Have you ever seen 1:1 comparisons of the Tele Rolleiflex 135 Sonnar against other lenses?

Acrobatics in the Vondelpark

A
Acrobatics in the Vondelpark

  • 2
  • 0
  • 44
Finn Slough Fishing Net

A
Finn Slough Fishing Net

  • 0
  • 0
  • 42
Dried roses

A
Dried roses

  • 9
  • 7
  • 103
Hot Rod

A
Hot Rod

  • 4
  • 0
  • 81
Relics

A
Relics

  • 2
  • 0
  • 71

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,455
Messages
2,759,251
Members
99,507
Latest member
rosin555
Recent bookmarks
0
Joined
Aug 31, 2023
Messages
176
Location
USA
Format
Analog
I'd love to see a side by side of the Tele Rolleiflex 135mm Sonnar lens against the Mamiya RB67's 127mm Mamiya KL f3.5 (with the 6x6 film back or cropped) and SMC Pentax 67 Macro 135mm f/4 (cropped to 6x6). Ideally the 1) same scene, 2) same model, 3) same subject distance, 4) same film, 5) same aperture. I'm sure someone has already done this somewhere out there? Have any of you ever come across a link?
 
Last edited:

ic-racer

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
16,483
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
The utility of the test would be limited by film flatness. If they all had a vacuum back that would help.
 

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,497
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
I don't recall ever seeing a side by side test of a MF lens. I've seen a few tests of 50mm lens like the Sigma , Nikon and Zeiss 50 1.5 by Pop Photography, never of MF lens. Not many would have access that that many platforms, if you referring the the Tele Rolleiflex that is somewhat rare. My guess is that all would resolve Tmax 200 at 200 LPM, but there might differences distortion and contest depending on the age of the lens and the coatings used.
 
OP
OP
Certain Exposures
Joined
Aug 31, 2023
Messages
176
Location
USA
Format
Analog
The utility of the test would be limited by film flatness. If they all had a vacuum back that would help.

Hmm...I bet the RB67 has one. I'll look into that. I wouldn't use a vacuum back often though.

I don't recall ever seeing a side by side test of a MF lens. I've seen a few tests of 50mm lens like the Sigma , Nikon and Zeiss 50 1.5 by Pop Photography, never of MF lens. Not many would have access that that many platforms, if you referring the the Tele Rolleiflex that is somewhat rare. My guess is that all would resolve Tmax 200 at 200 LPM, but there might differences distortion and contest depending on the age of the lens and the coatings used.

Okay, so basically you wouldn't expect a noticeable difference in sharpness between the three?
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
288
Location
Kentucky
Format
Multi Format
The utility of the test would be limited by film flatness. If they all had a vacuum back that would help.

I don't recall film flatness being noted as a particular issue in any of the systems being discussed? All of them are quality cameras with well engineered pressure plates. In fact among "good" cameras, the only real concern I remember having heard of are the early(knob wind) Graflex backs.

How many vacuum backs are even out there? The only ones I know of offhand are the Mamiya 70mm and the late Contax 645 system(but only with 220).
 

Dan Daniel

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Messages
2,832
Location
upstate New York
Format
Medium Format
I do know that when I had a Tele-Rollei for a while, the images struck me as excellent. Very sharp, great out of focus look. I bet it would be very nice for portraits. Of course the 0.3 mutar is needed for head shot distance I think.

Flickr has a search function that will let you pull up images by camera and lens, etc. I doubt that you will find the kind of direct A/B/C testing you are asking about. The Tele-Rollei isn't very common. And the TLR aspect compared to the SLR designs presents some differences.
 

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,497
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
Hmm...I bet the RB67 has one. I'll look into that. I wouldn't use a vacuum back often though.



Okay, so basically you wouldn't expect a noticeable difference in sharpness between the three?

At 8X10 to 11X14, using Tmax 100, printed on decent paper, no, I don't think I will much of a difference. But, is someone had all 3 Rollies, the TLR wide, 80mm 2.8 and the 135 F4, and these were compared to a Mamiya C330 with a wide normal and shot tele, or a Kowa SLR with 3 lens I think you see a difference. The normals will all likely resolved Tmax 100, but the long and short Rollei lens may outperform the Mamiya and Kowa? No good reason to think so, just a hunch. Of course the best comparison would be the 2 TLRs.
 

lecarp

Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
313
Format
8x10 Format
Sharpness is only one of many aspects when comparing lenses.
The OP gave no clue as to what he hopes to glean from such a comparison, sharpness wasn't mentioned.
Any of the lenses mentioned should be more than adequit from a sharpness point of view unless defective.
 

Arthurwg

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
2,536
Location
Taos NM
Format
Medium Format
I believe a "flat glass" was an accessory for the Rolleiflex.
 

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,497
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
Yes, but we are talking about cameras not going what 45 to 50 years old, many well used. The rollie being fixed lens will have fewer issues as there no play in the lens mount. My Kowa seem pretty solid, but the breech collar is going to become lose with use. So testing against cameras with interchangeable lens who knows if the difference is the in the lens or just wear and tear. So, yeah, not sure what P.O want to know and why he wants to know it.
 

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
2,924
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
Having owned those cameras with the exception of the Kowa..... I'd take the Tele-Rolleiflex in a heartbeat over the others. To me it's the best handling one of the lot and to me that means more than comparative lens tests.
 
OP
OP
Certain Exposures
Joined
Aug 31, 2023
Messages
176
Location
USA
Format
Analog
Sharpness is only one of many aspects when comparing lenses.
The OP gave no clue as to what he hopes to glean from such a comparison, sharpness wasn't mentioned.
Any of the lenses mentioned should be more than adequit from a sharpness point of view unless defective.

Yes, but we are talking about cameras not going what 45 to 50 years old, many well used. The rollie being fixed lens will have fewer issues as there no play in the lens mount. My Kowa seem pretty solid, but the breech collar is going to become lose with use. So testing against cameras with interchangeable lens who knows if the difference is the in the lens or just wear and tear. So, yeah, not sure what P.O want to know and why he wants to know it.

I'd like to see all the ways each of the lenses differ visually and then weigh that against the pros and cons of each camera system.

By the way, I decided to forget about studying the Pentax 6x7 lenses because I purchased a lemon and learned about all the various issues that camera system has. The Pentax 67II and Hasselblad are outside of my budget.

@Paul Howell , unfortunately, it seems like the Tele Rolleiflex lens tends to develop separation.
 
Last edited:

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,119
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
A good comparison would be Rollei lens and Hasselblad lenses since both are made by Zeiss.
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
288
Location
Kentucky
Format
Multi Format
A good comparison would be Rollei lens and Hasselblad lenses since both are made by Zeiss.

At least in the normal lenses, its often said that the Rolleiflex lenses are better than their Hasselblad counterparts. The 80mm Hasselblad Planar IIRC uses a mild amount of retrofocus, where the Rolleiflex lens doesn't need to. MOST Hasselblad 80mm Planars are 7 elements, barring the very early ones and the late CB 80mm(I actually have a 6 element Planar that came with my first Hasselblad, a 1960 500C-it was the only one I used up until honestly earlier this year when I got a mid-60s 80mm on another 500C. I don't see much difference...although the 100mm Planar was supposed to fix the "shortcomings" of the 80mm.

It would be difficult to compare Tele directly too, since the only 135mm Hassy lens I'm aware of is the short-mount Planar, very much a special purpose lens. The 150mm Sonnar, though, is legendary of course and might be a favorable comparison...

Also, don't forget that Schneider supplied quite a few Rolleiflex lenses, where the only Hassy lens I'm aware of they made was the 140-280 f/5.6 zoom behemoth. Legend has it that Schneider lenses are often better than their Zeiss counterparts, or at least on US market cameras since Schneider was trying to "prove themselves". I live in low rent Rolleiflex territory, with a couple of early Automats, all with 75mm f/3.5 Xenars(Tessar-equivalent) that I've never been disappointed in, and the only Zeiss Rolleis I've had have been Triotars.
 

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
2,924
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
Since Hasselblad is outside the the OP's budget....how about comparing the Mamiya C330 and a 135mm blue dot... since 6x6 is a closer comparison that the RB67?
 
OP
OP
Certain Exposures
Joined
Aug 31, 2023
Messages
176
Location
USA
Format
Analog
A good comparison would be Rollei lens and Hasselblad lenses since both are made by Zeiss.

At least in the normal lenses, its often said that the Rolleiflex lenses are better than their Hasselblad counterparts. The 80mm Hasselblad Planar IIRC uses a mild amount of retrofocus, where the Rolleiflex lens doesn't need to. MOST Hasselblad 80mm Planars are 7 elements, barring the very early ones and the late CB 80mm(I actually have a 6 element Planar that came with my first Hasselblad, a 1960 500C-it was the only one I used up until honestly earlier this year when I got a mid-60s 80mm on another 500C. I don't see much difference...although the 100mm Planar was supposed to fix the "shortcomings" of the 80mm.

It would be difficult to compare Tele directly too, since the only 135mm Hassy lens I'm aware of is the short-mount Planar, very much a special purpose lens. The 150mm Sonnar, though, is legendary of course and might be a favorable comparison...

Also, don't forget that Schneider supplied quite a few Rolleiflex lenses, where the only Hassy lens I'm aware of they made was the 140-280 f/5.6 zoom behemoth. Legend has it that Schneider lenses are often better than their Zeiss counterparts, or at least on US market cameras since Schneider was trying to "prove themselves". I live in low rent Rolleiflex territory, with a couple of early Automats, all with 75mm f/3.5 Xenars(Tessar-equivalent) that I've never been disappointed in, and the only Zeiss Rolleis I've had have been Triotars.

Unfortunately, the entry cost, maintenance cost, and replacement cost of the Hasselblad system is out of my price range. It would be interesting though!

Since Hasselblad is outside the the OP's budget....how about comparing the Mamiya C330 and a 135mm blue dot... since 6x6 is a closer comparison that the RB67?
You know what...I assumed the C330 and 135mm blue dot combo is much heavier and larger than the Tele Rolleiflex based on pictures and video. I will double check that.

I already own a RB67 and I could get an affordable 6x6 back for it. I'm looking for the most portable Mamiya RB67 alternative (based on size and weight) in that narrow focal range (125mm - 150mm) with the least tradeoffs. I landed on the Tele Rolleiflex.
 
Last edited:

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
51,930
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Tele-Rolleiflex weight= 1,535 grams
Mamiya C330 + 135mm f/4.5 blue dot lens weight = 1,835 grams
Mamiya C220 + 135mm f/4.5 blue dot lens weight = 1,520 grams
The Mamiyas are definitely larger.
I only have examples from the Mamiya, but anyways, here is one:
 

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
2,924
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
Unfortunately, the entry cost, maintenance cost, and replacement cost of the Hasselblad system is out of my price range. It would be interesting though!


You know what...I assumed the C330 and 135mm blue dot combo is much heavier and larger than the Tele Rolleiflex based on pictures and video. I will double check that.

I already own a RB67 and I could get an affordable 6x6 back for it. I'm looking for the most portable Mamiya RB67 alternative (based on size and weight) in that narrow focal range (125mm - 150mm) with the least tradeoffs. I landed on the Tele Rolleiflex.

I understand.... though there's not many Tele Rolleiflexes around and nice ones go for real money.
All things being equal they'd be my choice too.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
51,930
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
This one was using the C220 I also had for a while, with the 135mm lens:
 
OP
OP
Certain Exposures
Joined
Aug 31, 2023
Messages
176
Location
USA
Format
Analog
Tele-Rolleiflex weight= 1,535 grams
Mamiya C330 + 135mm f/4.5 blue dot lens weight = 1,835 grams
Mamiya C220 + 135mm f/4.5 blue dot lens weight = 1,520 grams
The Mamiyas are definitely larger.
I only have examples from the Mamiya, but anyways, here is one:

Thank you, Matt!

I understand.... though there's not many Tele Rolleiflexes around and nice ones go for real money.
All things being equal they'd be my choice too.

Yes, based on sold prices a deal does come around once in a while. I'll keep looking.
 

GG12

Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
86
Format
Medium Format
Have seen tele Rolleis for <$1500, so maybe you can find one

Not seen a test comparison, but this is a pretty interesting (and famous) test of two TLRs and a Hassy, and Mamiya. Pretty interesting results too:

four cameras test
 

Nokton48

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
2,949
Format
Multi Format
I have the Mamiya C22's/C33's with 135 Blue Dot. And also a 500C/M and 500EL/M with the Zeiss T* Bellows 135 Planar-S. I've tested them both side by side same composition in the studio, and both are more than adequate for my needs. They are both excellent in every way. The Mamys require the Parramender for accurate composition and the 135 Planar-S requires a double cable release so they work completely differently. Similar results can be achieved with either camera.

Superboom Up Apus 2 Primo Head Universal Beauty Light by Nokton48, on Flickr


I wrestled around with the Manfrotto Superboom today, got it all tuned up and decided to do a quickie test shoot ala "Beauty Lighting". Overhead Primo 2 Head with Universal Broncolor Beauty Dish, did some machine work to convert it to modern Pulso fittings. Apus 2 Broncolor Power Pack turned down to 7.9 power setting. Pulled out one of my Mamiya C22 TLR's with 135mm, loaded with Shanghai 220, camera has the Porrofinder and Stovepipe so fully tricked out. Metered with Broncolor Strobe Meter. It was fun to get back into the studio after a short hiatus.

Superboom Up Apus 2 Primo Head Universal Beauty Light 2 by Nokton48, on Flickr

Lighting test of above setup with Sony Nex 3 digital.
 
Last edited:

beemermark

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
848
Format
4x5 Format
Had one but sold it. Fantastic lens just like the Hasselblad. Just don't care that much for tele's.
 

ic-racer

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
16,483
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
The utility of the test would be limited by film flatness. If they all had a vacuum back that would help.

Maybe I will rephrase for clarity.

I suspect the differences between the lenses, when tested wide-open in the cameras with film, will be less than the differneces in frame by frame film flatness.
The in-camera test would be more valuable as a LENS test, rather than a FILM FLATNESS test if all the cameras had vacuum 220 backs and 220 film was available for the test. Of course that is not the case.

So, which ever lens has the lest amount of cleaning marks and haze; that would be the best one.

screen-shot-2024-11-17-at-9-10-28-pm-png.383732
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom