Any comments on the Rollei AFM35

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Camera Equipment : One Thread

Recently, the Rollei rolled out the new AFM35 which I suppose should be a good competitor to the T3 and Minilux.

Has anybody had any comments and experience on this new highend P&S ?

Among it, T3 and Minilux (non zoom) which is the best buy ? FYI I shoot picture with people most the time.

Regards.

-- whr Tam (whrtam88@hotmail.com), December 31, 2001

Answers

I'm in the same shoes, when you find out please let me know. Thanks.

-- Ed (helloed@msn.com), April 24, 2002.

I have the March issue of the Practical Photography magazine (UK) which contains quite a detailed comparison of several high-end compacts, including a Rollei (I'm almost sure that it is the same you are asking about - it definitely has the digits 35 in its front logo), a Leica, a Konica (Hexar?) and a Nikon, I think. As far as I remember, it was the Rollei which earned the magazine's "Recommended" verdict, due to the plenty of controls available to the user. I can double-check if it helps you.

-- Gediminas Pateckas (gediminas@mail.lt), April 25, 2002.

Yes, please get more information for us. Or is it possible to view the information on a web page and the address ? Thanks !

-- whr Tam (whrtam88@hotmail.com), April 28, 2002.

Well, I've found the magazine (which I'm afraid is not available online) and it actually is the Rollei AFM 35 which is compared to the new Leica C1. I was wrong in mentioning the other cameras - confused with another test, it seems.

And yes, as I wrote in my earlier post, the Rollei was deemed the better of the two cameras and rated 92 out of 100 points (against Leica's 90 points) since it does not only provide consistently good pictures but also allows more control and creativity to the user.

-- Gediminas Pateckas (gediminas@mail.lt), April 29, 2002.


To date, my afm35 has been an excellent companion, equal in picture quality to the minilux but decidedly superior in ergonomics and, for that matter, weight.

The minilux has always struck me as an overweight camera, titanium- bodied or otherwise!

-- TG (tgetty69@att.net), May 14, 2002.



Just purchased a Rollei AFM 35...I will get back to all of you about it. I can Compare it to my Contax T3 experience!

Greg

-- Greg Menedez (greg799@pacbell.net), May 27, 2002.


I have used the Afm 35 for almost half a year and shot more than 10 rolls. Pictures are consistently sharp and contrasty. It works great with Fuji Superia Reala. Minilux is bigger, heavier and more expensive.

-- Harris Chan (harris@cs.washington.edu), May 30, 2002.

I purchased a Rollei AFM 35.

I have two questions..

1. Does the red focusing beam have to hit exactly in the focusing target? ( I was looking at it in the dark and my red beam is a little off from the focusing targets, but still within the lines )

2. Is the aperature supposed to look like a funny looking hexagon?

Thenks!!

G Bodhi

-- G Bodhi (bodhixeno@netscape.net), May 30, 2002.


I finally purchased the AFM35 and have shot a few rolls.

My findings 1) Pictures are consistently great with correct exposure and AF. 2) Flash is very good. Fill flash gives natural skin tone. 3) Small size and handy. 4) Crystal clear view finder which is far superior to the Minilux. At par with the T3. 5) +2 EV Back light compensation together with +- 0.5 and 1 EV exposure compensation can handle most critical situation. However, the +- EV needs some practice, though still ease of use. 6) Can define the number of shots needed for bracketing, e.g. only 1 shot at +1 EV. 7) I accidentaly dropped it to the floor from a height for 3 feet. Still survives and functions. Also did the same with my Rollei Prego 90 and it still works. Seems like Rolleis are quite durable ! 8) It works very good with Reala. Don't use the MAX400 - It is the worst film I've ever used ! 9) Cheaper than the Minilux and T3. 10) Focusing is fast. 11) Highest shutter speed = 1/1000s 12) Possible to select aperture from F2.6 to F16.

I like this camera very much. My only disappointment is that the max. shutter speed for F2.6 is 1/290s. I can not fully 'blur' the background for portrait even with ISO100 film. Just don't know why the highend P/S can not achieve the high shutter speed of SLR. Are there any real good ISO 50 print films ?

To conclude, T3 provides more fucntions, but it is expensive. I prefer a 38mm lense to a 35mm. For me, the AFM35 already serves all my requirements - travel and people photo. Pictures are excellent. I did not take the Minilux, because the view finder is inferior - dark and too small.

-- whr Tam (whrtam88@hotmail.com), June 05, 2002.


I prefer the Rollei AFM35 over the Contax T3.

Don't get me wrong, I am a loyal Contax fan! I purchased a Black Contax T3...and I have to say that the T3 is one beautiful camera!

So why do I prefer the Rollei AFM35 over the T3?

To start with...fear!

I'm so paranoid of scratching or denting the titanium T3 that I find myself treating the camera like it was a newborn baby.

Don't beleive that Titanium dents and scratches easy...look here http://homepage.ntlworld.com/the.leighs/whatsthetruth.html

If you search out the other Contax T3 threads you will find that the Contax T3 winds the film using only one sprocket!

There seems to be complaints that this one single sprocket has the tendency to break off. Can you blame it...that lone sprocket is handling all the torque! That's my number 2 fear...it will break!

I know what your thinking..."this guy is paranoid! After all the camera comes with a three year warranty. It's still worth the $700.."

Listen closely...as mentioned on the numerous Contax T3 threads, the focusing on the T3 is about five ovals wide. So what you say! Well, if you take a picture with the subject behind a foreground object like a pole or a door or behind a tree, behind a car...(the list goes on) the camera will focus on the foreground!!

To remedy this problem you have to hold the camera in a vertical position, or push the tiny AFl button, or set the camera manually.

Don't believe me...then buy one. Confirm where the AF is locked itself by looking at the distance in the LCD on top of the camera...you will be amazed to find that it may be locked on to a subject other than what you chose. ( try aiming the focus targets between to soda cans ( spread the cans 3 feet wide apart if you like, and your subject 5 feet behind. ) see what happens.

The T3 is very solid in build and tiny to hold. It's pretty heavy.

What if I told you that a Point and Shoot camera should be easy to use.

After all...it is a point and shoot.

That's why I prefer the Rollie AFM 35.

Less buttons to push to access functions. T3 has more and the buttons are tiny.

Larger body...to control shake. T3 body too small for me.

Shutter lag is almost non existent. The lens pre focuses. T3 has lag...hard to believe at the price.

Stronger flash VS. the T3

Better lens resolution than the T3. ( According to a PopPhoto March edition page 128 ) verify this please.

let's stop here.

I'm not knocking the T3 at all. The T3 is my favorite.

let's face it, when I want to take pictures fast and without worry using a point and shoot over my SLR...I find myself grabing the Rollei AFM35.

The Flash on the T3 is a little too weak for me. With the T3 you can purchase the optional flash unit.

But I bet you...by the time you attach a falsh unti on your T3, I would have already taken the picture with my Rollei AFM35. The flash unit in the Rollie AFM is rated 13.8 on ISO 100!!- You may want to verify this for your self.

A point and shoot camera is just that- a point and shoot.

Why spend your time fiddling and pushing buttons...that's what an SLR is for.

Thanks everyone!

Priest

-- Priest (optionpriest@netscape.net), June 11, 2002.



Re the questions posted by G Bodhi

-- whr Tam (whrtam88@hotmail.com), June 23, 2002.

Re the questions posted by G Bodhi

1) I haven't tested the focusing beam of my Rollei, but for sure it always focuses correctly. You can try with your pictures. They will tell the truth.

2) Yes, the shape looks like a hexagon.

-- whr Tam (whrtam88@hotmail.com), June 23, 2002.


The only ASA 50 print film I have found is Konica Impressa 50 - you can buy it online at B&H Photo.

-- David Owczarek (dave@owczarek.com), July 05, 2002.

I can recommend the Rollei AFM35 very strongly. I've used it intensively over the past three months and compared it against the Leica Minilux, the Olumus Stylus Epic (Mju 2), Contax SLR and Olympus rangefinder (from the 70's). My findings are: Using Kodak and Fuji 100 ASA print film, the Rollei scores equal in definition and contrast to the Contax SLR. There are no obvious differences in results. Rollei's autofocus is fast and very reliable, even when shooting through a glass window. Although the lens formula is different from the Leica Minilux (Rollei being an improved Tessar 4 lens, the Leica a classic 6 lens) and Rollei's aperture is less sophisticated than Leica's (Rollei 5 blade irregular shaped, Leica a 7 blade and very even circle), the results cannot be distinquised between the two. I find the Rollei lightmeter to be better (far less sensitive to backlight), resulting in needing less + or -/- manual overrides). Rollei's handling is also better, especially the larger viewfinder and mor comfortable placement of the finder (Rollei to the left, Leica at a center position). There is one drawback: The close-up marks of the Leica are only one horizontal line, since the viewfinder is situated exactly above the lens. Using the Rollei you have to mind both a horizontal and a vertical line, this takes some getting used to. Another Leica advantage is the ability to see the camera's selected aperture and speed settings when using program mode. Rollei tells you nothing, but its speed go up to 1/1000 while leica stops at 1/400.

This Rollei is a much better designed camera than the infamous QZ 35 (Porsche designed, Samsung made) semi-rangefinder from a few years back. This camera is (co-) designed with (a lot) of help from Fuji, and the results are excellent. Remember it's not titanium, but a light metal alloy. looks nice, but the back panel scratches and marks easily. The Rollei is very comfortable to hold, the Minilus is larger (but provides a good grip) and heavier. The Rollei has two lugs for a traditional strap (and provides a very comfortable adjustable strap), while the Leica only has a single hand strap attachment. The Leica Minilux dates back to 1995, so who knows if a new version will bring some improvements that will top this Rollei?

-- Hans la Porte (hw@adlp.nl), July 09, 2002.


Just a few additional comments on my previous contribution:

Rollei AFM 35 strong points: Easy to handle and comfortable to hold, pretty good and well located viewfinder, clear indications for manual focus and exposure compensation in viewfinder, silent and discreet operation, very good optics, very good lightmeter, extensive manual overrides. Good and well balanced flash

Weak points: somewhat lightweight construction and lighter materials (feels a little less substantial compared to the Minilux), no information on shutter speed in program or aperture mode, no DOF indication (though this is not uncommon with these camera's, even the Contax G lacks DOF scales)

Minilux strong points:

Well constructed and flawlessly finished, excellent lens, rather heavy (but this minimizes camara shake), complete info on aperture and shutter speed in program and aperture mode.

Waek points: very small and dark viewfinder (too small to use conveniently, difficult to compose and view a scene), rather noisy focussing and transport(high pitched whirring), but very quiet shutter, minimum focus distance only 0.7m (Rollei 0.4m), slow manual overrides (+ or -/- buttons need a few seconds to press before anything happens, creating awkward situations when you have to say "just stay there, the camera needs more time". No indications in viewfinder on manual distance setting or exposure compensation, easy to accidentally set manual distance (before you know it your shooting landscapes with a set distance of 3 meters, you have no clue and think you're on AF), only one lug for strap attachment, making it less comfortable to carry.

Make no mistake: the Minilux is a formidable camera. It's just that its design is now 8 years old. The look and feel are excellent and my guess is that it will become a design classic. But it's time for a Minilux II. The Rollei is fresh from the drawing board (although it looks rather 70's).

The Contax T3 is great but somewhat overcomplicated and too small for me to hold comfortably (and I don't have big hands...). It probably has the best lens when you compare lab tests. But in general use, with print fim, you won't see the difference.

In my opinion all these camera's will be equal or better than mainstream SLR's. Compare the results from any of these to a generic high tech, plastic 28-80 slr kit from Canon, Minolta, Pentax or Nikon and these high end compacts will outperform any of them in terms of color saturation, sharpness, clearity etc. I know what I'm talking about, since I've used many of these camera's. In terms of versatility however they are nowhere, having non interchangable, non zoom, non optional flash, 'non anything' features. But I'm tired of carrying around big heavy camera cases with lots of equipment that I seldom use at that time, when these little camera's sitisfy 85% of my general requirements.

A top slr with a good (but expensive) lens will produce even better results, but mainly because of more sophisticated metering, autofocus and flash technology. Remember, the most important thing is a good lens, since any camera is still essentially just a dark box with a lens. In the end what counts is how well both the box and the lens are designed and manufactured.

-- Hans la Porte (hw@adlp.nl), July 10, 2002.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ