Discussion:
Flange focal distance
D***@dlr.de
2014-09-08 11:03:34 UTC
Permalink
Hello,

after a while I am going to start a question here.
Can you help me out with some questions about the flange focal distance of Rollei QBM?

First, on a couple of websites the number of 44,70 mm is published.
Also on Wikipedia this value was published.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auflagemaß

In the meantime, this value was corrected to 44,50 mm, and it is mentioned that the 44,70 mm was published erroneously.

So, is there anybody who can confirm the 44,50 mm?

Thanks a lot and best
Chris Burck
2014-09-08 20:01:27 UTC
Permalink
Dirk,

I'm no expert on the Rollei QBM, but having seen similar confusion WRT ffd
on other camera mounts, I'm thinking the 44.7 figure may apply to the
flange-to-pressure plate distance (when film is loaded), whereas the 44.5mm
figure represents the flange-to-focus plane distance. Also, if memory
serves (and please, someone correct me if I'm wrong as I'm half asleep at
the moment), 44.5mm is the M42 screw mount flange distance, and since these
bodies were originally designed as M42. . . .
Richard Knoppow
2014-09-08 20:17:34 UTC
Permalink
----- Original Message -----
From: <Dirk-***@dlr.de>
To: <***@freelists.org>
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2014 4:03 AM
Subject: [rollei_list] Flange focal distance
I received this with a blank body. Evidently others
are getting the text. Not sure what is going on.


--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
***@ix.netcom.com
CarlosMFreaza
2014-09-08 23:04:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@dlr.de
Hello,
after a while I am going to start a question here.
Can you help me out with some questions about the flange focal distance of Rollei QBM?
First, on a couple of websites the number of 44,70 mm is published.
Also on Wikipedia this value was published.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auflagemaß
In the meantime, this value was corrected to 44,50 mm, and it is mentioned that the 44,70 mm was published erroneously.
So, is there anybody who can confirm the 44,50 mm?
Hello Dirk:
I did not find the info in Prochnow's books after a
quick research, however the QBM flange is 44,50mm according Carl Zeiss
confirmed to the Wikipedia article author. Carl Zeiss manufactured
several QBM lenses from the beginning, of course.

Carlos
John Wild
2014-09-09 11:42:09 UTC
Permalink
The PC Super Angulon with adaptable lens mount spec sheet gives the flange
focus distance for a number of cameras...

http://www.summilux.net/documents/PCSuperAngulonR28-300ppp.pdf

...Rollei QBM Lens Mount 46.5 and Flange Focus 44.5

John
Post by CarlosMFreaza
Post by D***@dlr.de
Hello,
after a while I am going to start a question here.
Can you help me out with some questions about the flange focal distance of Rollei QBM?
First, on a couple of websites the number of 44,70 mm is published.
Also on Wikipedia this value was published.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auflagemaß
In the meantime, this value was corrected to 44,50 mm, and it is mentioned
that the 44,70 mm was published erroneously.
So, is there anybody who can confirm the 44,50 mm?
I did not find the info in Prochnow's books after a
quick research, however the QBM flange is 44,50mm according Carl Zeiss
confirmed to the Wikipedia article author. Carl Zeiss manufactured
several QBM lenses from the beginning, of course.
Carlos
---
Rollei List
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Bigler Emmanuel
2014-09-09 12:03:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@dlr.de
First, on a couple of websites the number of 44,70 mm is published.
Also on Wikipedia this value was published.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auflagemaß
In the meantime, this value was corrected to 44,50 mm, and it is mentioned
that the 44,70 mm was published erroneously.
So, is there anybody who can confirm the 44,50 mm?
Hallo Dirk-Roger !

According to the various compilations available on the 'net [available
does not means realiable : 44.6 mm is mentioned for the QBM ...], the
figure of 44,7 mm seems to be the flange focal distance of the
Voigtländer Bessamatic.

http://www.markerink.org/WJM/HTML/mounts.htm

--
Emmanuel
D***@dlr.de
2014-09-09 14:48:05 UTC
Permalink
Emanuel,

yes, but what is correct?

44,50; 44,60; or 44,70 ?

The link of Wikipedia I was including was saying, only some months ago: 44,70 mm.
Now they mentioned there was an error and corrected to 44,50.

I will doublecheck with someone from Rollei again, but any matured data someone has in a service manual will help.
Reason for my inquiry is that I have problems with fitting my Zeiss lenses with QBM to a Canon support. The adapter seems to be manufactured too thick.

Best regards

Dirk


Dirk-Roger Schmitt



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: rollei_list-***@freelists.org [mailto:rollei_list-***@freelists.org] Im Auftrag von Bigler Emmanuel
Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. September 2014 14:03
An: ***@freelists.org
Betreff: [rollei_list] Re: Flange focal distance
Post by D***@dlr.de
First, on a couple of websites the number of 44,70 mm is published.
Also on Wikipedia this value was published.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auflagemaß
In the meantime, this value was corrected to 44,50 mm, and it is
mentioned that the 44,70 mm was published erroneously.
So, is there anybody who can confirm the 44,50 mm?
Hallo Dirk-Roger !

According to the various compilations available on the 'net [available does not means realiable : 44.6 mm is mentioned for the QBM ...], the figure of 44,7 mm seems to be the flange focal distance of the Voigtländer Bessamatic.

http://www.markerink.org/WJM/HTML/mounts.htm

--
Emmanuel

---
Rollei List

- Post to ***@freelists.org

- Subscribe at rollei_list-***@freelists.org with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-***@freelists.org with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
D***@dlr.de
2014-09-09 14:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Dear John,

that is a great information!
Thanks for this document.

By the way, I own this lens with Rollei QBM mount!
If shifted, exposure metering does not work with the SL35E, but with SL2000 it was ok.
I do not know any reason.

Dirk


Dirk-Roger Schmitt



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: rollei_list-***@freelists.org [mailto:rollei_list-***@freelists.org] Im Auftrag von John Wild
Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. September 2014 13:42
An: ***@freelists.org
Betreff: [rollei_list] Re: Flange focal distance

The PC Super Angulon with adaptable lens mount spec sheet gives the flange focus distance for a number of cameras...

http://www.summilux.net/documents/PCSuperAngulonR28-300ppp.pdf

...Rollei QBM Lens Mount 46.5 and Flange Focus 44.5

John
Post by CarlosMFreaza
Post by D***@dlr.de
Hello,
after a while I am going to start a question here.
Can you help me out with some questions about the flange focal distance of Rollei QBM?
First, on a couple of websites the number of 44,70 mm is published.
Also on Wikipedia this value was published.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auflagemaß
In the meantime, this value was corrected to 44,50 mm, and it is
mentioned that the 44,70 mm was published erroneously.
So, is there anybody who can confirm the 44,50 mm?
I did not find the info in Prochnow's books after a
quick research, however the QBM flange is 44,50mm according Carl Zeiss
confirmed to the Wikipedia article author. Carl Zeiss manufactured
several QBM lenses from the beginning, of course.
Carlos
---
Rollei List
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
---
Rollei List

- Post to ***@freelists.org

- Subscribe at rollei_list-***@freelists.org with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-***@freelists.org with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
John Wild
2014-09-09 15:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Dirk,

I have one too. I bought it with a Nikon mount and was lucky to be able to buy a Rollei mount, I cannot remember if it was from Schneider or Rollei. I do not know if they still have some.

I did machine a Rollei mount for it but could not work out why it would not turn all the way to lock. I machined a little at a time to make it smaller because I thought it was too large, but that did not work. In the end it was too small and moved about. I then bought the proper one and realised that I had drilled holes for all the screws but the Rollei one did not have one hole because the stop down pin dropped into it!

John
Post by D***@dlr.de
Dear John,
that is a great information!
Thanks for this document.
By the way, I own this lens with Rollei QBM mount!
If shifted, exposure metering does not work with the SL35E, but with SL2000 it was ok.
I do not know any reason.
Dirk
Dirk-Roger Schmitt
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. September 2014 13:42
Betreff: [rollei_list] Re: Flange focal distance
The PC Super Angulon with adaptable lens mount spec sheet gives the flange focus distance for a number of cameras...
http://www.summilux.net/documents/PCSuperAngulonR28-300ppp.pdf
...Rollei QBM Lens Mount 46.5 and Flange Focus 44.5
John
Post by CarlosMFreaza
Post by D***@dlr.de
Hello,
after a while I am going to start a question here.
Can you help me out with some questions about the flange focal distance of Rollei QBM?
First, on a couple of websites the number of 44,70 mm is published.
Also on Wikipedia this value was published.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auflagemaß
In the meantime, this value was corrected to 44,50 mm, and it is
mentioned that the 44,70 mm was published erroneously.
So, is there anybody who can confirm the 44,50 mm?
I did not find the info in Prochnow's books after a
quick research, however the QBM flange is 44,50mm according Carl Zeiss
confirmed to the Wikipedia article author. Carl Zeiss manufactured
several QBM lenses from the beginning, of course.
Carlos
---
Rollei List
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
---
Rollei List
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
---
Rollei List
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Bigler Emmanuel
2014-09-09 16:32:07 UTC
Permalink
Hello All

I think that I have in hands the proper data allowing to solve the
Mystery of the Rollei 35 mm SLR Flange Focal Distance, thanks to Gérard
Métrot, our French Rollei expert and repair technician who just sent me
the Official Rollei Factory Specs as of 1972.

flange focal distance = distance between the lens bayonet seat and the
focal point = 44,67 mm (an official Braunswcheiger spec _should_ have a
comma as a decimal separator ;-) )

back focal distance = distance between the last lens vertex and the
focal point = 44,50 mm

Hence we get the clue for the "variable" figures quoted on the 'net

1/ confusion between flange focal distance (mechanical - bayonet seat)
and back focal distance (optical - lens vertex)

2/ flange focal distance = 44,67 mm explains why some documents mention
44.6 and some other 44.7

3/ those Rollei figures are not really related to the M42x1 flange
focal distance = "register" in English, quoted as 45.46 mm (not really
close to 44.67) in this other document:
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

I home, Dirk-Roger that you can now have a quiet sleep.
--
Emmanuel
CarlosMFreaza
2014-09-09 17:31:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bigler Emmanuel
Hello All
I think that I have in hands the proper data allowing to solve the Mystery
of the Rollei 35 mm SLR Flange Focal Distance, thanks to Gérard Métrot, our
French Rollei expert and repair technician who just sent me the Official
Rollei Factory Specs as of 1972.
flange focal distance = distance between the lens bayonet seat and the focal
point = 44,67 mm (an official Braunswcheiger spec _should_ have a comma as
a decimal separator ;-) )
back focal distance = distance between the last lens vertex and the focal
point = 44,50 mm
Hence we get the clue for the "variable" figures quoted on the 'net
1/ confusion between flange focal distance (mechanical - bayonet seat) and
back focal distance (optical - lens vertex)
2/ flange focal distance = 44,67 mm explains why some documents mention
44.6 and some other 44.7
3/ those Rollei figures are not really related to the M42x1 flange focal
distance = "register" in English, quoted as 45.46 mm (not really close to
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html
I home, Dirk-Roger that you can now have a quiet sleep.
--
Emmanuel
Perhaps it would be necessary to clarify if Dirk needs the back focal
distance, 44,50mm to assure a right focus for the QBM lenses with the
adapter for Canon, or if the mechanical distance 44,67mm is enough to
assure it or if both distances are the same for practical purposes.
Carl Zeiss confirmed as flange distance for the QBM 44,50mm as I wrote
yesterday and they give the back lens distance to film in their
technical info, f.e. according the Planar 1.4/50 Contax /Yashica
technical sheet the lens back distance "to film" is 45,50mm (there are
no technical sheets on line for QBM lenses).

Carlos
CarlosMFreaza
2014-09-09 18:32:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by CarlosMFreaza
Perhaps it would be necessary to clarify if Dirk needs the back focal
distance, 44,50mm to assure a right focus for the QBM lenses with the
adapter for Canon, or if the mechanical distance 44,67mm is enough to
assure it or if both distances are the same for practical purposes.
yesterday and they give the back lens distance to film in their
technical info, f.e. according the Planar 1.4/50 Contax /Yashica
technical sheet the lens back distance "to film" is 45,50mm (there are
no technical sheets on line for QBM lenses).
Carlos
This is the Contax/Yashica mount Planar 1.4/50 lens technical sheet,
it could give an idea baout the way Carl Zeiss measures the 44.50mm
for the QBM:

http://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/downloadcenter/contax_yashica/planar1-4_50mm_yashica_e.pdf

Carlos
D***@dlr.de
2014-09-09 20:39:32 UTC
Permalink
Emanuel,

thanks a lot, but this information confuses me totally!
I do not understand what a lens vertex is.
In the light from Carlos' information I do not understand the 44,67 mm for the focal point.

Second: From that, what Carlos was writing, the 44,67 mm are the distance from bayonet seat and pressure plate plane.
The 44,50 mm are the distance from the bayonet seat to the focusing screen plane, i.e. from the bayonet seat to the focal plane of the lens.
Considering this, you can imagine that the 44,50 mm are the distance from the bayonet to the inner film gliding tracks, i.e. to the surface of the film, where the 44,67 mm are the distance to the outer tracks against which the pressure plate is pressed. In between should be the film channel with a width of 0.17 mm. This makes sense.

In principle, it is now to question, which is the best focal point for the lens. Shall it be on the surface of the film (44,50 mm), at the back of the film (44,67), or in the middle (i.e. 44,59 mm).
Also to consider that in the center the films moves/bends/ a bit forward in direction to the lens after it has been transported. Considering the latter information, I can believe that the 44,50 was the distance on purpose for the inner tracks for the film AND the plane of focus, allowing to bend the film a bit, hence with 44,50 mm focal plane you meet the middle of the film thickness.

Similiar discussion you find here:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/665776

For example, look to Canon EF: The flange focus distance normally is reported to 44.00 mm. But there you find 44.14 mm. The difference is the thickness of the film channel, here 0.14 mm. (Lower tolerance than at Rollei which take 0,17 mm by the way).

Or here:
http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00acWi
( Nikon tolerance +/- 0.015 mm, even much lower than Rollei gear...)

Or, more specialized, here:

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/flange.html


Dirk







flange focal distance = distance between the lens bayonet seat and the focal point = 44,67 mm (an official Braunswcheiger spec _should_ have a comma as a decimal separator ;-) )

back focal distance = distance between the last lens vertex and the focal point = 44,50 mm

Hence we get the clue for the "variable" figures quoted on the 'net

1/ confusion between flange focal distance (mechanical - bayonet seat) and back focal distance (optical - lens vertex)

2/ flange focal distance = 44,67 mm explains why some documents mention
44.6 and some other 44.7

3/ those Rollei figures are not really related to the M42x1 flange focal distance = "register" in English, quoted as 45.46 mm (not really close to 44.67) in this other document:
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

I home, Dirk-Roger that you can now have a quiet sleep.
--
Emmanuel




---
Rollei List

- Post to ***@freelists.org

- Subscribe at rollei_list-***@freelists.org with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-***@freelists.org with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Richard Knoppow
2014-09-09 23:39:52 UTC
Permalink
----- Original Message -----
From: <Dirk-***@dlr.de>
To: <***@freelists.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 1:39 PM
Subject: [rollei_list] AW: Re: Rollei 35 mm SLR Flange focal
distance


Emanuel,

thanks a lot, but this information confuses me totally!
I do not understand what a lens vertex is.
In the light from Carlos' information I do not understand
the 44,67 mm for the focal point.

Second: From that, what Carlos was writing, the 44,67 mm are
the distance from bayonet seat and pressure plate plane.

I looked at two of Rudolf Kinglake's books on optical
design, the term "flange focal distance" does not appear in
the index of either. Nor can I find it in the Optical
Society handbook. Very odd because it is a common term. I
think the above is the correct definition, that is, that its
the distance of the locating reference plane for lens mounts
to the focal plane. Back focus is something else and is the
distance from the vertex of the last lens surface to the
focal plane when the lens is focused at infinity. I think
the definition will hold even if the last surface is concave
to the focal plane. The two are only incidentally related.
In a camera using a range finder the flange focal distance
is important because it affects the accuracy of the
rangefinder. I have a somewhat hazy memory that the bayonet
mount lenses for the early Nikon cameras would fit onto a
Contax, and vice-versa, but the flange focal distance was a
little different so the rangefinders would not work
correctly.


--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
***@ix.netcom.com
Richard Knoppow
2014-09-09 23:43:17 UTC
Permalink
----- Original Message -----
From: <Dirk-***@dlr.de>
To: <***@freelists.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 1:39 PM
Subject: [rollei_list] AW: Re: Rollei 35 mm SLR Flange focal
distance


Emanuel,

thanks a lot, but this information confuses me totally!
I do not understand what a lens vertex is.
In the light from Carlos' information I do not understand
the 44,67 mm for the focal point.

I always manage to forget something. The back focus can
be important where lenses are used in single lens reflex
cameras because it must be long enough to clear the moving
mirror. This is why symmetrical wide angle lenses are not
used on SLR's, the stick into the camera box too far.
Instead a reversed telephoto type WA lens must be used since
its back focus is considerably longer than a regular WA lens
for the same focal length.


--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
***@ix.netcom.com
D***@dlr.de
2014-09-09 20:59:45 UTC
Permalink
This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.
Richard Urmonas
2014-09-10 02:51:06 UTC
Permalink
Hello Dirk,

The maker of your digital camera will already have positioned the
sensor at the optimum point to match the Canon lens mount. Thus you do
not have to worry about this dimension, just the additional thickness
to convert from Canon to QBM.

I think the +/- 0.15mm tolerance you specify is not a difficult one to
meet, and you could easily tighen this to +/- 0.1mm, and it would not
be hard to find someone to machine the part to better than this. It
will of course become more expensive to improve the accuracy.

The effect of such a variation can be estimated by using simple lens
formulae (as if the lens was a single element of the correct FL).
Taking +/- 0.1mm and a 28mm lens as an example. At one end
(0.1mm more too thick) infinity focus will be sharp for a target at
7.84m and at the other end (0.1mm too thin)you will need to focus at
7.84m for a target at infinity.

If you improve the tolerance to +/- 0.05mm at one end infinity focus
will be sharp for a target at 15.68m, and at the other end you will
focus to 15.68m for an object at infinity.

One idea you could consider is to machine the part to be slightly thick
(+0.1 / -0 mm) and then use very fine sandpaper on a flat surface (like
a thick piece of glass) to trim the thickness to the correct dimension.

Note that the thickness will have the most effect on focus for wide
lenses.

I hope this helps


Richard




On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 20:59:45 +0000
Post by D***@dlr.de
Hello,
thanks for all of your help.
I run a "research programme" to adapt all my Rolleinar and Zeiss
lenses from the SL35 system to my Kodak DCS Pro SLR/c. This is a nice
camera designed by Kodak with a full frame digital chip which was
designed and made at Fillfactory in Belgium. The camera has a Canon
mount, however the body was made by Sigma. So it is an US/Japanese
camera with a European sensor. Very exotic.
So I got an QBM to Canon adapter from Ebay.
Available data where: Focal flange distance Canon EF mount: 44.00 mm.
The same for QBM 44.70 mm.
These data have been published for a long time everywhere, including
Wikipedia. I got the China made adapter.
I did not achieve infinity with my lenses. What was the reason?
I measured the thickness of the adapter to 0.67 mm. So everything
should be ok. Nevertheless it did not work. So I was working to find
out how to adjust the camera or the flange focus distance of the
camera. My guess was, it was too large. Just now I found out, that at
the Wikipedia, they corrected the QBM 44.70 to 44.50, stating the
44.70 where wrong.
What do I understand now? If this information is correct, the adapter
is TOO thick. It has to have a thickness of max 0.50 mm to achieve
infinity with my Zeiss lenses. I believe, the factory in China, which
makes the QBM adapters, also did rely on the wrongly reported 44.70
mm and manufactured the adapters accordingly wrong!
Now I am going to trim the adapter to the difference, hence to say
0.50 mm. But what is the best thickness, to obtain best infinity
adjustment with a digital sensor?
0,50 mm +0/-0.15 mm?
Emanuel, do you think this a good value I could give to our workshop order?
Or would digital sensors also need a certain "penetration" of the
focal plane into the sensor?
Best regards, and thanks a lot!
Dirk-Roger Schmitt
D***@dlr.de
2014-09-10 08:14:17 UTC
Permalink
..."0,50 mm +0/-0.15 mm?...."



This was a typing error.
I meant 0,50 mm +0/-0,015 mm.
(0,15 mm
Bigler Emmanuel
2014-09-10 10:28:10 UTC
Permalink
Thanks to Carlos, now we know the exact story.

Sorry for the noise, since I made a wrong interpretation of what was
supposed to be (in French) a 'tirage optique' of 44.50 mm ; in French
usually "tirage optique' is "back focal distance" measured form the last
lens vertex; in German technical sheets the lats lens vertex is denoted
by S', and the back focal distance it is denoted by S'F' or
S'A'_{infinity} but in fact G. Métrot meant : position of bayonet lens
seat measured _optically_ by reference to the ground glass and not
_mechanically_ by reference to the pressure plate. This is completely
different.

Thanks again Carlos for the explanation ! Hence 44.50 is a measurement
from the lens bayonet seat to a ground glass plane located somewhere at
the film gate, and 44.67 is with reference to the film pressure plate
(which actually is not really in contact with the film, like in the
Rollei TLR).

So Dirk-Roger, forget about the "lens vertex" (the summit of the last
lens surface, on the optical axis, the glass part which is the closest
to the focal point) which is totally irrelevant here since various
lenses of the same mounts have their last lens element located at
various places. In SLR cameras, tele lenses usually have the last lens
vertex deeply recessed inside the lens mount, whereas for other lenses
it can be very close to the bayonet seat.
For example, in C-type Hasselblad 2.8-80 planars, two small protruding
crescent-shaped pieces of metal located around the last lens element are
required to protect the glass form scratches. And the back focal
distance is shorter than the flange focal distance since the 2.8-80
plabar lens slightly enters inside the camera body.

--
Emmanuel
CarlosMFreaza
2014-09-10 23:35:37 UTC
Permalink
Hi Emmanuel:
I found the data in the Rollei Technical Report,
thank you for your clarification about it.

Carlos
Post by Bigler Emmanuel
Thanks to Carlos, now we know the exact story.
Sorry for the noise, since I made a wrong interpretation of what was
supposed to be (in French) a 'tirage optique' of 44.50 mm ; in French
usually "tirage optique' is "back focal distance" measured form the last
lens vertex; in German technical sheets the lats lens vertex is denoted by
S', and the back focal distance it is denoted by S'F' or S'A'_{infinity} but
in fact G. Métrot meant : position of bayonet lens seat measured _optically_
by reference to the ground glass and not _mechanically_ by reference to the
pressure plate. This is completely different.
Thanks again Carlos for the explanation ! Hence 44.50 is a measurement from
the lens bayonet seat to a ground glass plane located somewhere at the film
gate, and 44.67 is with reference to the film pressure plate (which actually
is not really in contact with the film, like in the Rollei TLR).
So Dirk-Roger, forget about the "lens vertex" (the summit of the last lens
surface, on the optical axis, the glass part which is the closest to the
focal point) which is totally irrelevant here since various lenses of the
same mounts have their last lens element located at various places. In SLR
cameras, tele lenses usually have the last lens vertex deeply recessed
inside the lens mount, whereas for other lenses it can be very close to the
bayonet seat.
For example, in C-type Hasselblad 2.8-80 planars, two small protruding
crescent-shaped pieces of metal located around the last lens element are
required to protect the glass form scratches. And the back focal distance is
shorter than the flange focal distance since the 2.8-80 plabar lens slightly
enters inside the camera body.
--
Emmanuel
---
Rollei List
subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Loading...