schneider 3.5 Xenotars. I have always assumed the 2.8 Zeiss Planars were also computer-designed, but I can't confirm this.

My Rolleicord IV w/Xenar is NOT computer-designed. It has great edge definition and is tack-sharp except wide open. At f3.5 it is visibly softer. It is not contrasty like a modern lens, and prone to flare. It is my understanding that all Xenars, to the end, were the same. Can anyone confirm this? Were the later Xenars recomputed?

My father-in-law envies my lens because he doesn't get the same sharpness with his 3.5F Xenotar Rolleiflex! I don't know whether this lens was also computer-designed or not. I have heard great things about Schneider's QA in the early '50s - did it fall off by the time the "F" cameras were made? It would surprise me, given Schneider's current commitment to quality. I don't have the serial number for the 3.5 Xenotar in question, but I could find it out.
 

dirk

CI-Founder
"...I'd like clarification on which Rollei TLR lenses were computer-designed, and which ones weren't..."

What do you mean with computer desigend? That they used a computer to calculate the design?

I do not know that and I do not think that this is making a difference for the user. Computer design models help the manufactuerer to calculate a design faster and cheaper (less working hours).

I think what improved the image quality over the last decades was more the usage of aspherical lenses, new coatings, techniques for flare reduction etc.

Dirk
 

butlp

Active Member
Yes, I mean that computers were used in correcting the design. There is agreement in the optical industry that the significant advances in Japanese and German optics in the 1960s and 1970s resulted largely from superior design after the introduction of computers. As one ex&le, apochromatic correction was not possible before this innovation. Also the edge definition and retention of high resolution across all apertures that we now demand, is not a feature of the older lens designs. "floating element" technology was also unknown before the use of computers. These are all significant advances for the user.
 

rozok

New Member
Hi everybody
I have a rolleiflex F3,5 with a planar and a viewfinder as a roof.The litte glas on the view finder is broken;somebody can help me to find that little glas?Thanks
Rozok
 

jeff

Active Member
>>The litte glas on the view finder is broken;somebody can help me to find that little glas?Thanks > Rozok

Do you mean the focusing screen or one of the magnifiers for the screen that are in the hood? Jeff
 
R

Ruben_blaedel

I have a rolleiflex automat 6x6 model 4ka with a zeiss-opton tessar 1:3,5 75 mm lens. it was made from 1951 to 1954 it has a red T on engraved just before the zeiss name on the optics ?? what does that mean on top of the camera were the serial number 1273751 is engraved to the left the letters DBP and to the right DBGM what is that ?? Its a bit worn and the framecounter seems a bit unreliable but the exposure time sounds like its working fine - I paid next to nothing for it and I wonder if it would be crazy to get it CLA - if its not to crazy to do that does anyone know a good place I live in Denmark but could send it to Germany or Sweden - I just dont whant to get ripped of thanks Ruben by the way can one put in a brighter screen
 

jeff

Active Member
> Sorry I can't help about where to get it serviced in Europe. You can get brighter screens for them- Beattie being. I bet the list will have a few good suggestions on servicing and screens. Good luck, Jeff
 

butlp

Active Member
>My 1953 Rolleicord IV had the same dark ground glass screen. I now refer to it as my "auto-focus" medium-format camera, as it has a great, light-grabbing modern screen that snaps into focus and is usable even in candlelight. It is a Maxwell Hi-Lux Brilliant Matte screen, and I don't know if you can get them in Denmark, although Mr. Maxwell will probably send you one. Be careful to have someone who works with Rollei install it (or any modern screen), as they must shim it correctly to make it focus properly. Save the old screen, in case you sell the camera to a collector some day. I've got a Schneider lens, not your lens. However mine has great sharpness even if it lacks the contrast and color saturation of a modern lens. Resolution drops off at wide-open apertures. This is typical of the good lenses of that era. It is still worth paying for the CLA, especially as you have gotten the camera inexpensively.
 

butlp

Active Member
> DBP = Deutsches Bundes Patent DBGM=Deutsches Bundes Gebrauchs Musterschutz (trade mark) note: If your camera had been assembled from pre-war parts, it would have had DRP and DRGM instead. The "Opton Tessar" tells you that it has a West German lens, this model was also shipped with lenses from Jena. As for the red "T", I believe it refers to Zeiss coating (invented by them, but not protected by patent after the war). Someone else will have to confirm this last detail, as I may be wrong!
 
R

Ruben_blaedel

>Thanks Jeff and Paul I will try to look for a eurpean repair - I have just got back into shooting hasselblad after years pause and if i can get this rollie working it will be the fist time since I was a kid i shot with a twin lens again - i would love to se a genetic fusion of the hassy and the rollie - the small dials to set time and aparture are really great and much more right ergonomic then the turning the lens on the hassy
 
Sharpness of a Rolleiflex 3.5F, Planar 75, year 1962. The film used was FP4+ rated at 50 ISO and the developer was an old pyro+dietil formula. The results are at least as good as modern Planars. Impressive!
 

mshabbir_gill

New Member
i hve Rolleiflex 2.8F sr.#12383407 with Schineder Kreuznach lens and in use since years alongwith rolleikin. Unfortunately its lens cap fallen in a jungle and locally tried to locate here in Lahore-Pakistan but could not find. A sliver was got melted but not fitting properly to save itsprecious lens. Someone told me its wide/tele kits are also available. May i request from where i can locate tele/wide kits and idea of its lens cap even plastic cap can save from scratches. Thanks.
 

jeff

Active Member
If you look on eBay they have a lot of Rollei stuff. The stuff you want will turn up probably sooner rather than later.
Jeff
 

siu_fung

Member
>The litte glas on the view finder is broken;somebody can help me to find that little glas?Thanks
you may be find old segull 4bi tlr ,it is copy from rollei, so it may be ok. and it is seem the glass made form east-germary.
 
Top