Quick question about the Rollei 35

[Kirks518]

When the lens is retracted, is it locked, or is it just 'there'? I just got one, and everything is going great, but the lens when retracted just sits there, and isn't locked in the closed position. The manual mentions locking the lens when opening, but nothing about when it's closed. Thanks.

 

[Bill Burk]

It does not lock in retracted position, so it can be pulled out easily.

 

[Hatchetman]

what he said

 

[Kirks518]

Great! Thanks!

 

[hdeyong]

I hope you enjoy yours as much as I do mine. It's a great little camera.

 

[alanrockwood]

In the retracted position it is just held in by friction, but it works fine. In the extended position it twists to a locked position before the camera can be used. You also have to unlock and twist it before pushing the lens into retracted position.

Also, there is something about the shutter being cocked or not cocked when placing the lens in retracted position, but I don't remember which because it has been a while since I used my Rollei 35.

 

[Kirks518]

In the retracted position it is just held in by friction, but it works fine. In the extended position it twists to a locked position before the camera can be used. You also have to unlock and twist it before pushing the lens into retracted position.

Also, there is something about the shutter being cocked or not cocked when placing the lens in retracted position, but I don't remember which because it has been a while since I used my Rollei 35.

Shutter has to be cocked.

So far I've run one roll through it, just finished it up about 30 minutes ago, going to develop it in a bit. It's fun, but I have a strange feeling I'm not going to like it as much as my Minolta 7sII or Canon QL17 GIII. We'll see.

 

[alienmeatsack]

If the shutter isn't cocked, or cocked fully, the lens will not retract and hits on one side. I had this happen to be on my first roll. It ended before the shutter was fully cocked to the next frame and then I could not for the life of me figure out why I couldn't get the lens to go back in. Finishing the cocking process freed it right up.

As far as the lens when it's in the camera, mine does not seem loose or feel like it's just going to pop out. As said above, it has some friction and just resists when you pull enough to make it stay without effort and come out when pulled gently.

 

[Hatchetman]

IMO its a camera that serves a purpose - when you need something really really small, yet you will be out in the sun. The lack of a rangefinder is problematic.

 

[mgb74]

... The lack of a rangefinder is problematic.

With the relatively wide and slow lens (35mm, max aperture of 2.8 or 3.5) the lack of a rangefinder is not as problematic as you might think. Especially if using iso 400 film (even at 250).

 

[Hatchetman]

Indoors you're going to be at f2.8, @ 5 feet, depth of field is about 8 inches. The distance markings on the lens are rudimentary to say the least. Not ideal.

 

[Xmas]

Indoors you're going to be at f2.8, @ 5 feet, depth of field is about 8 inches. The distance markings on the lens are rudimentary to say the least. Not ideal.

But it is a specialist camera for when you are travelling or hillwalking when you need small and light.

It is no good for available darkness.

It is no good for close ups.

 

[Hatchetman]

But it is a specialist camera for when you are travelling or hillwalking when you need small and light.

That's what I said!

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Indoors you're going to be at f2.8, @ 5 feet, depth of field is about 8 inches. The distance markings on the lens are rudimentary to say the least. Not ideal.

I'd say the Rollei 35 are not for this purpose!

 

[Hatchetman]

I'd say the Rollei 35 are not for this purpose!

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly!

 

[MartinP]

Just to point out that the lens is 40mm, not 35mm. Stick a bit of white tape on the lower part of back of the camera and, with the aid of a tape measure, mark it as a human rangefinder* if you need reassurance over focussing. In general, thinking of the width of your table, the length of your bed, the length of a room in your house etc. will be good enough.

*Hold the camera at arms length -- close your right eye -- line up the left of the camera with part of your subject -- swap eyes -- you will see the subject 'move' along the camera. With help of the tape measure, make marks at the intervals written on your lens barrel (0,9 1 1,2 1,5 2 3 6 metres on the Sonnar), or at least until you run out of camera width. The spacings of the marks you make on the tape depend on the separation of your eyes and the length of your arms, so they are not really universal, but that will cover the nearer distances for you.

 

[Hatchetman]

I would like to add additional marks on the focusing ring, but do not know how to calculate them. For example, what would be halfway between 8 and 15 feet? It is some sort of non-linear relationship.

 

[SalveSlog]

I think it's a logarithmic relationship. Just like the aperture.

 

[alanrockwood]

Just to point out that the lens is 40mm, not 35mm. Stick a bit of white tape on the lower part of back of the camera and, with the aid of a tape measure, mark it as a human rangefinder* if you need reassurance over focussing. In general, thinking of the width of your table, the length of your bed, the length of a room in your house etc. will be good enough.

*Hold the camera at arms length -- close your right eye -- line up the left of the camera with part of your subject -- swap eyes -- you will see the subject 'move' along the camera. With help of the tape measure, make marks at the intervals written on your lens barrel (0,9 1 1,2 1,5 2 3 6 metres on the Sonnar), or at least until you run out of camera width. The spacings of the marks you make on the tape depend on the separation of your eyes and the length of your arms, so they are not really universal, but that will cover the nearer distances for you.

I made a card to do the same thing. If done well it is surprisingly accurate.

There is a web page somewhere that gives more complete instructions on how to make one of these focusing aids, but I don't recall where it is. I think it's at photo.net.

 

[Bill Burk]

I tried drawing marks on my index finger but found it was difficult to reliably determine distances...

Anyone try the human rangefinder trick with better success? My hunch is the trigonometry doesn't really work well for the scale focusing cameras that I have. Like the difference between 4 and 12 feet is a quarter inch at arms length... and that a small error might make me choose 9 instead of 4, a significant focus error.

 

[1L6E6VHF]

I would like to add additional marks on the focusing ring, but do not know how to calculate them. For example, what would be halfway between 8 and 15 feet? It is some sort of non-linear relationship.

It actually is linear, but reciprocal. Turning the lens does not change the focal distance per se, it changes the result of (1/distance). One may note that if you set a lens to focus at 10 feet (or 3m), that the infinity mark will be exactly as far away from the 10' (or 3m) mark as the 5' (1.5m) mark is on the other side of the 10' mark.

To figure out the focus distance on an unmarked point between two marks, one would use the formula:

2
--------
1 1
-+-
d1 d2

For example - half way between 8 and 15 feet on the dial:

(2) divided by (1/8 + 1/15)
(2) divided by (.126 + .67)
(2) divided by (.193) = 10.363 (about 10'4" - not 11'6" as simple math would have it)

This has a lot do with why depth of field becomes a serious annoyance when shooting close-ups. For most normal lenses, 50' focus is not very different from 100', and the difference in focus between those two distances is less than the focus difference between 100' and the stars in Orion's Belt. At 3', just moving the object a few inches closer to the camera makes the rays of light from the subject even more divergent.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

It was theworst camera I ever had;very unreliable and prone to break-downs,also, tough to get repaired.I don't miss it.

 

[Hatchetman]

To figure out the focus distance on an unmarked point between two marks, one would use the formula:

Thank you. That is exactly what I need to know. As you imply focus at 3-10 feet is very difficult with this camera, and they could have made much better markings on the lens. Compare to the detail on some of the depth of field markings you see on some lenses that you'd need a loupe to even read.

 

[Regular Rod]

Just to point out that the lens is 40mm, not 35mm. Stick a bit of white tape on the lower part of back of the camera and, with the aid of a tape measure, mark it as a human rangefinder* if you need reassurance over focussing. In general, thinking of the width of your table, the length of your bed, the length of a room in your house etc. will be good enough.

*Hold the camera at arms length -- close your right eye -- line up the left of the camera with part of your subject -- swap eyes -- you will see the subject 'move' along the camera. With help of the tape measure, make marks at the intervals written on your lens barrel (0,9 1 1,2 1,5 2 3 6 metres on the Sonnar), or at least until you run out of camera width. The spacings of the marks you make on the tape depend on the separation of your eyes and the length of your arms, so they are not really universal, but that will cover the nearer distances for you.

You can make a really accurate human rangefinder for any focal length free with the aid of this clever tool: http://tomchuk.com/misc/rf/

RR

 

[elekm]

I have rarely missed focus with the Tessar-equipped camera, while I have missed with the one fitted with the Sonnar.

Excellent cameras that require some adjustments on the part of the photographer, although not as much as when moving to an Exakta, for example.

The hinged pressure plate holds the film very flat.

And it seems that most Rollei 35 cameras have a corner ding.