Rollei 35 tessar vs sonnar

[chris_david]

I'm shopping for a Rollei 35 and would appreciate any first hand

accounts of the performance of these two lens. It's my impression

that the tessar has higher contrast and the sonnar better resolution.

Based on the images I've seen, the tessar looks to be more pleasing

to my eye. Sharpness is not to most important factor. The speed

difference doesn't matter to me. Is there a cost difference?

 

Thanks,

Chris

[Andrew in Austin]

You've pretty much hit the nail on the head with regards to contrast and resolution. The Sonnar also yields better color rendition. Also, because both lenses are used by guestimating the distance, you'll more often than not will want to shoot close ups at f/8 in order to utilize the wide depth of field of the 40mm lens. The Tessar holds it own quite well at this aperture.

 

There is one important difference that you may be overlooking. The Tessar takes 24mm filters which are darn near impossible to acquire. The Sonnar on the other hand uses the 30.5mm filter size, which is still used on some digicams and a couple of high end P&S cameras.

[frank_scheitrowsky1]

I've had both cameras/lenses and still have the Tessar. It would come down to the type of shooting you will do with it. If it will be lots of low light stuff, then the Sonnar gives you more speed and better results at wider apertures. If it will be a daytime camera and middle f-stops, the Tessar is sharp (with no qualifications) and is cheaper to buy because all the collectors want the Sonnar version.

[jorn ake]

If you get the Sonnar and get a filter for the lens, check that the outside diameter of the filter matches the inner diameter of your lens cap and hood (assuming that you have a press-on not threaded-on lens cap and hood.) My filter (B&W) is slightly smaller, so both my filter and hood will not stay on. I am not sure why exactly I haven't gotten around to correcting this, but...

 

A really great camera to have on you at all times. That way you can shap away at nearly anything at any time. Carry an extra battery though to keep the meter (always on) going. Works surprisingly well btw. Pretty aimable for accurate calculations in varied light.<div></div>

[luis triguez]

Maybe my Rollei 35 is the one to have the poorest lens: Planar 3.5 but it's so bad. I made some pictures in North Wales time ago.

 

 

Porthmadog (Gwynedd) Tri-X 400 ASA. Rodinal 1:25 7 min 20C

[luis triguez]

Last one don't worry

[charcoal]

I have shot with both Tessar and Sonnar versions. The contrast and resolution of the Tessar are certainly adequate. My experience has been that the Tessar version shows a flare spot when taking a picture toward the sun even if the sun is well above the scene. The problem is that the sun reflects off the bottom of the lens barrel, giving a flare spot in the upper portion of the picture. And yes, I was using a lens hood. This was with an original, and fairly early, German version. I don't know whether or not this was addressed in later versions. The lens barrels of the 35S and B35 models are different, and I have never noticed this phenomenon with either of those models.

 

Regarding the availability of filters, try www.kohscamera.com. They have new Heliopan filters in 24mm size as follows: KR1.5, UV, Red 25, Orange 22, Yellow 8, Green 13 and Yellow/Green 11. 30.5mm filters are available in UV, KR1.5 and Red 25. They also have rubber lens hoods and screw in lens caps for both sizes. Some cheaper filters are also available in these sizes.

[jorn ake]

Here is the Sonnar shooting into (or thereabouts) the sun.<div></div>

[frank_a._bridges]

My advice FWIW: If you are on a budget and dont care about snob appeal, you can get a Tessar made in Singapore for under 150 us $.

They are very sharp and ( 8 x 10 print wise) nobody will tell the difference from a Sonnar made in Germany.

[andrew_hall1]

>Maybe my Rollei 35 is the one to have the poorest lens: Planar 3.5

 

I believe it's the triplet Triotar since no Rollei 35 has had a Planar lens.

[jamiew]

Chris.

 

With the advent of digital these cameras are not worth what they used to be. I have found that there really isn't that much difference in price between the two cameras. I have a Rollei 35S and it takes amazing photos, provided things are in focus. Before I begun shooting exclusively digital it's primary use for me was urban landscapes which did not require critical focus. That camera and a small table top tripod is amazing.

[vidom]

I have both a very old 35 with Tessar and a 35 Classic with the latest Sonnar. I love both. I can't see much difference in the results, both are fine performers. The Sonnar is supposed to be better at the wider apertures, this definitely levels off from about f5,6. The difference may be insignificant because you'll want to use either of them stopped down to increase DOF for compensation of the lack of distance setting accuracy. Camera shake at speeds below 1/125 is a serious matter as well because the camera is too light. Because of all of this, I end up using high speed film with these cameras, which also levels off any difference between these lenses.

[luis triguez]

Andrew, you are right. It's a Tessar. Sorry

[MTC Photography]

I have both Rollei 35 and Rollei 35S<P>

Rollei 35S has a better Sonnar lens

[MTC Photography]

Movie star Chou Run Fat is a photography fan his camera looks like a

Rollei 35s<P>

 

http://stars.zaobao.com/images1/zhourunfa241204.jpg