40mm lens is it the perfect inbetweeny

[snusmumriken]

That is unfortunate. I bought mine via some sort of austrian ebay 1.5 years ago. It had spent the last 20ish years in a drawer with the cover on. Even the battery still works. Until now it did not have any issues but maybe that is just luck. Are reliability issues common with these cameras?

Not that I've heard. Shutter speeds can get sticky over time, and front-cell focussing on the Tessar can become slack, but those things are fixed by a CLA. You will need an adapter when the time comes to replace the battery.

There are several million Rollei 35 variants out there somewhere, and many will have spent their lives in a drawer, like yours.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Zooms are handy for off-the-cuff shots.

 

[Huss]

That is unfortunate. I bought mine via some sort of austrian ebay 1.5 years ago. It had spent the last 20ish years in a drawer with the cover on. Even the battery still works. Until now it did not have any issues but maybe that is just luck. Are reliability issues common with these cameras?

The shutter. Every single one I checked out in the hope of buying had a defective shutter. Speeds below 1/30 sec were way off, sometimes acting like B.
I think I checked out five over the years before giving up. Some 'had a recent CLA' too!

 

[benjiboy]

A lens is considered normal, if its focal length equals the diagonal of the film format, which is ~43mm for 24x36. So 40mm has always been more normal than 50.

As johan writes, 43mm is the perfect lens focal length for 35mm film to completely fill the 24x36mm negative, but 40mm Isn't far off.

 

[Timo Schön]

The shutter. Every single one I checked out in the hope of buying had a defective shutter. Speeds below 1/30 sec were way off, sometimes acting like B.
I think I checked out five over the years before giving up. Some 'had a recent CLA' too!

That's interesting! I think I checked every speed when I bought mine but it has been a long time since I used shutter speeds slower than 1/30. Usually I use very fast film and/or push it when using this camera. I will check again when the current roll is finished - I really want this camera to keep working for a while so it can keep coming along when traveling. Mine is the T variant and I am in love with the lens!

 

[snusmumriken]

The shutter. Every single one I checked out in the hope of buying had a defective shutter. Speeds below 1/30 sec were way off, sometimes acting like B.
I think I checked out five over the years before giving up. Some 'had a recent CLA' too!

That's a shame. At least some of us have been lucky. I bought mine from a camera repairer who had undoubtedly serviced it before taking it on holiday a month earlier. His advice was to exercise all speeds between films when the camera was empty, which I have done ever since. That was back in 1990, and everything seems good - or at least, each speed selected is progressively longer than the last! I suspect most Rollei 35 users will never have used shutter speeds longer than 1/30 sec, so perhaps those speeds will be affected by dried-up lubricant.

The instructions in Rollei's repair manual for the 35 are a bit alarming. Basically, speeds are adjusted by bending components of the mechanism!

 

[faberryman]

As johan writes, 43mm is the perfect lens focal length for 35mm film to completely fill the 24x36mm negative, but 40mm Isn't far off.

I have shot focal lengths from 18mm to 500mm with my 35mm camera and they all completely filled the 24x36mm negative.

 

[Huss]

That's a shame. At least some of us have been lucky. I bought mine from a camera repairer who had undoubtedly serviced it before taking it on holiday a month earlier. His advice was to exercise all speeds between films when the camera was empty, which I have done ever since. That was back in 1990, and everything seems good - or at least, each speed selected is progressively longer than the last! I suspect most Rollei 35 users will never have used shutter speeds longer than 1/30 sec, so perhaps those speeds will be affected by dried-up lubricant.

The instructions in Rollei's repair manual for the 35 are a bit alarming. Basically, speeds are adjusted by bending components of the mechanism!
View attachment 326445
View attachment 326444

I have the feeling that is the case - the slower shutter speeds were never used so things gummed up. Problem for me is that cameras that supposedly had cla’s still had that issue. Then again that may have been because the tech was not competent.

 

[snusmumriken]

I have the feeling that is the case - the slower shutter speeds were never used so things gummed up. Problem for me is that cameras that supposedly had cla’s still had that issue. Then again that may have been because the tech was not competent.

I just searched YouTube: there are at least 3 videos showing how to resolve this problem.

 

[Huss]

I just searched YouTube: there are at least 3 videos showing how to resolve this problem.

Which proves my point that this is an issue with this camera.



You still need tools and skills.

p.s. I stopped watching at 3.34 in the video, when he basically took the leather covering off and the whole camera is literally in pieces.
Yeah, easy repair....

 

[snusmumriken]

Which proves my point that this is an issue with this camera.



You still need tools and skills.

p.s. I stopped watching at 3.34 in the video, when he basically took the leather covering off and the whole camera is literally in pieces.
Yeah, easy repair....

The video you watched had stuck shutter blades (inside the lens) but even so it was repairable with simple tools.

I watched two others where the escapement was gummed up, and freeing up required only the top plate to be removed.

Actually, I feel quite reassured that I could deal with those problems if they arose.

 

[Huss]

Actually, I feel quite reassured that I could deal with those problems if they arose.

You are handier than I am! After seeing everything dismantled and in pieces, I was all hail no!

 

[henryvk]

Two Rollei 35s were recently offered to me by family members but neither was in working order. Can't recall what the issues were but they both looked like they'd been used a lot, maybe that's saying something about how popular they were.

I have some fixed-lens 40mm scale-focusing cameras and I've grown very fond of the focal length.

LOMO Voskhod, T-48 f2.8/40mm triplet:

 

[Huss]

Two Rollei 35s were recently offered to me by family members but neither was in working order. Can't recall what the issues were but they both looked like they'd been used a lot, maybe that's saying something about how popular they were.

I am SHOCKED that they don't work. As a bonus - do they also have dents on the corners?

 

[r_a_feldman]

You are handier than I am! After seeing everything dismantled and in pieces, I was all hail no!

This picture shows my Robot II in a state where I could clean and lubricate the shutter clockwork (top row, second from the left). And I didn't even have to remove the leatherette!

BTW, the lens I have for it ( a CZJ 3 1/4cm f2.8 Tessar) is an equivalent of 41mm for the 24mm x 24mm Robot format, so it is on-topic for this thread.

 

[Huss]

This picture shows my Robot II in a state where I could clean and lubricate the shutter clockwork (top row, second from the left). And I didn't even have to remove the leatherette!

BTW, the lens I have for it ( a CZJ 3 1/4cm f2.8 Tessar) is an equivalent of 41mm for the 24mm x 24mm Robot format, so it is on-topic for this thread.

I doff my toupee to you Sir!

 

[Huss]

40 is fine for everything except portraits, which need around 100 to avoid big noses.

Mark

Taken with Voigtlander 40mm 1.2
No big nose.

 

[zen_zanon]

40 is my favourite focal length. Done lots of trips with it as my only lens.

 

[MattKing]

Taken with Voigtlander 40mm 1.2
No big nose.

Actually it does.
And more significantly, an over-sized chin and overly prominent shoulder.
And both don't matter much at all, because the other strengths of the image make those concerns unimportant - at least to me.
You may find that the subject of the photo would be bothered by these things.
But possibly not - one of the the results of the explosion of cel phone photography - particularly selfies - is that many people seem much more comfortable with what I consider to be the perspective distortion that arises from a too-short camera-to-subject distance.

 

[Huss]

Actually it does.
And more significantly, an over-sized chin and overly prominent shoulder.
And both don't matter much at all, because the other strengths of the image make those concerns unimportant - at least to me.
You may find that the subject of the photo would be bothered by these things.
But possibly not - one of the the results of the explosion of cel phone photography - particularly selfies - is that many people seem much more comfortable with what I consider to be the perspective distortion that arises from a too-short camera-to-subject distance.

I don’t see that at all. Knowing the person there is nothing exaggerated. The overly prominent shoulder is because it is taken at an angle where the shoulder is closest to the camera, and yet I don’t see it as such because that is the pose.

 

[MattKing]

I don’t see that at all. Knowing the person there is nothing exaggerated. The overly prominent shoulder is because it is taken at an angle where the shoulder is closest to the camera, and yet I don’t see it as such because that is the pose.

Your perception is understandable - you were there and you know the person. The perspective distortion issues are really only experienced by observers who aren't familiar with the subject - and they are at least somewhat subjective.
I expect art directors and stylists and advertisers are more likely to see these things then friends of the subject.
As I'm sure you know, when you photograph lots of strangers, and then try to sell them the photography, some things are more likely to be considered "flattering" by the subject than others. And a subject to camera distance that is a bit more generous than that which is afforded to you by a 40mm lens held close is one of them.

 

[Huss]

Your perception is understandable - you were there and you know the person. The perspective distortion issues are really only experienced by observers who aren't familiar with the subject - and they are at least somewhat subjective.
I expect art directors and stylists and advertisers are more likely to see these things then friends of the subject.
As I'm sure you know, when you photograph lots of strangers, and then try to sell them the photography, some things are more likely to be considered "flattering" by the subject than others. And a subject to camera distance that is a bit more generous than that which is afforded to you by a 40mm lens held close is one of them.

I see your point and I'm sorry if I came over as defensive.

There is a whole reason why 90-105mm lenses are popular.

 

[MattKing]

I see your point and I'm sorry if I came over as defensive.

There is a whole reason why 90-105mm lenses are popular.

I'd trade 100 lenses for your "eye".
That being said, my Zuiko 85mm f/2 is a lens you couldn't get from me no matter how you tried.
Same for the 35mm Zuiko f/2.
This one is the 35mm Zuiko:

And this one is (most likely) one of many examples of the 85mm in the masterful hands of Jane Bown - Samuel Beckett in this case, outside a stage door:

 

[Steven Lee]

I see the appeal of 40mm lenses, but only for people who like 3:2 aspect ratio. I much prefer 4:3, especially for vertical orientation. Even the samples shared here are needlessly stretched. So I tend to crop 35mm negatives by "chopping off" the useless "ears", so the 35mm is my version of the perfect inbetweeny, as in between 28mm and 50mm.

All of this is laughable, of course, because we all know that the 6x6 is the perfect format, where 60mm is the perfect focal length. Everything else is just a compromise for situations when 60mm on 6x6 is not available.

 

[Radost]

I see the appeal of 40mm lenses, but only for people who like 3:2 aspect ratio. I much prefer 4:3, especially for vertical orientation. Even the samples shared here are needlessly stretched. So I tend to crop 35mm negatives by "chopping off" the useless "ears", so the 35mm is my version of the perfect inbetweeny, as in between 28mm and 50mm.

All of this is laughable, of course, because we all know that the 6x6 is the perfect format, where 60mm is the perfect focal length. Everything else is just a compromise for situations when 60mm on 6x6 is not available.

And 28 plus 40mm gives you more flexibility Than 35mm. Also “ especially when it comes to Leica” most people dont want 40mm. Their loss is my gain.

Hasselblad made a superb 60mm f3.5. And if I ever get in to Hasselblads “not likely” it will be the first lens to buy.