Discussion:
Color Ultron AR 1.4/55 Made in Germany?
(too old to reply)
D***@dlr.de
2012-04-26 07:59:36 UTC
Permalink
I am really wondering where this lens comes from.

All the lenses available are in the Mamiya type Rolleinar design.
They look like the other Mamiya lenses for Rolleinar or Voigtländer.
Most of them are marked Made in Japan.

I have one marked Made in Germany which is very rare.
However, the lens housing anyway looks like any other Mamiya stuff.

So I am wondering where the Made in Germany comes from

Anyway, the mechanics of the Mamiya Rolleinar lenses is clearly superior to the mechanics of the Zeiss lenses 1.8/50, 1.4/50, 2,8/80, 2.8/135 etc.

Dirk


Regards

Dirk
CarlosMFreaza
2012-04-26 10:21:07 UTC
Permalink
<Dirk-***@dlr.de> escribió:
> I am really wondering where this lens comes from.
>
> All the lenses available are in the Mamiya type Rolleinar design.
> They look like the other Mamiya lenses for Rolleinar or Voigtländer.
> Most of them are marked Made in Japan.
>
> I have one marked Made in Germany which is very rare.
> However, the lens housing anyway looks like any other Mamiya stuff.
>
> So I am wondering where the Made in Germany comes from
>
> Anyway, the mechanics of the Mamiya Rolleinar lenses is clearly superior to the mechanics of the  Zeiss lenses 1.8/50, 1.4/50, 2,8/80, 2.8/135 etc.

As I commented in a previous post, Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses were made
first in Japan and by Rollei Singapore (Rollei Optical Co) afterwards
according a post from Claus Prochnow talking about Rollei up to the
1981 bankruptcy, however I never saw a Rolleinar/Mamiya lens "made in
Singapore" (perhaps they exist, I don't know), I guess the lens barrel
was made in Japan anyway (then "Made in Japan") and the optics by
Rollei. It's interesting to note that Prochnow writes in the Report IV
that the Rolleinar/Mamiya/Color Ultron (I'd add Planar Contarex)MC
1.4/55mm lens was made through Mamiya Japan and _Rollei Braunschweig_
( Rollei had the former Voigtländer factory to manufacture lenses in
Braunschweig).

Mamiya no longer manufactured lenses for 35mm cameras from about 1984
(perhaps before this date), and Rollei lost the Rollei Optical Co in
Singapore from 1981, but Rollei provided several Rolleinar/Mamiya
lenses for the 3003 and 3001 cameras manufactured up to 1994 and for
the 3003 metric manufactured up to about 1998/2000, these lenses were
made by Rollei in Braunschweig under Mamiya license, perhaps Rollei
still had lenses barrels "Made in Japan" from the Rollei Singapore
factory as happened for the Rollei 35mm electronic shutters, the "Made
in Germany" barrels appeared when they used all the "Made in Japan"
barrels, this is a speculation, but the facts are that the
Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses, at least the optics, were made in Germany by
Rollei after the bankruptcy.
Every Rolleinar/Mamiya lens (they were manufactured from 1977) was
provided with the groove to give the wide open diaphragm data to the
camera body (QBM IV).

Rollei decided to offer the Japanese Rolleinar lenses for the 35mmm
SLR cameras because they were cheap and very good lenses, some of
these lenses designs were also very modern, the zooms specially. The
German optics industry produced a few zooms at the time and they
couldn't compete with the Japanese zooms, Zeiss Germany did not
manufacture zooms and Schneider manufactured two bulkies, heavies and
very expensive 45-100 and 80-240mm zooms, in the other hand the
Japanese 35mm cameras were provided with cheaper, lighter and computer
designed MC zoom lenses.

Carlos
D***@dlr.de
2012-04-26 19:37:06 UTC
Permalink
Carlos,



thanks a lot, please see my comments:





-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: rollei_list-***@freelists.org [mailto:rollei_list-***@freelists.org] Im Auftrag von CarlosMFreaza
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. April 2012 12:21
An: ***@freelists.org
Betreff: [rollei_list] Re: Color Ultron AR 1.4/55 Made in Germany?



<Dirk-***@dlr.de<mailto:Dirk-***@dlr.de>> escribió:

> I am really wondering where this lens comes from.

>

> All the lenses available are in the Mamiya type Rolleinar design.

> They look like the other Mamiya lenses for Rolleinar or Voigtländer.

> Most of them are marked Made in Japan.

>

> I have one marked Made in Germany which is very rare.

> However, the lens housing anyway looks like any other Mamiya stuff.

>

> So I am wondering where the Made in Germany comes from

>

> Anyway, the mechanics of the Mamiya Rolleinar lenses is clearly superior to the mechanics of the Zeiss lenses 1.8/50, 1.4/50, 2,8/80, 2.8/135 etc.



As I commented in a previous post, Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses were made first in Japan and by Rollei Singapore (Rollei Optical Co) afterwards according a post from Claus Prochnow talking about Rollei up to the

1981 bankruptcy, however I never saw a Rolleinar/Mamiya lens "made in Singapore" (perhaps they exist, I don't know), I guess the lens barrel was made in Japan anyway (then "Made in Japan") and the optics by Rollei. It's interesting to note that Prochnow writes in the Report IV that the Rolleinar/Mamiya/Color Ultron (I'd add Planar Contarex)MC 1.4/55mm lens was made through Mamiya Japan and _Rollei Braunschweig_ ( Rollei had the former Voigtländer factory to manufacture lenses in Braunschweig).



No reason to believe that. Maybe in the case 1,4 /55 first optics were made in Braunschweig, put into Barrels from Mamiya? The barrels first marked Germany, later the barrels marked Japan?

Sounds strange. Also the barrels are much more superior to the other ones Rollei was able to make at this time.





Mamiya no longer manufactured lenses for 35mm cameras from about 1984 (perhaps before this date), and Rollei lost the Rollei Optical Co in Singapore from 1981,



that is correct.





but Rollei provided several Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses for the 3003 and 3001 cameras manufactured up to 1994 and for the 3003 metric manufactured up to about 1998/2000, these lenses were made by Rollei in Braunschweig under Mamiya license,



definitely not

Rollei only made Zeiss lenses in license and bought the other lenses from Japan. That is for sure as I worked together with the Rollei people in an optics research project and knew at bit about their optical production shop, which I visited on regular basis.

However for a long time, some Rolleinar lenses from Mamiya were sold. Those came out of large stock Rollei Fototechnik overtook after the bankruptcy.





perhaps Rollei still had lenses barrels "Made in Japan" from the Rollei Singapore factory as happened for the Rollei 35mm electronic shutters, the "Made in Germany" barrels appeared when they used all the "Made in Japan"

barrels, this is a speculation, but the facts are that the Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses, at least the optics, were made in Germany by Rollei after the bankruptcy.



Absolutely not true. No Mamiya lense was made after bankruptcy in Braunschweig. My 1.4/55 with marking "Made in Germany" I bought directly in the bankruptcy sale in Braunschweig, so it was made far before the bankruptcy.



Every Rolleinar/Mamiya lens (they were manufactured from 1977) was provided with the groove to give the wide open diaphragm data to the camera body (QBM IV).



True



Rollei decided to offer the Japanese Rolleinar lenses for the 35mmm SLR cameras because they were cheap and very good lenses, some of these lenses designs were also very modern, the zooms specially.



Zooms were, at least some, from Tokina.



The German optics industry produced a few zooms at the time and they couldn't compete with the Japanese zooms, Zeiss Germany did not manufacture zooms and Schneider manufactured two bulkies, heavies and very expensive 45-100 and 80-240mm zooms, in the other hand the Japanese 35mm cameras were provided with cheaper, lighter and computer designed MC zoom lenses.



It is right, that the German industry was no more able to produce competing zoom lenses.





So I have no doubt, that all Rolleinar lenses were made fully in Japan. The only exception is the 1.4 55 with a japanese barrel in a quality at that time no one in Germany could produce anymore- but marked "Made in Germany".

Another explanation is that when Rollei launched the Rolleinar series, they made some prototypes, so maybe they mounted the QBM Bajonet to the japanese lenses, marked them Germany and showed them to journalists.





This of course is only valid for 35 mm lenses.



For 6000 system lenses, there were Zeiss, Schneider, and Mamiya lenses sold after bakruptcy.

Some Schneider and Zeiss were bought, others made in license.







Regards



Dirk





Carlos

---

Rollei List



- Post to ***@freelists.org<mailto:***@freelists.org>



- Subscribe at rollei_list-***@freelists.org<mailto:rollei_list-***@freelists.org> with 'subscribe'

in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org<http://www.freelists.org>



- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-***@freelists.org<mailto:rollei_list-***@freelists.org> with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org<http://www.freelists.org>



- Online, searchable archives are available at http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
CarlosMFreaza
2012-04-26 21:31:23 UTC
Permalink
Dirk, it's difficult to edit the post to answer each one of your
points, anyway I'll answer the points you disagree or you doubt
without to copy your comments above:

1) The Auto Mamiya Sekor SX 1.4/55mm M42 lens was also manufactured
with the Sears- Sekor name, these lenses were not multicoated, it was
a Planar 1.4/55mm copy designed for CZ by Johann Berger in 1959 to use
in the Contarex camera, according some sources (Manual Focus forum,
Taunesreiter Deutschland) CZ did not use this lens finally due to the
Planar 1.4/50 design and licensed the 1.4/ 55 to Tomioka in Japan and
then other Japanese manufacturers also used the design. Facts are that
a multicoated MC version was made by Mamiya for Rollei from 1977 with
the Rolleinar name and other for Voigtländer with the Color Ultron AR
name, both QBM, I have the Color Ultron 1.4/55 and the barrel says
"Lens made in Japan". The Rolleinar version has the focusing ring and
f stop rings cover with diamonds in square pattern, the Color Ultron
with diamonds in diagonal pattern.
I asked Prochnow who did make the Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses after Mamiya
no longer made them and he answered me they were made by Rollei in
Singapore because it was cheaper than in Japan, it only could happen
up to 1981 because there was no Rollei Singapore after 1981. It's not
so rare that an optical factory makes the optics and the lens barrels
are made by other companies. The Rolleinar Mamiya 1.4/55 was made up
to 1981 only BTW, according the Report IV it was also made in Germany
by Rollei Braunschweig simultaneously, you have a Rolleinar Mamiya
1.4/55 "Made in Germany" lens and then the Report IV is correct.
Rollei manufactured a lot of lenses in the Voigtländer Optische Werke
at the time.

2) I'm afraid that despite you worked together with the Rollei people
your explanation is not satisfactory. There were several Rolleinar
lenses made after the bankruptcy only, some of them were _new_ lenses
and labeled HFT, the Rollei multicoating registered trademark, f.e.:
1)HFT Rolleinar/Mamiya-Sekor 2,8/28mm QBM IV manufactured from 1984 to
1994.- 2)HFT Rolleinar/Kiron Makro 2,8/105mm QBM IV manufactured from
1984 to 1989.- 3)HFT Rolleinar/Mamiya- Sekor zoom 4/80-200mm QBM IV
manufactured from 1984 to 1989.- 4)HFT Rolleinar/AT-X Tokina
5,6-4/50-250mm QBM IV manufactured from 1984 to 1990.- and several
other lenses Kiron, Tokina, Sigma wirh the Rollei HFT multicoating,
who did make the Rolleinar Mamiya HFT lenses?, who did make the Mamiya
lenses manufactured before the bankruptcy and that were continued
after the bankruptcy keeping the MC multcoating name?. You agreed that
Mamiya no longer made 35 mm lenses form about 1984 and then, Who did
make the Rolleinar Mamiya lenses, some of them HFT made after 1984,
others MC manufactured up to about 1996?. OK, I'm not 100% sure Rollei
made them, but your explanation is not satisfactory at all.

3) Zooms were made or designed by Mamiya, Kiron. Tokina and Sigma,
they are listed in the Report IV, and some of Mamiyas zoom and lenses
were made after the bankruptcy only, they were not bought by Rollei
Fototechnic during the bankruptcy. Who did make them?, I ask again.



El día 26 de abril de 2012 16:37, <Dirk-***@dlr.de> escribió:
> Carlos,
>
>
>
> thanks a lot, please see my comments:
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: rollei_list-***@freelists.org
> [mailto:rollei_list-***@freelists.org] Im Auftrag von CarlosMFreaza
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. April 2012 12:21
> An: ***@freelists.org
> Betreff: [rollei_list] Re: Color Ultron AR 1.4/55 Made in Germany?
>
>
>
> <Dirk-***@dlr.de> escribió:
>
>> I am really wondering where this lens comes from.
>
>>
>
>> All the lenses available are in the Mamiya type Rolleinar design.
>
>> They look like the other Mamiya lenses for Rolleinar or Voigtländer.
>
>> Most of them are marked Made in Japan.
>
>>
>
>> I have one marked Made in Germany which is very rare.
>
>> However, the lens housing anyway looks like any other Mamiya stuff.
>
>>
>
>> So I am wondering where the Made in Germany comes from
>
>>
>
>> Anyway, the mechanics of the Mamiya Rolleinar lenses is clearly superior
>> to the mechanics of the  Zeiss lenses 1.8/50, 1.4/50, 2,8/80, 2.8/135 etc.
>
>
>
> As I commented in a previous post, Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses were made first
> in Japan and by Rollei Singapore (Rollei Optical Co) afterwards according a
> post from Claus Prochnow talking about Rollei up to the
>
> 1981 bankruptcy, however I never saw a Rolleinar/Mamiya lens "made in
> Singapore" (perhaps they exist, I don't know), I guess the lens barrel was
> made in Japan anyway (then "Made in Japan") and the optics by Rollei. It's
> interesting to note that Prochnow writes in the Report IV that the
> Rolleinar/Mamiya/Color Ultron (I'd add Planar Contarex)MC 1.4/55mm lens was
> made through Mamiya Japan and _Rollei Braunschweig_ ( Rollei had the former
> Voigtländer factory to manufacture lenses in Braunschweig).
>
>
>
> No reason to believe that. Maybe in the case 1,4 /55 first optics were made
> in Braunschweig, put into Barrels from Mamiya? The barrels first marked
> Germany, later the barrels marked Japan?
>
> Sounds strange. Also the barrels are much more superior to the other ones
> Rollei was able to make at this time.
>
>
>
>
>
> Mamiya no longer manufactured lenses for 35mm cameras from about 1984
> (perhaps before this date), and Rollei lost  the Rollei Optical Co in
> Singapore from 1981,
>
>
>
> that is correct.
>
>
>
>
>
> but Rollei provided several Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses for the 3003 and 3001
> cameras manufactured up to 1994 and for the 3003 metric manufactured up to
> about 1998/2000, these lenses were made by Rollei in Braunschweig under
> Mamiya license,
>
>
>
> definitely not
>
> Rollei only made Zeiss lenses in license and bought the other lenses from
> Japan. That is for sure as I worked together with the Rollei people in an
> optics research project and knew at bit about their optical production shop,
> which I visited on regular basis.
>
> However for a long time, some Rolleinar lenses from Mamiya were sold. Those
> came out of large stock Rollei Fototechnik overtook after the bankruptcy.
>
>
>
>
>
> perhaps Rollei still had lenses barrels "Made in Japan" from the Rollei
> Singapore factory as happened for the Rollei 35mm electronic shutters, the
> "Made in Germany" barrels appeared when they used all the "Made in Japan"
>
> barrels, this is a speculation, but the facts are that the Rolleinar/Mamiya
> lenses, at least the optics, were made in Germany by Rollei after the
> bankruptcy.
>
>
>
> Absolutely not true. No Mamiya lense was made after bankruptcy in
> Braunschweig. My 1.4/55 with marking “Made in Germany” I bought directly in
> the bankruptcy sale in Braunschweig, so it was made far before the
> bankruptcy.
>
>
>
> Every Rolleinar/Mamiya lens (they were manufactured from 1977) was provided
> with the groove to give the wide open diaphragm data to the camera body (QBM
> IV).
>
>
>
> True
>
>
>
> Rollei decided to offer the Japanese Rolleinar lenses for the 35mmm SLR
> cameras because they were cheap and very good lenses, some of these lenses
> designs were also very modern, the zooms specially.
>
>
>
> Zooms were, at least some, from Tokina.
>
>
>
> The German optics industry produced a few zooms at the time and they
> couldn't compete with the Japanese zooms, Zeiss Germany did not manufacture
> zooms and Schneider manufactured two bulkies, heavies and very expensive
> 45-100 and 80-240mm zooms, in the other hand the Japanese 35mm cameras were
> provided with cheaper, lighter and computer designed MC zoom lenses.
>
>
>
> It is right, that the German industry was no more able to produce competing
> zoom lenses.
>
>
>
>
>
> So I have no doubt, that all Rolleinar lenses were made fully in Japan. The
> only exception is the 1.4 55 with a japanese barrel in a quality at that
> time no one in Germany could produce anymore- but marked “Made in Germany”.
>
> Another explanation is that when Rollei launched the Rolleinar series, they
> made some prototypes, so maybe they  mounted the QBM Bajonet to the japanese
> lenses, marked them Germany and showed them to journalists.
>
>
>
>
>
> This of course is only valid for 35 mm lenses.
>
>
>
> For 6000 system lenses, there were Zeiss, Schneider, and Mamiya lenses sold
> after bakruptcy.
>
> Some Schneider and Zeiss were bought, others made in license.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Dirk
>
>
>
>
>
> Carlos
>
> ---
>
> 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
>
>
CarlosMFreaza
2012-04-26 22:52:30 UTC
Permalink
4) I found right now Claus Prochnow was right when he wrote me that
Rolleinar lenses were made first in Japan and later in Singapore,
please look at these two images in the Jan Boetcher Rollei Museum,
it's the first time I see Rolleinar lenses engraved " Lens made in
Singapore" ("made in Japan" and "made in Singapore" lens barrels looks
identical), I had only seen Rolleinar 1.4/55 engraved "Lens made in
West Germany" in eBay :

http://www.janboettcher.de/images/RNAR28135.JPG

http://www.janboettcher.de/images/R2835MIS.JPG

Carlos




El día 26 de abril de 2012 18:31, CarlosMFreaza <***@gmail.com> escribió:
> Dirk, it's difficult to edit the post to answer each one of your
> points, anyway I'll answer the points you disagree or you doubt
> without to copy your comments above:
>
> 1) The Auto Mamiya Sekor SX 1.4/55mm M42 lens was also manufactured
> with the Sears- Sekor name, these lenses were not multicoated, it was
> a Planar 1.4/55mm copy designed for CZ by Johann Berger in 1959 to use
> in the Contarex camera, according some sources (Manual Focus forum,
> Taunesreiter Deutschland) CZ did not use this lens finally due to the
> Planar 1.4/50 design and licensed the 1.4/ 55 to Tomioka in Japan and
> then other Japanese manufacturers also used the design. Facts are that
> a multicoated MC version was made by Mamiya for Rollei from 1977 with
> the Rolleinar name and other for Voigtländer with the Color Ultron AR
> name, both QBM, I have the Color Ultron 1.4/55 and the barrel says
> "Lens made in Japan". The Rolleinar version has the focusing ring and
> f stop rings cover with diamonds in square pattern, the Color Ultron
> with diamonds in diagonal pattern.
> I asked Prochnow who did make the Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses after Mamiya
> no longer made them and he answered me they were made by Rollei in
> Singapore because it was cheaper than in Japan, it only could happen
> up to 1981 because there was no Rollei Singapore after 1981. It's not
> so rare that an optical factory makes the optics and the lens barrels
> are made by other companies. The Rolleinar Mamiya 1.4/55 was made up
> to 1981 only BTW, according the Report IV it was also made in Germany
> by Rollei Braunschweig simultaneously, you have a Rolleinar Mamiya
> 1.4/55 "Made in Germany" lens and then the Report IV is correct.
> Rollei manufactured a lot of lenses in the Voigtländer Optische Werke
> at the time.
>
> 2) I'm afraid that despite you worked together with the Rollei people
> your explanation is not satisfactory. There were several Rolleinar
> lenses made after the bankruptcy only, some of them were _new_ lenses
> and labeled HFT, the Rollei multicoating registered trademark, f.e.:
> 1)HFT Rolleinar/Mamiya-Sekor 2,8/28mm QBM IV manufactured from 1984 to
> 1994.- 2)HFT Rolleinar/Kiron Makro 2,8/105mm QBM IV manufactured from
> 1984 to 1989.- 3)HFT Rolleinar/Mamiya- Sekor zoom 4/80-200mm QBM IV
> manufactured from 1984 to 1989.- 4)HFT Rolleinar/AT-X Tokina
> 5,6-4/50-250mm QBM IV manufactured from 1984 to 1990.-  and several
> other lenses Kiron, Tokina, Sigma wirh the Rollei HFT multicoating,
> who did make the Rolleinar Mamiya HFT lenses?, who did make the Mamiya
> lenses manufactured before the bankruptcy and that were continued
> after the bankruptcy keeping the MC multcoating name?. You agreed that
> Mamiya no longer made 35 mm lenses form about 1984 and then, Who did
> make the Rolleinar Mamiya lenses, some of them HFT made after 1984,
> others MC manufactured up to about 1996?. OK, I'm not 100% sure Rollei
> made them, but your explanation is not satisfactory at all.
>
> 3) Zooms were made or designed by Mamiya, Kiron. Tokina and Sigma,
> they are listed in the Report IV, and some of Mamiyas zoom and lenses
> were made after the bankruptcy only, they were not bought by Rollei
> Fototechnic during the bankruptcy. Who did make them?, I ask again.
>
>
>
> El día 26 de abril de 2012 16:37,  <Dirk-***@dlr.de> escribió:
>> Carlos,
>>
>>
>>
>> thanks a lot, please see my comments:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: rollei_list-***@freelists.org
>> [mailto:rollei_list-***@freelists.org] Im Auftrag von CarlosMFreaza
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. April 2012 12:21
>> An: ***@freelists.org
>> Betreff: [rollei_list] Re: Color Ultron AR 1.4/55 Made in Germany?
>>
>>
>>
>> <Dirk-***@dlr.de> escribió:
>>
>>> I am really wondering where this lens comes from.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> All the lenses available are in the Mamiya type Rolleinar design.
>>
>>> They look like the other Mamiya lenses for Rolleinar or Voigtländer.
>>
>>> Most of them are marked Made in Japan.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> I have one marked Made in Germany which is very rare.
>>
>>> However, the lens housing anyway looks like any other Mamiya stuff.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> So I am wondering where the Made in Germany comes from
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Anyway, the mechanics of the Mamiya Rolleinar lenses is clearly superior
>>> to the mechanics of the  Zeiss lenses 1.8/50, 1.4/50, 2,8/80, 2.8/135 etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> As I commented in a previous post, Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses were made first
>> in Japan and by Rollei Singapore (Rollei Optical Co) afterwards according a
>> post from Claus Prochnow talking about Rollei up to the
>>
>> 1981 bankruptcy, however I never saw a Rolleinar/Mamiya lens "made in
>> Singapore" (perhaps they exist, I don't know), I guess the lens barrel was
>> made in Japan anyway (then "Made in Japan") and the optics by Rollei. It's
>> interesting to note that Prochnow writes in the Report IV that the
>> Rolleinar/Mamiya/Color Ultron (I'd add Planar Contarex)MC 1.4/55mm lens was
>> made through Mamiya Japan and _Rollei Braunschweig_ ( Rollei had the former
>> Voigtländer factory to manufacture lenses in Braunschweig).
>>
>>
>>
>> No reason to believe that. Maybe in the case 1,4 /55 first optics were made
>> in Braunschweig, put into Barrels from Mamiya? The barrels first marked
>> Germany, later the barrels marked Japan?
>>
>> Sounds strange. Also the barrels are much more superior to the other ones
>> Rollei was able to make at this time.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Mamiya no longer manufactured lenses for 35mm cameras from about 1984
>> (perhaps before this date), and Rollei lost  the Rollei Optical Co in
>> Singapore from 1981,
>>
>>
>>
>> that is correct.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> but Rollei provided several Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses for the 3003 and 3001
>> cameras manufactured up to 1994 and for the 3003 metric manufactured up to
>> about 1998/2000, these lenses were made by Rollei in Braunschweig under
>> Mamiya license,
>>
>>
>>
>> definitely not
>>
>> Rollei only made Zeiss lenses in license and bought the other lenses from
>> Japan. That is for sure as I worked together with the Rollei people in an
>> optics research project and knew at bit about their optical production shop,
>> which I visited on regular basis.
>>
>> However for a long time, some Rolleinar lenses from Mamiya were sold. Those
>> came out of large stock Rollei Fototechnik overtook after the bankruptcy.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> perhaps Rollei still had lenses barrels "Made in Japan" from the Rollei
>> Singapore factory as happened for the Rollei 35mm electronic shutters, the
>> "Made in Germany" barrels appeared when they used all the "Made in Japan"
>>
>> barrels, this is a speculation, but the facts are that the Rolleinar/Mamiya
>> lenses, at least the optics, were made in Germany by Rollei after the
>> bankruptcy.
>>
>>
>>
>> Absolutely not true. No Mamiya lense was made after bankruptcy in
>> Braunschweig. My 1.4/55 with marking “Made in Germany” I bought directly in
>> the bankruptcy sale in Braunschweig, so it was made far before the
>> bankruptcy.
>>
>>
>>
>> Every Rolleinar/Mamiya lens (they were manufactured from 1977) was provided
>> with the groove to give the wide open diaphragm data to the camera body (QBM
>> IV).
>>
>>
>>
>> True
>>
>>
>>
>> Rollei decided to offer the Japanese Rolleinar lenses for the 35mmm SLR
>> cameras because they were cheap and very good lenses, some of these lenses
>> designs were also very modern, the zooms specially.
>>
>>
>>
>> Zooms were, at least some, from Tokina.
>>
>>
>>
>> The German optics industry produced a few zooms at the time and they
>> couldn't compete with the Japanese zooms, Zeiss Germany did not manufacture
>> zooms and Schneider manufactured two bulkies, heavies and very expensive
>> 45-100 and 80-240mm zooms, in the other hand the Japanese 35mm cameras were
>> provided with cheaper, lighter and computer designed MC zoom lenses.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is right, that the German industry was no more able to produce competing
>> zoom lenses.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> So I have no doubt, that all Rolleinar lenses were made fully in Japan. The
>> only exception is the 1.4 55 with a japanese barrel in a quality at that
>> time no one in Germany could produce anymore- but marked “Made in Germany”.
>>
>> Another explanation is that when Rollei launched the Rolleinar series, they
>> made some prototypes, so maybe they  mounted the QBM Bajonet to the japanese
>> lenses, marked them Germany and showed them to journalists.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This of course is only valid for 35 mm lenses.
>>
>>
>>
>> For 6000 system lenses, there were Zeiss, Schneider, and Mamiya lenses sold
>> after bakruptcy.
>>
>> Some Schneider and Zeiss were bought, others made in license.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>>
>> Dirk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Carlos
>>
>> ---
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
CarlosMFreaza
2012-04-27 15:51:43 UTC
Permalink
CarlosMFreaza <***@gmail.com> escribió:
> 4) I found right now  Claus Prochnow was right when he wrote me that
> Rolleinar lenses were made first in Japan and later in Singapore,
> please look at these two images in the Jan Boetcher Rollei Museum,
> it's the first time I see Rolleinar lenses engraved " Lens made in
> Singapore" ("made in Japan" and "made in Singapore" lens barrels looks
> identical), I had only seen Rolleinar 1.4/55 engraved "Lens made in
> West Germany" in eBay :
>
> http://www.janboettcher.de/images/RNAR28135.JPG
>
> http://www.janboettcher.de/images/R2835MIS.JPG

5) I found a Color Ultron AR 1.4/55 "Lens made in West Germany" in an
ended auction at eBay Germany, this lens is _identical_ regarding my
similar lens engraved "Lens Made in Japan" and then it's evident that
the same lens barrel manufacturer (perhaps Mamiya Sekor factory,
perhaps other lens barrel manufacturer), provided the lenses barrels
for the Rolleinar/Mamiya and Voigtländer Color Ultron 1.4/55 lens
versions made in Japan and made in Germany and we can add the
Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses made in Singapore since the Rolleinar Mamiya
2.8./135 and 28mm made in Japan and made in Singapore shown in the
photographs above also have identical lenses barrels. This is the
Color Ultron AR/Mamiya 1.4/55mm made in West germany (it's necessary
to scroll the page to the center):

http://www.ebay.de/itm/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=130676149364

6) The paragraphs 4 and 5 are about Rolleinar/Mamiya and
Voigtländer-Rollei/Mamiya lenses made up to the Rollei banruptcy in
1981, there were no HFT Rolleinar Mamiya lenses up to 1981, all them
are MC, even those lenses made in Germany and Singapore. The HFT
Rolleinar lenses, including the Mamiyas ones, appeared from 1984
during the Rollei Fototechnic era. The point is that in 1984 the
largest and main Mamiya distributor and partner in Japan, Osawa,
filled for bankrupcy, it affected Mamiya very much and it was
restructured to become a photographic company dedicated to MF
equipment mainly, the 35mm cameras and lenses manufacture were
eliminated and then the question is "Who did make the new HFT
Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses from 1984?" , Mamiya had advanced projects to
introduce new 35mm cameras and some new lenses when the Osawa
bankruptcy aborted them, it could explain new HFT Rolleinar/Mamiya
lenses made for Rollei from 1984, but it does not explain who made
them. I guessed that at least some batches could be made by Rollei
Fototechnic because I read somewhere Mamiya licensed them to Rollei
and since Rollei was making Zeiss lenses under license for the TLR and
6000 cameras system they could also make the Mamiya lenses, but facts
are I never saw one of them made in Germany up to now, I have seen
some HFT Rolleinar/Mamiyas samples in eBay Germany, but they were made
in Japan. Perhaps Mamiya having contracts with Rollei asked other
Japanese lenses manufacturer to take charge of the 35mm Mamiya lenses
manufacture for Rollei.

Carlos

Carlos
Dirk-Roger Schmitt
2012-05-04 06:58:45 UTC
Permalink
Dear Carlos,

thank you very much for your anwer,
I have the following comments:

1) Well, the 1.4/55 seems to have an interesting
story. So I was not aware that this was licensed
from Zeiss to Japanese Manufacturers.
It is true, that Rollei overtook the Voigtländer
factory including equipment. However, this took
place in 1972 or a bit later. The factory was
completely closed down. Rollei did not
manufacture anything there. At least not 1977 or
later. Of course they took personal, toolings and
designs to the factory at Salzdahlumer Straße.
I must admit I was never aware that Rolleinar
Lenses were also made in Singapore. Interesting
pictures form Jan Böttcher. Anyway, these must
be complete designs from Mamiya including tooling
which where brought to Singapore. At this time
this was a very strange thing, having a Zeiss
line of lenses made in Singapore (50 mm, 2.8/35,
135 mm, 200 mm etc.) with a barrel quality say
"not been from the best quality considering
tolerances etc." and then launching a parallel
line from Mamiya with excellent optics and very
good and tolerance free barrels. O.k, you might
say, the Zeiss line from Singapore, performance
of production not to be the best, and then the
other line from Japan. Even that decision shows
that at that time at Rollei no real agreement in
the management how to proceed did exist. One
wanted an attractive line of lenses and realized,
they could not come from Singapore. So there
must have been some kind of conflict between the
Singapore management and the "to buy in Japan"
fraction. Even worse, later to start to make the
Mamiya lenses in Singapore shows the confusion of
management at that time. This must have ended in
disaster as it did with the bankruptcy.

Another story I can tell you was that in the
1970s Rollei wanted to start production of Zeiss
optics in Singapore and wanted a license
agreement with Zeiss Oberkochen. Zeiss Oberkochen was quite reluctant.
Hence contacts where made with Zeiss Jena, and
once a delegatin with East German Wartburg cars
visited the factory in Braunschweig. At time of
cold war quite a strange activity. The management
of Rollei was requested to keep this visit very
confidential. So one negotiated to obtain
licendes for lenses to be made in Singapore.
However, finally, with the background having an
alternative for Rollei from Zeiss Jena, Zeiss
Oberkochen agreed for the license to make the
lenses in Singapore. I know this story from
somebody who was assistant to the management at
this time. He was in charge to plan the
production costs for the start of the Rollei 35
in Singapore. However, he was so under pressure
by the CEO, Peesel, to calculate "low costs" to
convince the Norddeutsche Landesbank for giving
loans, that it was against his honor to continue.
Also his numbers where "corrected" by Peesel
before he went to the banks. As this gentleman
did not want to participate in cheating the
banks, he later quit the job and made a complete other career.

2) Considering the multicoatings: MC, HFT, Zeiss
T*..... All these are only trademarks and do not
say anything about the type of coating or the
quality. The multicoatings are all quite
similiar. The difference is just the color of
the remaining rest reflectance. This might be
green, red, or red/blue. The color of rest
reflectance has been selected only for marketing
reasons, not for technical reasons. So Zeiss
wants this dark/red colour as a "branding". Even
at that time, the coating designs have not more
been developed by the optics manufacturers but
just bought together with the coating machines
from the coating machine industry like Balzers of
Leybold. So you buy a machine for multicoating,
and the supplier asks you: What colour of rest
reflectance you prefer? Then you get the process with the machine.

All the lenses you mentioned where never made in
Braunschweig but just bought from Japan.
Rollei Fototechnic made the Zeiss 2.0/28,
1.4/50 and maybe some or two more (also the
Zeiss Makro Planar 60 mm I guess). But that was it.

3) Also the zooms where all made in Japan.


Regards

Dirk





At 23:31 26.04.2012, you wrote:
>Dirk, it's difficult to edit the post to answer each one of your
>points, anyway I'll answer the points you disagree or you doubt
>without to copy your comments above:
>
>1) The Auto Mamiya Sekor SX 1.4/55mm M42 lens was also manufactured
>with the Sears- Sekor name, these lenses were not multicoated, it was
>a Planar 1.4/55mm copy designed for CZ by Johann Berger in 1959 to use
>in the Contarex camera, according some sources (Manual Focus forum,
>Taunesreiter Deutschland) CZ did not use this lens finally due to the
>Planar 1.4/50 design and licensed the 1.4/ 55 to Tomioka in Japan and
>then other Japanese manufacturers also used the design. Facts are that
>a multicoated MC version was made by Mamiya for Rollei from 1977 with
>the Rolleinar name and other for Voigtländer with the Color Ultron AR
>name, both QBM, I have the Color Ultron 1.4/55 and the barrel says
>"Lens made in Japan". The Rolleinar version has the focusing ring and
>f stop rings cover with diamonds in square pattern, the Color Ultron
>with diamonds in diagonal pattern.
>I asked Prochnow who did make the Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses after Mamiya
>no longer made them and he answered me they were made by Rollei in
>Singapore because it was cheaper than in Japan, it only could happen
>up to 1981 because there was no Rollei Singapore after 1981. It's not
>so rare that an optical factory makes the optics and the lens barrels
>are made by other companies. The Rolleinar Mamiya 1.4/55 was made up
>to 1981 only BTW, according the Report IV it was also made in Germany
>by Rollei Braunschweig simultaneously, you have a Rolleinar Mamiya
>1.4/55 "Made in Germany" lens and then the Report IV is correct.
>Rollei manufactured a lot of lenses in the Voigtländer Optische Werke
>at the time.
>
>2) I'm afraid that despite you worked together with the Rollei people
>your explanation is not satisfactory. There were several Rolleinar
>lenses made after the bankruptcy only, some of them were _new_ lenses
>and labeled HFT, the Rollei multicoating registered trademark, f.e.:
>1)HFT Rolleinar/Mamiya-Sekor 2,8/28mm QBM IV manufactured from 1984 to
>1994.- 2)HFT Rolleinar/Kiron Makro 2,8/105mm QBM IV manufactured from
>1984 to 1989.- 3)HFT Rolleinar/Mamiya- Sekor zoom 4/80-200mm QBM IV
>manufactured from 1984 to 1989.- 4)HFT Rolleinar/AT-X Tokina
>5,6-4/50-250mm QBM IV manufactured from 1984 to 1990.- and several
>other lenses Kiron, Tokina, Sigma wirh the Rollei HFT multicoating,
>who did make the Rolleinar Mamiya HFT lenses?, who did make the Mamiya
>lenses manufactured before the bankruptcy and that were continued
>after the bankruptcy keeping the MC multcoating name?. You agreed that
>Mamiya no longer made 35 mm lenses form about 1984 and then, Who did
>make the Rolleinar Mamiya lenses, some of them HFT made after 1984,
>others MC manufactured up to about 1996?. OK, I'm not 100% sure Rollei
>made them, but your explanation is not satisfactory at all.
>
>3) Zooms were made or designed by Mamiya, Kiron. Tokina and Sigma,
>they are listed in the Report IV, and some of Mamiyas zoom and lenses
>were made after the bankruptcy only, they were not bought by Rollei
>Fototechnic during the bankruptcy. Who did make them?, I ask again.
>
>
>
>El día 26 de abril de 2012 16:37, <Dirk-***@dlr.de> escribió:
> > Carlos,
> >
> >
> >
> > thanks a lot, please see my comments:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: rollei_list-***@freelists.org
> > [mailto:rollei_list-***@freelists.org] Im Auftrag von CarlosMFreaza
> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. April 2012 12:21
> > An: ***@freelists.org
> > Betreff: [rollei_list] Re: Color Ultron AR 1.4/55 Made in Germany?
> >
> >
> >
> > <Dirk-***@dlr.de> escribió:
> >
> >> I am really wondering where this lens comes from.
> >
> >>
> >
> >> All the lenses available are in the Mamiya type Rolleinar design.
> >
> >> They look like the other Mamiya lenses for Rolleinar or Voigtländer.
> >
> >> Most of them are marked Made in Japan.
> >
> >>
> >
> >> I have one marked Made in Germany which is very rare.
> >
> >> However, the lens housing anyway looks like any other Mamiya stuff.
> >
> >>
> >
> >> So I am wondering where the Made in Germany comes from
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Anyway, the mechanics of the Mamiya Rolleinar lenses is clearly superior
> >> to the mechanics of the Zeiss lenses 1.8/50, 1.4/50, 2,8/80, 2.8/135 etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > As I commented in a previous post, Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses were made first
> > in Japan and by Rollei Singapore (Rollei Optical Co) afterwards according a
> > post from Claus Prochnow talking about Rollei up to the
> >
> > 1981 bankruptcy, however I never saw a Rolleinar/Mamiya lens "made in
> > Singapore" (perhaps they exist, I don't know), I guess the lens barrel was
> > made in Japan anyway (then "Made in Japan") and the optics by Rollei. It's
> > interesting to note that Prochnow writes in the Report IV that the
> > Rolleinar/Mamiya/Color Ultron (I'd add Planar Contarex)MC 1.4/55mm lens was
> > made through Mamiya Japan and _Rollei Braunschweig_ ( Rollei had the former
> > Voigtländer factory to manufacture lenses in Braunschweig).
> >
> >
> >
> > No reason to believe that. Maybe in the case 1,4 /55 first optics were made
> > in Braunschweig, put into Barrels from Mamiya? The barrels first marked
> > Germany, later the barrels marked Japan?
> >
> > Sounds strange. Also the barrels are much more superior to the other ones
> > Rollei was able to make at this time.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Mamiya no longer manufactured lenses for 35mm cameras from about 1984
> > (perhaps before this date), and Rollei lost the Rollei Optical Co in
> > Singapore from 1981,
> >
> >
> >
> > that is correct.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > but Rollei provided several Rolleinar/Mamiya lenses for the 3003 and 3001
> > cameras manufactured up to 1994 and for the 3003 metric manufactured up to
> > about 1998/2000, these lenses were made by Rollei in Braunschweig under
> > Mamiya license,
> >
> >
> >
> > definitely not
> >
> > Rollei only made Zeiss lenses in license and bought the other lenses from
> > Japan. That is for sure as I worked together with the Rollei people in an
> > optics research project and knew at bit about
> their optical production shop,
> > which I visited on regular basis.
> >
> > However for a long time, some Rolleinar lenses from Mamiya were sold. Those
> > came out of large stock Rollei Fototechnik overtook after the bankruptcy.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > perhaps Rollei still had lenses barrels "Made in Japan" from the Rollei
> > Singapore factory as happened for the Rollei 35mm electronic shutters, the
> > "Made in Germany" barrels appeared when they used all the "Made in Japan"
> >
> > barrels, this is a speculation, but the facts are that the Rolleinar/Mamiya
> > lenses, at least the optics, were made in Germany by Rollei after the
> > bankruptcy.
> >
> >
> >
> > Absolutely not true. No Mamiya lense was made after bankruptcy in
> > Braunschweig. My 1.4/55 with marking “Made in Germany” I bought directly in
> > the bankruptcy sale in Braunschweig, so it was made far before the
> > bankruptcy.
> >
> >
> >
> > Every Rolleinar/Mamiya lens (they were manufactured from 1977) was provided
> > with the groove to give the wide open
> diaphragm data to the camera body (QBM
> > IV).
> >
> >
> >
> > True
> >
> >
> >
> > Rollei decided to offer the Japanese Rolleinar lenses for the 35mmm SLR
> > cameras because they were cheap and very good lenses, some of these lenses
> > designs were also very modern, the zooms specially.
> >
> >
> >
> > Zooms were, at least some, from Tokina.
> >
> >
> >
> > The German optics industry produced a few zooms at the time and they
> > couldn't compete with the Japanese zooms, Zeiss Germany did not manufacture
> > zooms and Schneider manufactured two bulkies, heavies and very expensive
> > 45-100 and 80-240mm zooms, in the other hand the Japanese 35mm cameras were
> > provided with cheaper, lighter and computer designed MC zoom lenses.
> >
> >
> >
> > It is right, that the German industry was no more able to produce competing
> > zoom lenses.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > So I have no doubt, that all Rolleinar lenses were made fully in Japan. The
> > only exception is the 1.4 55 with a japanese barrel in a quality at that
> > time no one in Germany could produce anymore- but marked “Made in Germany”.
> >
> > Another explanation is that when Rollei launched the Rolleinar series, they
> > made some prototypes, so maybe they mounted
> the QBM Bajonet to the japanese
> > lenses, marked them Germany and showed them to journalists.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This of course is only valid for 35 mm lenses.
> >
> >
> >
> > For 6000 system lenses, there were Zeiss, Schneider, and Mamiya lenses sold
> > after bakruptcy.
> >
> > Some Schneider and Zeiss were bought, others made in license.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> > Dirk
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> > ---
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
>---
>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
Marc James Small
2012-05-04 08:15:45 UTC
Permalink
At 02:58 AM 5/4/2012, Dirk-Roger Schmitt wrote:

>2) Considering the multicoatings: MC, HFT, Zeiss
>T*..... All these are only trademarks and do not
>say anything about the type of coating or the
>quality. The multicoatings are all quite
>similiar. The difference is just the color of
>the remaining rest reflectance. This might be
>green, red, or red/blue. The color of rest
>reflectance has been selected only for marketing
>reasons, not for technical reasons. So Zeiss
>wants this dark/red colour as a "branding". Even
>at that time, the coating designs have not more
>been developed by the optics manufacturers but
>just bought together with the coating machines
>from the coating machine industry like Balzers of
>Leybold. So you buy a machine for multicoating,
>and the supplier asks you: What colour of rest
>reflectance you prefer? Then you get the process with the machine.

I don't believe this to be correct. The color of
a lens coatings indicates the frequencies which
it most effectively serves. Zeiss is most
insistent on this and there have been a few
articles on this in ZEISS LENS NEWS. If there is
a difference in the indicated color of the
coating, then that shows that the peak
effectiveness of the lens coating will also be different.

Marc


***@aya.yale.edu
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!
Laurence Cuffe
2012-05-04 10:58:27 UTC
Permalink
On May 04, 2012, at 04:15 AM, Marc James Small <***@comcast.net> wrote:

At 02:58 AM 5/4/2012, Dirk-Roger Schmitt wrote:

>2) Considering the multicoatings: MC, HFT, Zeiss
>T*..... All these are only trademarks and do not
>say anything about the type of coating or the
>quality. The multicoatings are all quite
>similiar. The difference is just the color of
>the remaining rest reflectance. This might be
>green, red, or red/blue. The color of rest
>reflectance has been selected only for marketing
>reasons, not for technical reasons. So Zeiss
>wants this dark/red colour as a "branding". Even
>at that time, the coating designs have not more
>been developed by the optics manufacturers but
>just bought together with the coating machines
>from the coating machine industry like Balzers of
>Leybold. So you buy a machine for multicoating,
>and the supplier asks you: What colour of rest
>reflectance you prefer? Then you get the process with the machine.

I don't believe this to be correct. The color of
a lens coatings indicates the frequencies which
it most effectively serves. Zeiss is most
insistent on this and there have been a few
articles on this in ZEISS LENS NEWS. If there is
a difference in the indicated color of the
coating, then that shows that the peak
effectiveness of the lens coating will also be different.

Marc


***@aya.yale.edu
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!
 
I'll line up with Marc on this.
There is a good Guide to this stuff here:
https://www.cvimellesgriot.com/products/Documents/TechnicalGuide/Optical-Coatings.pdf


From a fairly High end Scientific optics company, Melles Griot. I found their Guides very readable when I was doing optical instrumentation research.
All the best
(Dr) Laurence Cuffe 



---
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
CarlosMFreaza
2012-05-04 16:17:13 UTC
Permalink
Dear Dirk:
Your comments are interesting, thank you very much, I
have some points anyway:

2012/5/4 Dirk-Roger Schmitt <Dirk-***@dlr.de>:
> Dear Carlos,
>
> thank you very much for your anwer,
> I have the following comments:
>
> 1) Well, the 1.4/55 seems to have an interesting story. So I was not aware
> that this was licensed from Zeiss to Japanese Manufacturers.
> It is true, that Rollei overtook the Voigtländer factory including
> equipment. However, this took place in 1972 or a bit later. The factory was
> completely closed down. Rollei did not manufacture anything there. At least
> not 1977 or later. Of course they took personal, toolings and designs to the
> factory at Salzdahlumer Straße.
> I must admit I was never aware that Rolleinar Lenses were also made in
> Singapore. Interesting pictures form Jan Böttcher.  Anyway, these must be
> complete designs from Mamiya including tooling which where brought to
> Singapore. At this time this was a very strange thing, having a Zeiss line
> of lenses made in Singapore (50 mm, 2.8/35, 135 mm, 200 mm etc.) with a
> barrel quality say "not been from the best quality considering tolerances
> etc." and then launching a parallel line from Mamiya with excellent optics
> and very good and tolerance free barrels. O.k, you might say, the Zeiss line
> from Singapore, performance of production not to be the best, and then the
> other  line from Japan. Even that decision shows that at that time at Rollei
> no real agreement in the management how to proceed did exist. One wanted an
> attractive line of lenses and realized, they could not come from Singapore.
>  So there must have been some kind of conflict between the Singapore
> management and the "to buy in Japan" fraction. Even worse, later to start to
> make the Mamiya lenses in Singapore shows the confusion of management at
> that time. This must have ended in disaster as it did with the bankruptcy...."

In 1972 Zeiss-Ikon shut down the Voigtländer optical factory they had
bought previously, that year Carl Zeiss Oberkochen, Rollei and
the Gemeinwirtschaft Bank had an agreement to found the "Optischen
Werke Voigtländer GmbH" to keep alive the VO lenses production and
considering the Rollei decision for large scale production. The OWV
GmbH was dedicated to manufacture more common Zeiss lenses for the
Rollei cameras (TLR lenses were not included) keeping the Zeiss lenses
name but replacing "Carl Zeiss" by "made by Rollei" (and some Japanese
lenses aferwards), this arrangement afterwards reached Zeiss lenses
made by the Rollei Optical Co Singapore too (perhaps under the
circumstances you commented in your post); the more difficult lenses
to manufacture were made at Carl Zeiss Oberkochen anyway, with the
name Carl Zeiss in the lens ring of course but with the Rollei term
"HFT" (High Fidelity Transfer) for the T* multicoating process to keep
the same name for this significant feature (at the time) regarding the
Zeiss lenses made by Rollei. Rollei - CZ Oberkochen agreement was a
bit beyond a simple license, it was a joint venture, at least
initially, it allowed Rollei to use CZ lenses designs even for lenses
with Voigtländer names for Voigtländer cameras made by Rollei.

I have the Planar 1.8/50mm made by Rollei Singapore and it still is a
great lens producing excellent results and looking very well and
pristine and similar comment for my Rollei 35 Tessar 3,5/40 made by
Rollei in Singapore. In spite of similar design for the external lens
barrel cover, the color for the numbers are different regarding the
Rolleinar Japanese lenses and you "feel" the construction is different
someway, but I couldn't say that one is better than the other one.
Rollei production in Singapore had high quality standards and the
designs, prototypes and manufacture tooling were tried in Germany
previously while the workers were trained by German instructors,
(except for a few cases like the Rollei 35 LED). Problem with some
Rollei Singapore products was that they had no time enough for a right
pre-production devolopment for the models and problems for the quality
control due to the massive production _sometimes_.

Rollei found in the Rolleinar Japanese lenses (Mamiya several of them,
but Kiron, Tokina, Sigma, Yabe too) a cheaper line of lenses than the
CZ line, with modern designs in general and high optical quality and
zoom lenses that were a strong sales point for the 35mm Japanese
cameras. Claus Prochnow wrote that these Japanese lenses were as good
as the CZ lenses in general, or with perfomance very close to them
despite of the cheaper price, and he talked about the CZ lenses made
in Oberkochen and Braunschweig, not only about those ones made in
Singapore. Labour costs were cheaper in Singapore than in Japan and
this was the reason they were made in Singapore afterwards, the Mamiya
lenses specially. According the Rollei Report IV, the only reason for
the Rolleinar Japanese lenses was the cheaper price for similar
quality and some modern designs like the zooms, Singapore lenses
quality had nothing to do with the decision, in fact Rollei Optical
Co. Singapore manufactured lenses for lenses manufacturers like
Schneider for no Rollei products. The famous Sonnar 2.8/40 HFT for the
Rollei 35S was made in Singapore only after a few production
prototypes were made in Germany initially.

> 2) Considering the multicoatings: MC, HFT, Zeiss T*..... All these are only
> trademarks and do not say anything about the type of coating or the quality.
> The multicoatings are  all quite similiar. The  difference is just the color
> of the remaining rest reflectance. This might be green, red, or red/blue.
> The color of rest reflectance has been selected only for marketing reasons,
> not for technical reasons. So Zeiss wants this dark/red colour as a
> "branding".  Even at that time, the coating designs have not more been
> developed by the optics manufacturers but just bought together with the
> coating machines from the coating machine industry like Balzers of Leybold.
> So you buy a machine for multicoating, and the supplier asks you: What
> colour of rest reflectance  you prefer? Then you get the process  with the
> machine...

They are trademarks and the same name could be applied for different
multicoating processes indeed, however there are technical
consequences for the multicoating predominant color reflectance, as
Marc wrote,"...If there is a difference in the indicated color of the
coating, then that shows that the peak effectiveness of the lens
coating will also be different... " and then the coating will be more
or less effective according the light wavelength. The _predominant_
general color reflectance can be different, multicoatings could show
some minor similar reflectances. For example, the MC Mamiya and SMC
Pentax multicoatings have a similar greenish general color
reflectance, Tokina MC multicoating has a strange light blue
predominant reflectance; CZ T* and Rollei HFT multicoating for CZ
lenses made by Rollei have a dark red predominant color reflectance. I
never saw the predominant color reflectance for the Rolleinar Japanese
lenses marked "HFT" in the lens ring manufactured from 1984.

Carlos
Loading...