Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Opinion on Rollei 6008 40/3.5, 60/3.5, 90/4m, 110mm/2 & 180/2.8 lenses wanted  (Read 3155 times)

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

I recently added a Rollei 6008 alongside my Contax 645 system, as to use for:

1. Repro work because of its ultra quite shutter & ability to lock mirror which Contax lucks (with multishot backs)...
2. Film digitization instead of a drum scanner using multishot MFDB. (same reason than the Contax as above)
3. Use with Rollei Control S on a view camera with my MFDBs (in multishot mode too) and Sony FF mirrorless.
4. Leaf shutter for high sync which Contax lucks
5. Add 6x6 film captures which Contax lucks

I choose the particular camera because it is fully compatible with my current Sinarback 54H & Hasselblad CF-39MS backs (as long as I get hold of the adapters and cables for it)... and additionally because it is "as quite as a dead man can be" if used in 16x mode with a multishot back.

Don't care for AF or other type of photography than what is described above... I think of the 90mm f4m as the prime lens to satisfy 1 & 2 above and then the 90 and the rest as to built a system around it for 3, 4 & 5...  Please comment on your experience on these lenses for what they are wanted for... Thank you.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2016, 06:18:41 pm by Theodoros »
Logged

Gigi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 548
    • some work

Welcome to Rollei-land. I've been using the system since about 1992, and have owned each of those lenses, although with different experience levels. Much appreciate the system, and currently use the lenses with the later Hy6 body.

I have used a number of lenses for repro work, as they are all quite good. The 90 is exceptionally sharp, and it is real crisp. Eric Hiss (Rolleiflex USA - check out his website, full of good info) is quite fond of this lens and has taken some very sharp images with it, including multishot. I did a test comparing it with a Rodie 90 HR lens (one generation back) and found it either comparable or superior. All good for this lens.

Very fond of the leaf shutter. Use it all the time, with the easy mirror lockup. For walk around, one can use a monopod, compose, hold steady and just flick the mirror up and shoot. Got some nice shots in dimmer light with that, shooting the 60 reasonably controlled to 1/40, and in extreme, to 1/20 sec.

On each of the lenses -
40 3.5 - this is a nice compact Schneider lens, and generally decent. It is, however, the only Schneider lens for the Rollei that shows a bit of softness on the edges. I prefer tech camera lens for the wides, but this is a good lens with that one caveat.
60 3.5 - if this is the Curtagon, favorite lens of the group. Don't know why, but it is sharp, has warm, a general rendering that is IMHO superior to any other lens owned. Don't let this one go. Haven't used it for copy work tho.
90 f4 - the macro of the group. Super sharp. long focus throw, I don't care for it for walk around, somehow finding myself always short of DOF. Prefer the 80 2.8 AF, with optional 1.4 TX for the general use instead.
110 f2 - much loved lens by others, but I didn't fall for it. Too heavy for walk around. The best Zeiss in the Rollei family (the other ones are not as good as the Schneiders).
180 2.8 - very good lens, no flaws, just not light. Much liked for portrait work. Use with the 1.4  TX, and get a 250 f4, with no loss of quality. However, I prefer the smaller 150 telexenar.

My walk around kit is typically the 60mm, or if there is room, I'll add the 80 with the 1.4TX, or just the 150 Telexenar.

All of these lenses will do fine on digital backs - I've seen Eric's work on the 80mb back, I use a Leaf 33mp back, and really have no complaints. For walk around, I'd base your work on the 60 Curtagon, and use the others as needed. Its easy enough to add the 80 2.8 if you want it later. Or the 150.

Enjoy the system. Not too sure about whether this makes much sense to add on the Sony FF body, but you'll figure that out. These are fine lenses, solid as rocks.
 
Logged
Geoff

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

Welcome to Rollei-land. I've been using the system since about 1992, and have owned each of those lenses, although with different experience levels. Much appreciate the system, and currently use the lenses with the later Hy6 body.

I have used a number of lenses for repro work, as they are all quite good. The 90 is exceptionally sharp, and it is real crisp. Eric Hiss (Rolleiflex USA - check out his website, full of good info) is quite fond of this lens and has taken some very sharp images with it, including multishot. I did a test comparing it with a Rodie 90 HR lens (one generation back) and found it either comparable or superior. All good for this lens.

Very fond of the leaf shutter. Use it all the time, with the easy mirror lockup. For walk around, one can use a monopod, compose, hold steady and just flick the mirror up and shoot. Got some nice shots in dimmer light with that, shooting the 60 reasonably controlled to 1/40, and in extreme, to 1/20 sec.

On each of the lenses -
40 3.5 - this is a nice compact Schneider lens, and generally decent. It is, however, the only Schneider lens for the Rollei that shows a bit of softness on the edges. I prefer tech camera lens for the wides, but this is a good lens with that one caveat.
60 3.5 - if this is the Curtagon, favorite lens of the group. Don't know why, but it is sharp, has warm, a general rendering that is IMHO superior to any other lens owned. Don't let this one go. Haven't used it for copy work tho.
90 f4 - the macro of the group. Super sharp. long focus throw, I don't care for it for walk around, somehow finding myself always short of DOF. Prefer the 80 2.8 AF, with optional 1.4 TX for the general use instead.
110 f2 - much loved lens by others, but I didn't fall for it. Too heavy for walk around. The best Zeiss in the Rollei family (the other ones are not as good as the Schneiders).
180 2.8 - very good lens, no flaws, just not light. Much liked for portrait work. Use with the 1.4  TX, and get a 250 f4, with no loss of quality. However, I prefer the smaller 150 telexenar.

My walk around kit is typically the 60mm, or if there is room, I'll add the 80 with the 1.4TX, or just the 150 Telexenar.

All of these lenses will do fine on digital backs - I've seen Eric's work on the 80mb back, I use a Leaf 33mp back, and really have no complaints. For walk around, I'd base your work on the 60 Curtagon, and use the others as needed. Its easy enough to add the 80 2.8 if you want it later. Or the 150.

Enjoy the system. Not too sure about whether this makes much sense to add on the Sony FF body, but you'll figure that out. These are fine lenses, solid as rocks.

Thanks, very informative and helpful indeed... walk around or travel isn't what I got the Rollei for (I've got the Contax and DSLRs for that...), The Rollei and lenses are  only wanted for the 5 reasons I state above... Still very informative and helpful as I can conclude and adapt for my requirements your input. 

Only one thing... would you prefer the Zeiss 40 over the Schneider 40? Which aperture does the Schneider 40 "comes to life"? Shall I drop the Schneider 40 altogether as I have the superb Contax 35/3.5?  I really don't want to do that as I plan to use it for 6x6 film... (and then digitize the film by using the Sinarback 54H in 16x multishot mode)...
Logged

Gigi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 548
    • some work

I've not shot with the Zeiss 40, but don't take the criticism of the Schneider too harshly. Its a remarkable lens, compact, and speedy. With a MFDB, you should have good results to the edge of the sensor. Its just the only lens in the lineup that wasn't "perfect".  Its still good - I'd hold onto it, if its not huge money.
Logged
Geoff

dergiman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
    • http://www.philippderganz.com

The Schneider 40mm lens is a good lens, just not as perfect as the rest of the Schneider pack. I prefer the Schneider 50mm/2.8 AFD PQS lens. If the 50mm focal length is good for you i´d try to get a 50mm/f2.8 AF PQS lens for your Rollei 6000. The 50mm manual focus PQS is optically different and a bit heavier, but i never shot with the manual focus lens, so i can´t comment its´ optical performance.

You should also look into the Schneider 150mm/f4.5 APO-Macro PQ lens.
Logged
Philipp Derganz Photography
www.philippderganz.com
Architektur Photo
Wien, Austria

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454


Has one checked on the image circle of the lenses under consideration? (inc the 150/f4.5 micro).
Logged

dergiman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
    • http://www.philippderganz.com
Logged
Philipp Derganz Photography
www.philippderganz.com
Architektur Photo
Wien, Austria

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

 
Phillip, thank's a lot!
Logged

Gigi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 548
    • some work

There was a Rollei macro manual - you can find it here:

http://www.gigi-photos.com/rollei-closeup-manual.pdf
Logged
Geoff

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

There was a Rollei macro manual - you can find it here:

http://www.gigi-photos.com/rollei-closeup-manual.pdf

Geoff, you are a life savior! Thanks!
Logged

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

Can somebody please mention on which is sharper at f8 & f11... is it the 90/4 micro or is it the 150/4.5?  The question is not for micro work, but rather with the subject at 10 to 20 feet distance
Logged

Gigi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 548
    • some work

That is not easy. The 90 has the reputation as the sharpest in the bunch, but the 150 f4.5 is such a very special lens. Compared with the 150 telexenar and a 150 Rodie Apo-sironar Digital, it was better than both. And it renders beautifully.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 03:54:40 am by Gigi »
Logged
Geoff

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

That is not easy. The 90 has the reputation as the sharpest in the bunch, but the 150 f4.5 is such a very special lens. Compared with the 150 telexenar and a 150 Rodie Apo-sironar Digital, it was better than both. And it renders beautifully.

Let me put it different... Which one would you (or other) prefer as to use for art reproduction of a demanding painting using the Sinarback 54H back in 16x mode?  (no strobes - fuorescent 5600K lighting softened with >97 CRI valves).
Logged

Gigi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 548
    • some work

Fair question, hard to answer, as I have never put either one into that level of testing. For example, I have used a 50AF for copy work of architectural drawings with a single shot back. While perhaps not known for that use, even this lens has been very good (with just a bit of distortion correction dialed in). All to say that these lenses are quite fine in general. I suspect either the 90 or 150 would work. 

Given that the 90 is known for its sharpness, and wouldn't require the bellows (possible shake) I'd probably go that way. However, if color rendition was critical, I'd look carefully at the 150. Very hard choice. Touch base with Eric Hiss though, as he has done multishot with these lenses and has more expertise.

Sorry not to be more helpful.
Logged
Geoff

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

Fair question, hard to answer, as I have never put either one into that level of testing. For example, I have used a 50AF for copy work of architectural drawings with a single shot back. While perhaps not known for that use, even this lens has been very good (with just a bit of distortion correction dialed in). All to say that these lenses are quite fine in general. I suspect either the 90 or 150 would work. 

Given that the 90 is known for its sharpness, and wouldn't require the bellows (possible shake) I'd probably go that way. However, if color rendition was critical, I'd look carefully at the 150. Very hard choice. Touch base with Eric Hiss though, as he has done multishot with these lenses and has more expertise.

Sorry not to be more helpful.

Ι know Eric (never met him due to distance though) for many years... However Eric has (wisely) decided not to participate on forum conversations (or rarely do) anymore... So, I guess I will have to trust you for this guys... I really don't need the 6008 to do things I already do with my Contax... The Contax system is faster, can go more wide, handles superbly and lenses are great... I really want to supplement the Contax system for what Contax is (mechanically) inferior for... 

So..., after your suggestions, I'm leaning towards the following:  50/2.8, 90/4APOm & 150/4,6APOm only.... (and forget using the system for general photography)... Only to use the lenses for Art repro (which is what I mainly do for a living) and then on a view camera for interior architecture of monuments and wall paintings in ancient Byzantine monasteries... How does this sound to you? 
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up