Coating Rollei Carl Zeiss 35mm f2.8 Distagon

MF-addicted · Last edited by MF-addicted on Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:49 pm; edited 1 time in total

Took the chance today to get a cheap Rollei Set with
1. Carl Zeiss 35mm f2.8 Distagon.
2. Planar 1.8/50 Made by Rollei
3. Carl Zeiss Tele-Tessar 4/135
Comments on these lenses are helpful to me, too.

They are no HFT versions.
Looks like the versions on this site:
http://captjack.exaktaphile.com/rollei/Rolleilenses.htm

So my question:
Is there a different coating on it that differs from the HFT version.
Any information appreciated.
Thank you.

poilu · Expire: 2019-08-29

I read that lenses made by Zeiss got the label HFT for consistence with Rollei naming

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

till I know, not all the zeiis-rollei lenses were HFT (multicoated). The old distagon, planar and tele-tessar weren't multicoated. The multicoated planar 1,8/50 was HFT, singapore made.

Rino.

MF-addicted · Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:51 pm Post subject:

Thanks so far for your comments.
This means that without HFT the lens is single coated or is it another type of multicoating ?

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

That is something difficult to answer.
Why? Because there were lenses with a name that suggest a single coat (like the Super takumar) but in the last time of production they had a multicoat with the same name. It was a multicoat that wasn't the SMC, but not the old single coat. That can be aplicated to the distagon 2,8/35.

I had this lens (far from spectacular), was a decent one, but single coated (prone to flare, medium to low contrast). If you find an Angulon, it's better lens.

Regards, Rino

Keysersoze27 · Expire: 2012-12-24

They use a dual-coating layer made by Zeiss . They are supposed to be a little sharper than the HFT ones Wink

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

In 35 mm, the distagon 2,8/35 made by rollei germany and singapur didn't have a zeiss coated.

In general terms, perhaps be useful the follow:

"How do Zeiss T* and Rollei HFT compare?

Since this has recently grown into a frequently asked question we feel it is appropriate to provide an official and unequivocal answer from Carl Zeiss:

HFT, meaning "High Fidelity Transfer", is a multi-layer anti-reflection coating system co-developed by Zeiss and Rollei. This occurred several decades ago at a time when Zeiss T* coating was new on the market and could only be applied at the Zeiss Oberkochen plant to rather small camera lens production batches. Rollei envisaged very large volume production in their then new Singapore plant and therefore encouraged this joint development.

Today the situation is this: HFT has become a well established trademark for Rollei's proprietary multi-layer anti-reflection coating. The optical performance of this Zeiss/Rollei co-development is so close to the performance of the original Zeiss T* that one can hardly detect any difference in all practical picture taking.

The Planar®, Distagon®, Sonnar® lenses that Rollei produces under license from Carl Zeiss are all HFT coated by Rollei. All the lenses that Carl Zeiss produces for Rollei at the Zeiss Oberkochen plant are actually Zeiss T*. coated. However, the designation on these lenses is "HFT" in the interest of remaining fully consistent throughout the Rollei product range.

Camera Lens News No. 13, Spring 2001"

Interesant, isn't it?

MF-addicted · Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:33 pm Post subject:

Thanks to poilu, estudleon, Keysersoze27

Keysersoze27 · Expire: 2012-12-24

Hari · Expire: 2015-05-27

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Common price not a deal , not ripp-off.

photosite · Joined: 15 Sep 2024 Posts: 10

Here is a review of the Rollei distagon 35mm f/2.8. https://otherphotosite.wordpress.com/2024/08/28/rollei-35mm-f28-qbm/

caspert79 · Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 3213 Location: The Netherlands

photosite · Joined: 15 Sep 2024 Posts: 10

[quote="caspert79"][quote="photosite"]Here is a review of the Rollei distagon 35mm f/2.8. https://otherphotosite.wordpress.com/2024/08/28/rollei-35mm-f28-qbm/[/quote]

Thank you, interesting review. Despite its designation it doesn't seem to be an extraordinary lens (I hope I don't insult anyone). The results (I'm also checking on Flickr) look very vintage, which can be a good thing if you're after a certain look, but can probably be achieved with cheaper lenses.

After trying quite a few vintage 35mm lenses I finally settled with the Minolta MD 35mm f/2.8 and MIR 24H 35mm f/2. The Minolta delivers quite stunning performance for a lens so cheap (80€ or less), and is nice and compact. The MIR 24H 35mm f/2 is less perfect in certain aspects (like flare resistance), but actually has great resolution, very short MFD and beautiful bokeh. The latter is often a bit expensive though; I sort of accidently obtained one by trading it against another lens.[/quote]

The truth is that its main advantage of the rollei is probably flare resistance, but I think it is overpriced. The construction of the zeiss for contax is much better and the prices only a little higher, but from what I've seen they don't perform much better (35mm f/2. Cool

. Among the new lenses, the tamron 35mm f/2.8 is optically much, much better, can be had for a little bit more, but it is built in plastic and neither its manual focus nor autofocus are the best.