28. June 2002
The Rollei Mutar 0.7 x

Although both wideangle (f/4 55mm) and tele (f/4 135mm) versions were made of the famous Rolleiflex TLR's the vast majority of the produced Rolleiflexes either has a f/3.5 75mm or a f/2.8 80mm non-interchangeable lense (post WWII models that is).
However, it would be nice to somehow be able to alter the focal length of the TLR's for different kind of applications.
This is where the Mutar 0.7 x comes in:
The Rollei Mutar 0.7 x (or Carl Zeiss Mutar 0.7 x) is a wideangle attachment lens for Rolleiflex TLR's.
It's a pair of optics build together to fit in front of the viewing as well as taking lens of almost any Rolleiflex TLR (Bay I, II and III).
A tele version known as the Tele-Mutar 1.5 x was also made and I will describe this one in another article.

This article will demonstrate the image quality of the Mutar 0.7 x used on a Rolleiflex 2.8GX and (as so often before) I must apologize for the big amount of pictures you have to download here....

Technical info
The Mutar 0.7 x reduces the focal length of a 75mm to 54mm and of a 80mm to 57mm (equivalent to about 35mm in 24x36).



Carl Zeiss designed the Mutar for optimum performance on the best-selling f/3.5 75mm Planar lens from f/5.6 and smaller - meaning that from f/5.6 the user will get good image quality.
Since the Mutar was designed for the 75mm, bay II is the standard bayonet, but additional bayonet rings are available for both Bay I and III and (Bay II 42mm).
It weighs 437g making the camera very front heavy.
1000 Mutar 0.7 x were produced between 1963 and 1967.

In use
The overall look and feel of the Mutar leaves you with the impression of very high quality. It's a very solid lens, in fact I think you can drop it on a floor and nothing will happen to it!
My Mutar 0.7 x is fitted with the Type III bayonet and I can therefore use it on my Rolleiflex 2.8GX which has a 80mm Planar lens.



On the above pictures you'll see the Mutar attached to the GX. Also notice the sun-shade that can be folded down to double as a lens-cap.
The taking lens does not reduce the light very much (maybe half a stop), but the viewing lens on the other hand reduces the light with about 1³/₄ - 2 stops. This means that the image you see in the viewfinder becomes rather dark AND it also means that on the GX the TTL light-meter is "fooled". This problem didn't occur on the older models of course and is easily compensated for by turning the ISO dial 2 stops (I normally uses ISO 100 films and therefore turn the dial to ISO 400). This setting gives me normally exposed images.
The darkening of the viewfinder might call for a prism, which helps to block out light or maybe even better just a magnifying hood (I'm not sure if they were ever produced for the TLR, I have an adopted Bronica magnifying hood).
Since the Mutar contains a lot of glass, it becomes rather heavy. Therefore there is a little foldable "foot" on the front, so that the camera can stand on a flat surface (Rollei thought of everything):



It is possible to use a Rolleiflex with a Mutar handheld. Carrying around becomes difficult, because it is so front heavy. However when shooting you can support the camera by holding underneath the Mutar, this will actually get you quite a good grip on the camera.
My intention is to use the Mutar 0.7 x for architectural photography, like the insides of churches etc. Finally I will say that it is quite funny to use an attachment like this - when using a TLR you are so used to the 75/80mm, that using a 57mm becomes rather interesting.

Image quality
As described above, the Mutar is made for optimum performance on the 75mm Planar but I've only tested it on a 80mm Planar since my Mutar 0.7 x is fitted with the Type III bayonet.
I've tested in two ways: First I'm comparing to the 80mm Planar WITHOUT the Mutar attached and then I'm comparing to a shoot taking with a Nikon F90x and a 35-105mm zoom. I did the later, because I wanted to see how much more (quality) I got (if anything) from the Mutar compared to simply stick to my 35mm Nikon. The Nikkor 35-105mm lens is not a high-quality lens, but at f/11 it should (and does) produce a decent image quality.
I know you wanted me to test against the Wideangle Rollei or perhaps another Carl Zeiss MF lens, but unfortunately I haven't got neither, but maybe sometimes in the future I get a chance to do that test? It is my impressions thought by reading Rollei literature, that the wideangle Rollei is better (a little wider and one stop faster also).
Fuji Provia 100F is used for all the test images. All images are scanned on the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro scanner. Medium format images are scanned at 3200dpi while 35mm images are scanned at 4800dpi. All enlargements are shown at actual pixel-size.

80mm Planar vs. Mutar 0.7 x
Let's see some pictures!

80mm Planar. 1/125, f/11

With Mutar 0.7 x. 1/125, f/11

On the Mutar picture above (to the right) we can clearly see a rather strong vignetting (even at f/11 !), the image also seems a bit darker, but it could be that the light changed a bit OR - more likely - that the taking lens actually does take half a stop of light.
(On the Mutar picture I simply moved closer to the subject and you'll notice the changed angle).
And now in detail.
I've selected two areas, one near the center and one near the border of the image:



Near the center:

80mm Planar

80mm Planar with Mutar 0.7 x

Near the left side:

80mm Planar

80mm Planar with Mutar 0.7 x

On the first two images we see a slight loss of sharpness or perhaps just a loss of contrast. On the second two pictures of the antenna the Mutar clearly becomes blurred, while the Planar without Mutar is tack sharp. It seems as though the Mutar is superimposing two images a bit offset on top of each other, creating a "double-image" effect(?)
Again we must remember that the Mutar was designed for the f/3.5, 75mm Planar NOT the f/2.8, 80mm.
At the extreme corners the problem get even worse at this aperture.

Stopped further down:

Mutar. 1 sec. f/22

Detail of lower right corner

On this very sharp looking picture taken at f/22 the strange "double image" effect is only seen at the extreme corners and then only at object close to the camera (here the floor).

What about wide open? What happens when you open up the aperture?

1/15, f/2.8 ½

1 sec., f/11

The result can best be described as looking like the effect you get if you are using a soft-filter. The strange "double-image" effect disappears, but everything becomes soft instead.
Also notice the strange shift in colors (it might be a bit more pronounced here than on the actual slides)? The image to the right (f/11) has the correct colors - the church is build of yellow brick-stones.
The two images was taken with only seconds apart.

Mutar 0.7 x vs. 35mm Nikkor
I've made several wide-angle images (of churches) in the past with Nikkor lenses. I don't have a 35mm fixed focal length lens only a 35-105mm 1:3.5 - 4.5 D Nikkor lens.
I'm very pleased with this lens, it produces very sharp images.
The 35mm setting on this zoom lens closely matches the angle of view that the Mutar gives, so therefore I'm comparing to that here.

35mm Nikkor. 1/125, f/11

Mutar 0.7 x. 1/125, f/11

Details:

35mm Nikkor

80mm Planar with Mutar 0.7 x

35mm Nikkor

80mm Planar with Mutar 0.7 x

(Remember that the 24x36mm frames are scanned at 4800dpi while the MF frames are scanned at 3200dpi, giving images that are almost the same in size).
In the center of the frame (the plant) the Mutar is clearly superior. We do get more details and the contrast/sharpness is better (probably due to the smaller enlargement). On the borders the Mutar suffers from the strange "double-image" effect giving a more blurred image. There are however almost the same amount of details, but not quite.

Conclusion
The Rollei Mutar 0.7 x is an interesting (and funny) accessory. Unfortunately it is also quite expensive.
On the Planar f/2.8 80mm it seems to perform best closed down to f/16 or even f/22.
This is quite a limitation which very often will force you to use the camera on a tripod for long exposures.
As said before, the Mutar was designed for optimum performance on the 75mm Planar and might therefore perform a lot better on that. I don't have the necessary Bay II rings to test it on the 75mm Planar (yet).
At apertures smaller than f/11 it will outperform my 35mm Nikkor lens. Although the horizontal angle of view on the 35mm Nikkor compares to the Mutar the vertical angle is much smaller on 24x36mm than on the square 6x6 format, giving you quite different images when used inside a church f.ex.
I'm still convinced though that the Mutar will provide me with new and interesting pictures when used "properly".

Update 06.01.03
A couple of readers have informed me, that the Bay III "ring" on any Mutar actually covers a Bay II. The Mutars are "born" with a Bay II but can be fitted with adaptors for a Bay III. This means - as the kind readers pointed out for me - that I can simply unscrew the Bay III ring on the taking lens and that will then reveal a Bay II. The viewing lens however requires a Bay II ring to be attached.
Luckily I have a Mutar 1.5x with a Bay II ring on the viewing lens. That ring will fit on the Mutar 0.7x viewing lens.
Here is what it looks like:

Mutar 0.7x and 1.5x

Mutar 0.7x and 1.5x

On the picture to the right, one can see the two Mutars with their standard (non-detachable) Bay II on the taking lens and no bayonet on the viewing lens. The Bay II ring for the viewing lens will fit both the Mutar 0.7x and the Mutar 1.5x. No other rings neither for the taking lens nor the viewing lens can be interchanged!
In my case this means that I can now make a Mutar 0.7x with a bayonet II, but I can not make a 1.5x with a bayonet III, since the Bay III rings are made specifically for the Mutar 0.7x. The engraving on the viewing lens ring says "Bay II" while the engraving on the taking lens ring says "Bay III 0.7x" to emphasize that it will only fit the 0.7x.
So, below you'll see the final result; my Mutar 0.7x now with the standard Bay II. Thanks for pointing it out for me!

But, what's the point? Well, as you can read elsewhere in this article, the Mutars from Rollei where optimized for the 75mm f3.5 Planar lens and I can now make new tests using that lens! I will now conduct tests using the Mutar 0.7x on a 75mm Planar and compare the results with the pictures already shown on this site. So, stay tuned for the next update ..!

Links
Don't miss my review of the Rolleiflex 2.8GX.

There are many sites and pages about Rolleiflex TLR cameras on the Net, here you will find links to pages that I've found very good and informative:
• Rolleigraphy.org by Ferdi Stutterheim - this site contains lot of information about TLR's and you'll find many links as well.
• Rollei.org - links and manuals.
• The Rollei Page by Dave Wyman - lots of links and information from photographer Dave Wyman.
• Rolleiflex TLR page by Torbjorn Aase - lots of information about TLR and accessories.
• Rollei Only - Canadian Collector of Rollei TLR Cameras.
• Rollei Fototechnic GmbH - the Rollei factory web site.

Mutars are sometimes for sale here and there on the net. I think you'll find some here:
• Collectcamera