Doble objetivo

ROLLEI FILTERS

2011-07-28T19:18:00.000-07:00

ROLLEI B&W FILTERS FACTORS AND EV NUMBERS COMPENSATING TABLE: Rollei used filter factors numbers up to about 1955/56, they were not marked on the filters ring, the table above shows these numbers and main uses for these filters, it also shows the EV compensating numbers engraved in the filters ring from 1955/56. (click on thumbnail).-

Note: Rollei TLR cameras Infra-red filters are already compensated for the IR photography focus shift.

ANTI-REFLECTION COATING: Rollei filters were coated from about 1950/51, "The practical accesories Rolleiflex Rolleicord" booklet from 1954 says: "...All Rollei optical lens accesories are treated with a hard, abrasion-resistant anti-reflection coating. In addition the coating of each filter is adjusted to enhance the effect of the filter's color and for maximum contrast..."

ROLLEI FILTERS EV COMPENSATING NUMBERS AND FILTERS EQUIVALENCES

Rollei filters rings were marked with Exposure Values compensating numbers after Rollei started to use Compur shutters and cameras with the Exposure Values System (EVS), these numbers were used for Rollei TLR, Rollei 35, Rolleiflex SL 66, Rolleiflex 35mm SLR, Rollei SLX/6000 and other cameras B&W filters (see EV numbers and equivalences in the table above, click on thumbnail).

SOME ROLLEI B&W FILTERS SAMPLES

Rollei B&W filters rings were engraved with different words along the years, pre-war filters up to about 1937 were clip-on type, earliest Bayonet I (1938), II (1949) and III (1952) filters have the filter diameter marked in the ring, the filter type, "Rollei" and "Germany" and "Franke & Heidecke", from about 1953 a red "R" indicating coating replaced the diameter mark, a black "R" replaced the red one afterward and from 1956 the marks were "R"+bayonet size, "Rollei" and filter type, "Germany" and the EV compensating number. The photograph above shows: "A": R(bayonet) II UV filter engraved like filters from 1956 but without EV number mark, some -0 filters have the mark anyway. "B": This B III filter is older than "A", it has the red "R" without bayonet size and it does not have the EV compensating number mark. "C": Rollei 35 Tessar UV filter marked "R00", "Rollei UV" and "Germany" without EV number, however other Rollei 35 B&W filters have the EV number mark. "D": SL66 B VI light red filter, it has engraved "Rollei-hellrot" (light red), "-2 -3.5", "R VI" and "Germany" in the filter ring edge (no visible). "E" : B III medium yellow filter marked as described for filters from 1956, this filter box is different regarding boxes from the "F&H" era, it has the "Rollei-Werke Franke&Heidecke" company name and then it is at least from 1964. "F": A BIII light red filter, it is engraved like the "E" but it is older, from the "F&H" era.(click on thumbnail).

ROLLEI INSTRUCTIONS FOR ORANGE AND RED FILTERS (SEVERAL LANGUAGES)

German, English and French (click on thumbnail)

Italian, Portuguese and Spanish (click on thumbnail)

ROLLEI COLOR CONVERSION FILTERS

Rollei colour conversion filters for colour photography were made from 1956. The image shows my 2.8C Xenotar with a Rollei R1 (R10) and R5 (R50) filters fitted together on the Xenotar making an R6 (R60) filter (see the tables below to read about the Rollei colour conversion filters system, click on thumbnail).

The table above explains the scale and system used for the colour filters effect and filters power and mentions each filter available for the regular three TLR cameras bayonet with the commercial code, the WA Rolleiflex B IV is not included (click on thumbnail)

Tables A and B work together for the Practical Accesories printed version, you can obtain some useful info anyway (click on thumbnail)

Rollei Circular Tripod Head 1957

2010-12-23T16:59:00.000-08:00

In 1957 F&H Rollei developed this interesting circular tripod head for the TLR, it was made to have a level instrument high precision and was better from this point of view than others tripod heads using different means like ball heads (f.e.); it had three main functions that could be used combined or separately, one was to offer a system for a perfect parallax correction for close-ups and macro/microphotography similar regarding the Mamiya Paramender someway but more complex (the Paramender is an accesory for the tripod head, the Rollei device was a tripod head directly), the system had different plates according the taking lens-viewing lens combo, this lens plate slid within a frontal fixed lens plate to change from the viewing lens to the taking lens via a lever, in other words the taking lens was placed in the viewing lens place after it was focused (you could do fine focusing again if necessary in the lenses new position BTW, knowing the taking lens had the right framing), the camera also slid on a rail smoothly for a more precise focusing with close-ups and macro auxiliary lenses specially. Using a dedicated tripod legs, the circular tripod head could rotate very much for reproduction work and it could also be used to take up to 10 pano frames having the circular tripod head a special 6º movement to help for the task. Since the TLR could be slid on a graduated rail, you could find the very exact exit pupil for each camera and lens combo.

The production prototype was excellent and some samples were made in 1957, but it was very expensive to manufacture, Rollei decided to abort the project, at the end of the day the Heidosmat Rolleinars offered a good parallax correction in general except for some slight perspective distortion perceptible for certain situations and F&H already manufactured the RPH from decades ago; this circular tripod head was a good accesory Rollei did not manufacture for the market.

Note: My blog about the Rolleiflex SL 35 System: http://rolleiflexsl35system.blogspot.com/2011/06/rolleiflex-sl-35-system.html

MARILYN MONROE and ROLLEIFLEX

2010-09-27T09:16:00.000-07:00

This photograph was taken by John Vachon during the 1953's summer in Canada, where they were filming a movie, it belonged to the magazine Look and was given to the USA Library of Congress in 1971. Marilyn is holding a Rolleiflex 3.5A or MX (Click on thumbnail).-
Note : My blog about the Rolleiflex SL 35 system: http://rolleiflexsl35system.blogspot.com/2011/06/rolleiflex-sl-35-system.html

Rolleinar 3 BIII

2010-04-24T12:47:00.000-07:00

Rolleiflex 2.8C Xenotar 2.8/80 with Rolleinar 3, click on thumbnail

Rolleinar was the close-up lenses name for Rollei TLR cameras if made by Rollei, Proxar if made by Carl Zeiss and Curtar if made by Schneider; from the '70s Rolleinar also was the name for some lenses made for Rollei 35mm reflex cameras.
Rolleinar 3 close-up lens, BI,II and III is a bit rarer than 1 and 2 because the manufacture period was shorter(1957-1981) than for others Rolleinars .
Rolleinar 3 is difficult to work with, the 32-24 cm focusing distance range is narrow and then if you are photographing camera handheld is better to move your body with the camera within the focusing range than to focus with the focusing knob.

ROLLEI TLR 6X6 LENSES

2009-10-09T05:08:00.000-07:00

ROLLEIFLEX & ROLLEICORD 6X6 TAKING LENSES

(Page copyright Carlos Manuel Freaza 2009)

TESSAR Carl Zeiss: f4,5-f3,8-f3,5/75mm, 4 elements, 3 groups, 54º, focusing 1m to infinity (Rolleiflex Original, Standard, Automat, New Standard); (3,5X; 3,5 A MX; 3,5B MX EVS sharing with Xenar Schneider 3.5/75), T up to 1973(recomputed version). It was used for Rolleiflex cameras from 1928 to 1973, treated with “T” lens coating from 1949, the Tessar lens quality helped very much to the Rolleiflex fame. It was called Zeiss OPTON Tessar from 1946 if made in CZ Oberkochen during some years and afterward OPTON Tessar and OPTON (OPTische Werke OberkocheN) for some countries due to trademark issues with Carl Zeiss Jena
TESSAR Carl Zeiss:f2,8/80mm, 4 elements, 3 groups, focusing 1m to infinity, “T” lens coating (Rolleiflex 2,8 also known as A, December 1949 to August 1951).
XENAR Schneider Kreuznach: f 4,5/75 (300 units made in December 1947 for Rolleicord II only, the rarest standard lens for a Rollei TLR), f3.5/75, 4 elements, 3 groups, Tessar copy ( Rolleicord II sharing with Triotar Zeiss 3,5/75, III sharing with Triotar Zeiss 3.5/75 , IV, V, Va, Vb, from 1947 to 1977); (Rolleiflex 3,5X; 3,5 A MX; 3,5B MX EVS sharing with Tessar), Rolleimagic and Rolleimagic II; Rolleiflex T from 1973 to 1976; the Xenar 3.5/75 was used on Rollei TLR cameras from 1947 to 1977, lenses coated from November 1949.

TRIOTAR Carl Zeiss: f 4,5-f3,8-f 3,5/75mm, triplet: Rolleicord I “art Deco”, Rolleicord I, Rolleicord Ia, Rolleicord Ia Polizei, Rolleicord II Phillips, Rolleicord II lasts versions sharing with Xenar Schneider, Rolleicord III first versions sharing with Xenar Schneider 3,5/75. Lens cheaper than Tessar and Xenar, used on Rolleicord cameras from November 1933 up to about July 1953 and coated from November 1949.
The Triotar name was used for the 1984/85 F Platinum special edition viewing lens.

BIOMETAR Carl Zeiss Jena: f 2,8/80mm, 5 elements, 4 groups, 53º, “T” coated, focusing 1m to infinity, used for the Rolleiflex 2.8B only from February 1952 to March 1953; Carl Zeiss Jena could not produce this excellent lens according F&H needs and only 1250 cameras were manufactured, being the Rollei TLR rarest standard lens after the Xenar 4,5/75, the design was used for several very good lenses at Eastern Europe during the Cold War and the similiraty with the Xenotar Schneider 2,8/80 five elements design is obvious.
XENOTAR Schneider Kreuznach: f 2,8/80mm, 5 elements, 4 groups, coated, 53º, focusing 1m to infinity. This famous lens was used on the Rolleiflex 2,8 C for the first time from December 1952 sharing with the Planar Zeiss 2.8/80 from March 1954, other models that received this lens were: Rolleiflex 2.8D, Rolleiflex 2,8/E, Rolleiflex 2.8E2, Rolleiflex 2,8E3, Rolleiflex 2,8F, sharing with the Planar Zeiss 2.8/80 for these cameras; Rolleiflex 2,8F Aurum 1983 special edition.

XENOTAR Schneider Kreuznach: f3,5/75mm, 5 elements, 4 groups, coated, 54º, a lighter, cheaper and less fast version than the 2.8/80, excellent lens too (Rolleiflex 3,5 C or E, Rolleiflex 3,5 E2 sharing with the Planar 3,5/75 5 elements for these cameras). It was used from October 1956 to July 1961

XENOTAR Schneider Kreuznach: f3,5/75mm, 6 elements, 4 groups, coated, 54º, the fourth element was split into two parts and cemented, the lens became 6 elements; according some very good sources, the lens was cheaper and easier to manufacture this way, keeping the same quality regarding the 5 elements version (Rolleiflex 3,5E3 from July 1961 to January 1965 sharing with the Planar 6 elements for this model, Rolleiflex 3,5F third version from 1965- sharing this year with the Planar 3,5/75- to December 1976, anyway there are evidences about small no regular batches up to 1980).
PLANAR Carl Zeiss Oberkochen: f 2,8/80mm, 5 elements, 4 groups, coated, 53º, this lens became excellence synonymous: from March 1954 Rolleiflex 2,8C, Rolleiflex 2.8D, Rolleiflex 2,8/E, Rolleiflex 2.8E2, Rolleiflex 2,8E3, Rolleiflex 2,8F, sharing with the Xenotar 2.8/80 for these cameras up to 1973, it was called OPTON for the Eastern countries. Carl Zeiss built a limited Planar 2,8/80 five elements series -it had been discontinued in 1972- for the 2,8F Platinum special edition in 1984/85, this lens received the HFT (T*) multicoating process becoming the only standard Rollei TLR lens with multilayer coating. This Planar 2,8/80, manufactured by Rollei under CZ license, was used for the Rolleiflex GX models and Rolleiflex FX from 1987 to 2009.

PLANAR Carl Zeiss Oberkochen: f 3,5/75mm, 5 elements, 4 groups, coated, 54º, a lighter, cheaper and slower version than the 2.8/80, excellent lens too (Rolleiflex 3,5C or E, Rolleiflex 3,5E2 sharing with the Xenotar Schneider 5 elements for these cameras; Rolleiflex 3,5 F first and second version and third version firsts cameras. It was used from 1956 up to about the beginning of 1961).

PLANAR Carl Zeiss Oberkochen: f 3,5/75mm, 6 elements, 4 groups, coated, 54º, this time the second element was split into two cemented parts, the lens became 6 elements with a similar diagram regarding the Xenotar 6 elements; according some very good sources, the lens was cheaper and easier to manufacture this way, keeping the same quality regarding the 5 elements version (Rolleiflex 3,5E3 from July 1961 to January 1965 sharing with the Xenotar 6 elements for this model, Rolleiflex 3,5F third version from about the beginning of 1961 to 1965, sharing this year with the Xenotar 3,5/75, anyway there are a few samples with Planar from 1966 to 1973).

SONNAR Carl Zeiss: f4/135mm, 5 elements, 33º , coated. This special lens for the Tele-Rolleiflex was used on the model from 1959 to 1975. The minimal focusing distance is 2,6m and then it’s necessary to use the dedicated Rolleinars for closest focusing distances (up to 1,35m with the Rolleinar 0,35 and up to 0,93m with the 0,7).

DISTAGON Carl Zeiss (NO DIAGRAM): f4/55mm, 7 elements, 71º, coated, wide angle. This special lens was used for the Rolleiflex Wide from 1961 to 1967, the minimal focusing distance is 0,6m. (up to 24cm with the dedicated Rolleinar).

TELE XENAR Schneider Kreuznach: f4/135mm, 33º, HFT multicoating, made by Rollei under Schneider license for the new Rolleiflex FT based on the FX. This lens allowed 1,5m minimal focusing distance without auxiliary lenses. A few FT units were made from 2007.

SUPER ANGULON Schneider Kreuznach: f4/50mm, 7 elements in 6 components, 75º wide angle lens, HFT multicoating, made by Rollei under Schneider license for the new Rolleiflex FW based on the FX, manufactured from about 2004.

NOTE: Magnar, Duonar, Mutars and Proxar, Curtar, Rolleinar auxiliaries lenses and Rollei TLR viewing lenses will be considered afterward.
cmfreaza@yahoo.com.ar

cmfreaza@gmail.com

Note: My blog about the Rolleiflex SL 35 system: http://rolleiflexsl35system.blogspot.com/2011/06/rolleiflex-sl-35-system.html

Claus Prochnow *1930 t2008

2008-08-03T03:27:00.000-07:00

Claus Prochnow was Rollei engineer designer from 1955 to 1991, he integrated and led teams to develop cameras like the first Rollei SLR 6x6 prototype, Rolleimagic, Rolleiflex SL66; Rollei 35 S; two new Rollei 35 prototypes; Rollei SL35; Rolleiflex SLX; Rolleiflex 2000 and 3000; Rolleiflex 6000 series, the "monster" Rollei LFC 230x230mm format (Large Format Camera ) etc. He liked to represent Rollei at the Photokina to know the users opinion about the Rollei products directly, in 1958 his portrait at the Photokina was Life magazine cover.
From 1994 were published his books Rollei Report 1, Rollei Report 2, Rollei Report 3, Rollei Report 4 and Rollei Report 5 about the complete Rollei production from 1920 to 2000 with the company history, the detailed technical description for the products, models development history, prototypes, serial numbers, photographs, diagrams and additional data, he created a system to catalogue the Rollei production called "Prochnow Register, PR ...."; 1360 pages plenty of very good info (Rollei Report 2 had a new reviewed edition in 2001 and the Report 3 in 2006). He also published a Rollei Technical Report and a special book dedicated to the Rollei 35 camera, "Rollei 35, Eine Kamera Geschichte" and a booklet for the English translation, "Rollei 35, a Camera History", the Rollei Report 1 has a booklet for the English translation too. He also wrote three "Voigtländer Report" about the Voigtländer production from 1840, the last one appeared in October 2007. Mr. Claus Prochnow passed away 31/July/2008, he was from Brunswick (Braunschweig) "the oldest camera town" according he liked to say.

Other Carlos M Freaza historic blog at:
http://carlosmfreaza.blogspot.com

1960s Photojournalists

2008-04-23T04:23:00.000-07:00

If you pay attention about the cameras, most of these 1960s photojournalists are using Rollei TLR cameras(please click on the thumbnail)

Resolving power and contrast -partial transcription-

2007-11-10T09:09:00.000-08:00

(click on thumbnails to see the largest image)"...The resolving power is not as important a criterion for image quality as is generally believed. This statement will be proved in the following paragraphs. A number of photos were taken with perfectly uniform image quality over the entire field, so that it is not necessary to balance center sharpness against edge sharpness. Neither do these pictures show any visible vignetting nor distortion. We may, therefore, use these photos without any reservation for comparative image quality tests. Let us first consider photos 1 and 2. They are both of poor quality. If you had to choose, however, which of the two would you prefer? At first glance, you would probably select photo 2. At least, that is what everyone did who saw the pictures up to now. Photo 2 appears to have much higher contrast than photo 1, the latter giving the impression of being fuzzy. However, if you take a close look, you will notice that photo 1 has a considerably higher resolution and better definition than photo 2 which, upon close examination, is rather unsharp. We do not know for which of the two pictures you will finally settle. Your decision will largely depend on your personal preference. In any case, however, you will certainly not find photo 1 so much better as the resolution figure would have it. Actually, the lens resolution figure for photo 1 is twice as high as that for photo 2. Let us now turn to photos 3 and 4. Their image quality, or at least the image quality of photo 4, is much better than that of the pictures previously studied. And yet, it is photo 3 which has the higher resolution. This is easily recognizable in the ornaments of scepter, crown and robe. But unless we take a very good look, we do not realize it. The higher resolution, therefore, is of no consequence for the impression created by the picture. Far more striking examples could be presented in photos of really good image quality. Unfortunately, this cannot be done here because the screens employed in the printing process would destroy the fine detail which we need to prove that a poorer photo actually can have the higher resolution. But with the aid of a trick we can create similar conditions to those en- countered in very good pictures. For this purpose, we need only choose a larger viewing distance, in other words, we observe photos 3 and 4 from a distance of, say, 3 or 6 feet instead of from the normal reading distance of approximately 10 in. There will then be absolutely no doubt about which of the pictures is the better one, and we realize of how little avail high resolution can be. The fine detail reproduced in the photo with the higher resolution can no longer be clearly seen. In other words, it does not matter whether it is resolved or not. The above examples have demonstrated that it is possible to have poor photos show- in high resolution, and good pictures with moderate resolution. Two photos of identical resolution may be entirely different in image quality. Just compare photos 1 and 4 from a distance of about 3 feet. Both pictures have the same lens resolution figure - but what a difference in image quality. It is evident that the resolving power - or at least the resolving power alone - is not the decisive criterion in evaluating the quality of photographic lenses, and this is what we have tried to show. At this point the question may be raised whether the poor image quality in photos 1 and 3 may not primarily be the result of softer printing as compared to the printing of photos 2 and 4. The answer is no because all four examples were taken on identical photographic material and treated alike during processing. There is, of course, a possibility of improving photos 1 and 3 to a certain extent during processing (by using high-contrast photographic material with the added control of dodging, redevelopment etc.), but the improvement will be rather insignificant even with a subject of very few intermediate tones, as is the case in our examples. With true half- tone pictures, the above technique would be practically use- less, because any attempt at improving the image through the use of high-contrast photographic material would automatically lead to a decrease of tonal gradation. But, you will ask, what is it that distinguishes photo 4 with its modest resolution from photo 1 which has the same resolution as 4, and photo 3 with high resolution? What then, if not lens resolution, is a valid criterion for image quality? Our comparative photographs have shown that the image quality is not so much deter- mined by the definition of fine detail as by the manner in which the more easily perceptible, larger structural elements in the picture are reproduced. The more faithful the contrast ratio, the better the image quality. It is obvious that the degree of accuracy of contrast rendition in an image depends on how coarse or fine the respective structural elements of the image are...."

From:
Resolving Power and Contrast
Erich Heynacher and Fritz Kober
ZEISS INFORMATION No. 51

Rollei Panorama Head rotation axis Test

2007-06-18T05:32:00.000-07:00

This is a test (I did it some years ago) to establish the right rotation axis for the Rolleiflex 2.8C and the Rollei Panorama Head two basic models with the lens focused to infinity. It can be applied to other Rollei TLR models despite the different lenses, the change is almost imperceptible for practical purposes. There is a very slight difference for the rotation axis provided using the RPH first model and the RPH newest model used in conjunction with the Rolleifix, it does not affect the final stitched image for practical purposes and please remember some Rollei TLR manual recommendations about the RPH use: "...landscape pictures of distant views, which include a large portion of the horizon, are made possible with the panorama head..." (Please click on the thumbnails)

Rollei factory Braunschweig 1959

2006-11-25T09:36:00.000-08:00

This is the Rollei factory in Braunschweig, Niedersachsen, Germany on 1959. The view looks similar today but some buildings were rented for other firms like the Kraemer building (white at center) with the name "Rolleiflex" in the photograph (click on thumbnail).

This is a tools warehouse in the factory (click on thumbnail)

This a machine to stamp aluminium parts (click on thumbnail).

Cutting tools (click on thumbnail)

Lathes (click on thumbnail)

Perforation tools at work (click on thumbnail)

45º perforation tools (click on thumbnail

Polish (click on thumbnail)

Camera front panel

Machines to galvanize parts (click on thumbnail)

Glasses polish (click on thumbnail)

Vacuum chambers to coat filters and Rolleinars(click on thumbnail)
Painting chamber (click on thumbnail)

Focusing mechanism assembly(click on thumbnail)

Lenses assembly (click on thumbnail)

Film transport mechanism assembly (click on thumbnail)

Collimator, this collimator is still in use (click on tumbnail)

Shutters tester device (click on thumbnail)

Carl Zeiss K 6 lens tester device (click on thumbnail)

Some Rollei TLR cameras

2006-10-14T03:52:00.000-07:00

Rolleiflex 3.5F Planar 3.5/75 six elements and Rollei 35 Tessar 3.5/40 (please click on thumbnails, copyright cmfreaza 2006)

Rolleicord IV, Schneider Xenar 3.5/75

Rolleiflex 2.8C Xenotar 2.8/80;Rolleimeter C;Rollei Pistol Grip and flash bracket with flash
Rolleimagic Xenar 3.5/75, functions window
Rolleimagic lenses, the viewing lens Heidosmat really is a Xenar too
The powerful Rolleimagic Gossen lightmeter
Rolleimagic and Rolleiflex comparison

Rollei News 7 1954 brochure

2006-10-14T02:45:00.000-07:00

List Prices

2006-10-14T02:31:00.000-07:00

Burleigh Brooks Inc. NY list prices for F&H products (Rolleiflex) on December 1954