Rodenstock-Heligon 35mm f2.8 A, M mount.

[Pyrogallol]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 hours ago, UliWer said:

I don‘t think the Heligon was originally for medium or even large format: with 35mm it would have been a very strong or even extreme wide angle for the larger formats and you couldn‘t expect f/2.8 then.

Though there is not much information about this lens: was it a special design for LTM or are there 35mm f/2,8 lenses from Rodenstock for other cameras? When was it produced? There are some lists about Rodenstock serial numbers on the web, though I don‘t trust them: your  23xxxxx would be from the early fifties then, which I don‘t believe. If Rodenstock really had a f/2.8 35mm so early it would have been a very strong contender to the Leitz Summaron which only had f/3.5 but the fact that it is a rather rare lens speaks well against this assumption. The Zeiss Biogon was never sold by Zeiss with LTM - and for the Contax it cost twice as much as the Summaron. Any idea about the Heligon‘s original price?

One more practical question: I think it has a very small filter thread, and you don‘t find filters in this size. Will Leitz A36-filters fit?

The prewar 35mm Zeiss Biogon was an f2.8 lens https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/pp/zicontax35f28.htm so Leitz could have had an f2.8 35mm lens earlier?

I have one mounted in a Leica screw focussing mount, from a 50mm lens by the depth of field scale. I was told by the seller that it was found in a photographic studio in Alexandria Egypt that had been closed for 50 years, a good story if it is true. The glass is in poor condition for normal use but it is wonderful when using infrared film. The Infrared light seems to cut through the discolouration in the glass.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[wlaidlaw]

I borrowed a pre-war 35/2.8 Biogon to see if it would work on my post-war Contax IIa, when I would probably have bought it but for some reason it was so stiff to mount that I was reluctant to force it on. I know there were some minor differences in the mount between the pre-war and post-war Contax mounts but I did not think it applied to the 35mm. 

Wilson

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Pyrogallol]

23 minutes ago, wlaidlaw said:

I borrowed a pre-war 35/2.8 Biogon to see if it would work on my post-war Contax IIa, when I would probably have bought it but for some reason it was so stiff to mount that I was reluctant to force it on. I know there were some minor differences in the mount between the pre-war and post-war Contax mounts but I did not think it applied to the 35mm. 

Wilson

I believe the prewar 35mm lens extended further at the back and would foul the shutter blinds on the postwar camera, see https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/pp/zicontax35f28.htm

Edited June 10, 2023 by Pyrogallol

[UliWer]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Pyrogallol:

The prewar 35mm Zeiss Biogon was an f2.8 lens ... so Leitz could have had an f2.8 35mm lens earlier?

Well, the post-war Biogon, which fitted the Contax IIa/IIIa was re-designed in 1948 and on the market in the early fifties. It was a very special design, and so Leitz followed a different path with the double-gaussian design for the Summaron - which "only" had 1:3.5. As the 1:3.5 Summaron was a big success on the market Zeiss made a completely new 1:3.5/35mm Planar in the mid-fifties to compete. Though the Planar was still more expensive than the Summaron (255,-DM as the Summaron was sold for 220,-DM, whilst Zeiss charged 460,-DM for the Biogon) so it was no real success and is today one of the rare lenses for the Contax.

We can also look at Canon: they introduced their 1:2.8/35mm in 1957, the Leitz 1:2.8/35mm Summaron came one year later. 

So my assumption is, if Rodenstock really introduced their 1:2.8/35mm in the early fifties, it must have been a big success, as it had no real competion on the LTM market, if it was priced reasonably. As we don't find many Heligons on the second hand market now, I have severe doubts about an early introduction. The lists of serial numbers which say that items up to 2.500.000 were produced before 1952 might be read with a grain of salt: we know from Leitz that serial-numbers were often assigned well before the the actual production, so we cannot rule out that Rodenstock followed the same pattern.

I may be completely wrong believing that the Heligon was produced only in the late 50s when the 1:2.8/35mm Summaron was already sold by Leitz. So it would be interesting if somebody had a catalogue or any advertising for the lens (Photo Porst comes to my mind), which gives a date when it was on the market.

[wlaidlaw]

The 35/2.8 Summaron is a truly excellent lens. When I still had a 35 ASPH Summicron (swapped for an APO), I did test shots from both lenses at f2.8 on my M240 on a tripod, then compared the results. Apart from the Summaron being marginally softer in the corners, there was very little to choose between them. I rarely use any other lens on my IIIa, with a SBLOO finder. 

Wilson

[qqphot]

I have one of the transitional 35mm/2.8 Summarons that was originally LTM but had an M mount collar added; it splits its time between the IIIg and M2, and it's one of my favorites. Really very little to complain about at all.