Comparing the lens on my Rollei P&S to my Leica M7 w 28mm Asph

[Alan Johnson]

It seems likely that the Leica lens result is limited by something else, not the lens.
For example see post 19 here, a Zeiss 50 mm gets 240-260 lppm on the film with CMS 20:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/rollei-rpx-25-grain-and-resolution.115244/

 

[pentaxuser]

It seems likely that the Leica lens result is limited by something else, not the lens.
For example see post 19 here, a Zeiss 50 mm gets 240-260 lppm on the film with CMS 20:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/rollei-rpx-25-grain-and-resolution.115244/

CMS 20 is a "special kind of film so can I ask:Would the there be a difference in the test if the majority of "normal" films were used.?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[BMbikerider]

The Rollei QZ is made out of titanium, including the lens cap! It was designed by Porsche for Rollei as the ultimate P&S camera.

OK let me modify my comment: When the Rollei has been melted down and all residual metals and plastic have been recycled and made into other consumer items. Ferdinand Porsche can design something else to use what is left.

 

[removed account4]

but can your rollei lens make sunshine at midnight,
or poach an egg ?

 

[Huss]

It seems likely that the Leica lens result is limited by something else, not the lens.
For example see post 19 here, a Zeiss 50 mm gets 240-260 lppm on the film with CMS 20:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/rollei-rpx-25-grain-and-resolution.115244/

Why do you assume it's not the Rollei lens that is limited by the film?

 

[Huss]

OK let me modify my comment: When the Rollei has been melted down and all residual metals and plastic have been recycled and made into other consumer items. Ferdinand Porsche can design something else to use what is left.

Just compare the melting point of titanium (Rollei) vs brass (Leica)

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/melting-temperature-metals-d_860.html



I wonder why Leica uses such an inferior material?

 

[BMbikerider]

In short, I dunno!
Get in touch with Leica themselves. Perhaps it has something to do with brass is more easily machined than titanium and not many of their cameras get melted down.
Brass has served Ernst Leitz and now Leica for a century, so why change a proven formula. All the essential working parts will be somewhat better and robust materials with the idea in mind that they can be repaired time and time again. Were the screw thread mounts of the early interchangeable lens Leicas also made of brass. I never heard of a screw thread camera failing because it was brass! The later ones (M Series) would have the mount made from stainless steel which is more than durable enough for a camera and ideal for a bayonet.

Also Titanium will be far more expensive and more difficult to make complex moldings and pressings and so bump the price up even further. Brass isn't an inferior metal, it is just different and suits the task in hand. besides when the 1st Leicas were made had they even discovered the properties of Titanium?

(Apart from anything else I don't like point and shoot cameras)

 

[Frank53]

It seems likely that the Leica lens result is limited by something else, not the lens.
For example see post 19 here, a Zeiss 50 mm gets 240-260 lppm on the film with CMS 20:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/rollei-rpx-25-grain-and-resolution.115244/

That’s what I was wondering in posts #10 and #15.
But my contribution was not appreciated
Of course it could limit the results of both lenses.
In “the old days” tests were performed on films like Technical Pan or Agfa Copex.
Regards,
Frank

 

[Ian Grant]

It's wrong to call the Rollei 35 QZ just a P&S camera, sure it's Automatic has various program modes and has Autofocus but it also has manual settings as well. It was an expensive expensive, I don't know the original prices but they can fetch high prices still today.

We could call any SLR with a Program mode and Autofocus a P&S camera, the reality here is it's comparison of a high end Rollei 35mm camera with another high end Leitz lens we should expect quality results from both.

Ian

 

[Alan Johnson]

Why do you assume it's not the Rollei lens that is limited by the film?

It's called the prime lens vs zoom lens debate. If the zoom lens was equal they would not need to make prime lenses any more for most purposes.

 

[Ian Grant]

It's called the prime lens vs zoom lens debate. If the zoom lens was equal they would not need to make prime lenses any more for most purposes.

It's a very limited zoom range 28-60mm which helps designers produce a high quality f2.8 lens, what we can't see in the examples is how or if the lens distorts compared to the Leitz lens.

Ian

 

[guangong]

Interesting...I once pitted my Retina IIa against my M6 w/50mm Summicron--same film, processed together, etc--made enlargements in my darkroom to the sizes that I typically print 35mm negatives, and was shocked to find that the Retina was actually just a tad sharper at each enlargement size. Never going to give up my Leica, but I was pleasantly surprised knowing that I could grab the Retina for a hike or whatever and expect nice results.

Back in the days when Retinas were sold new in camera stores they were not cheap. But compared with the cost of a Leica with lens they were sold as “the poor man’s Leica “. Not only fine lenses but very convenient cameras to carry around.

 

[Huss]

In short, I dunno!
Get in touch with Leica themselves. Perhaps it has something to do with brass is more easily machined than titanium and not many of their cameras get melted down.
Brass has served Ernst Leitz and now Leica for a century, so why change a proven formula. All the essential working parts will be somewhat better and robust materials with the idea in mind that they can be repaired time and time again. Were the screw thread mounts of the early interchangeable lens Leicas also made of brass. I never heard of a screw thread camera failing because it was brass! The later ones (M Series) would have the mount made from stainless steel which is more than durable enough for a camera and ideal for a bayonet.

Also Titanium will be far more expensive and more difficult to make complex moldings and pressings and so bump the price up even further. Brass isn't an inferior metal, it is just different and suits the task in hand. besides when the 1st Leicas were made had they even discovered the properties of Titanium?

(Apart from anything else I don't like point and shoot cameras)

Leica has made a bunch of limited edition cameras out of titanium, including my M7:

https://petapixel.com/2014/08/30/gorgeous-rare-leica-mp-titanium-available-first-time-outside-japan/
https://www.thephoblographer.com/2016/06/09/leica-m7-titanium-edition-kit-will/

So Leica knows that only the best of the best is made of it, which is why their versions are $40,000 and up... Without a lens!

The solid titanium Rollei is looking sweeter all the time.

 

[Huss]

It's a very limited zoom range 28-60mm which helps designers produce a high quality f2.8 lens, what we can't see in the examples is how or if the lens distorts compared to the Leitz lens.

Ian

That limited zoom range still tops that of what my 28mm 2.8 Asph offers. By a lot.


There are plenty of horizontal lines (and some vertical ones too) in those pics to look for distortion. Just match the two up.

 

[Ian Grant]

That limited zoom range still tops that of what my 28mm 2.8 Asph offers. By a lot.


There are plenty of horizontal lines (and some vertical ones too) in those pics to look for distortion. Just match the two up.

I might be miss-reading you but in English you imply the Zoom is better than your 28mm Leitz lens. I'd doubt that I borrowed a 21mm Leitz lens in th 1990's and it was superb a28mm is even better

Ian

 

[faberryman]

Not sure why everyone is so surprised at the Rollei’s performance. Leica makes nice lenses, but they are not the only one. Rarely does absolute lens performance make or break an image.

 

[Huss]

I might be miss-reading you but in English you imply the Zoom is better than your 28mm Leitz lens. I'd doubt that I borrowed a 21mm Leitz lens in th 1990's and it was superb a28mm is even better

Ian

The Leica 28mm Asph 2.8, that I own, is indeed superb. But comparing the results from it to my Rollei shows no difference at 28mm and 2.8. So the Rollei's lens is superb too.
The difference here is that the Rollei's lens came attached to a camera that has a far higher spec in many ways than my Leica M7, that I attached my 28mm lens to.
The Rollei is made out of titanium, and has a shutter that goes to 1/8000 sec. The Leica is made out of brass (unless you want to pay $40,000 more for a titanium one), and has a shutter that goes to 1/1000 sec.
The Rollei cost (used) $500 give or take. My M7 + lens costs (used) $3500.

Anyway, this isn't really a Leica vs. whatever, as I love my M7, especially after I had the 75mm frame lines masked off so the VF is uncluttered when using a 50mm lens. It's just to show that there are some hidden gems out there for not 'that' much money in comparison.
Here is the one huge advantage of the Leica - it is whisper quiet. The Rollei is like a drunk toppling over rubbish bins in comparison.

 

[Huss]

Even BooBoos appreciates the Porsche design, titanium build and 1/8000 sec shutter...