[pure-silver] Re: Old Kodak Lenses
- From: "Gene Johnson" <genej2@xxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 07:25:24 -0800
The old barrel lenses I'm using are generally f4.5 I have a Kodak
anastigmat, a Heliar, and a Ross Xpres. At f stops around 4.5-5.6, I cannot
right now honestly tell the difference. They all look very good to me. My
hot lights generally get me f5.6 and 1/25 with hp5, so the old barrel lenses
and Packard shutter fit right in.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Koch, Gerald" <gkoch02@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 6:26 AM
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Old Kodak Lenses
> The Tessar design is quite a good one capable of producing very sharp
> images. It's major drawback is being limited to moderate apertures.
> For 50 mm lenses such as those used in 35 mm cameras this limits the
> maximum aperature to f2.8.
>
> What's more amazing is that these old lenses were designed without the
> aid of computers. All done by hand calculation over a period of months
> or years.
>
> Jerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gene Johnson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 9:48 PM
> To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Old Kodak Lenses
>
>
> I would have never thought that lenses this old would be so good.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 6:31 PM
> Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Old Kodak Lenses
>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gene Johnson" <genej2@xxxxxxx>
> > To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 5:32 PM
> > Subject: [pure-silver] Old Kodak Lenses
> >
> >
> > > I've been shooting quite a bit with 3 old Kodak lenses lately out of
>
> > > pure coincidence. A 170mm f6.3 Tessar in a Compound, a 6 3/8 inch=20
> > > Anastigmat in a barrel, and a 80mm Anastar on a Kodak Reflex II TLR.
>
> > > I am very impressed with all 3 of them for sharpness and contrast=20
> > > (lack of coating considered where appropriate) even wide open. All
> > > but the Anastar are uncoated. All exhibit excellent OOFA
> > > qualities too. I now have all I need, so I'll tell
> > > everyone. Don't be afraid of buying them because they're
> > > so cheap. I am now a believer, Kodak made darn good
> > > lenses.
> > > Richard, and anyone else, I've done some portrait work
> > > with this 6 3/8 Anastigmat, and frankly I just love it.
> > > It softens just slightly wide open and generally gives
> > > very pleasant skintone rendition. I've never heard
> > > anything good said about Tessar designs for this purpose,
> > > with Heliars and such getting all the ink. Is there some
> > > technical reason for Tessars to be poopoo'd for
> > > portraiture?
> > >
> > Tessars work fine for portraiture. Many lenses have some residual=20
> > spherical aberration when wide open. Spherical tends to soften=20
> > highlights by spreading them out resulting in a sort of halo effect.=20
> > The problem with unsymmetrical lenses, like the Tessar, is that they=20
> > also tend to have coma or oblique spherical (similar to coma but from=20
> > a different source). This makes tear drop shaped smears out of the
> > highlights which most people find unpleasant. These
> > aberrations are absent at the center of the image but become
> > progressively visible as the angle increases. Both disappear
> > rapidly with stopping down. Spherical, OTOH, is constant in
> > all parts of the image.
> > Kodak made two series of Kodak Anastigmat lenses. The
> > Series 30 are Tessars, the Series 70 are four element air
> > spaced of the generic type sometimes called a Celor or a
> > Dialyte. A great many very fine lenses are of this type, the
> > Apochromatic Artar and Goerz Dogmar being examples. They are
> > limited in coverage and have 8 glass-air surfaces leading to
> > flare if not coated, so they were never as popular for
> > general use as the Tessar. Most of the Kodak lenses are
> > similar to the Dogmar in being not quite symmetrical. The
> > shifting of a little power from one cell to the other helps
> > to optimise the lens for distant subjects. The last of this
> > series was the No.70 K.A. which became the f/7.7, 203mm
> > Ektar. The 100mm Enlarging Ektar is also of this type. The
> > other Series 70 K.A.s were discontinued around 1947, I don't
> > know the exact date. Around this time Kodak also changed the
> > names of all the remaining K.A. lenses.
> > Some of these lenses became Ektanons, some other names.
> > The front element focusing lenses previously known as Kodak
> > Anastigmat Special became Anastars, lower quality, three
> > element lenses became Anastons.
> > The Anastar in the Kodak Reflex is a four element air
> > spaced type, the one in the f/3.5 rangfinder version of the
> > Kodak 35 camera is a modified tessar. The rear component of
> > this lens has the order of powers reversed from the normal
> > Tessar. A Kodak designer, I can't remember whether it was
> > Aklin or Altman now, says this results in better performance
> > where high index glass is used.
> > Some of Kodak's cheaper lenses are quite remarkably good.
> >
> > ---
> > Richard Knoppow
> > Los Angeles, CA, USA
> > dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> =3D=3D=3D=3D
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to=20
> > your
> account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
> subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
> >
>
>
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
> account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
> subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>
============================================================================
=================================
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts:
