[rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar

My uncoated 2.8 tessar in Compur Rapid for Super Ikonta B is excellent. 
Plus I love using the camera around j-schoolies and other digerati --
they all seem to think it's an old polaroid...  It takes 11, not 12
shots....

Peter Nebergall

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 11:03:06 -0800 "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
writes:
> Thank you Carlos. Apparently the only 80mm F2.8 Tessar that people 
> liked was
> the one for the Hasselblad. In my references under the moniker 
> "Lousy
> Lenses" they state the following:
> 
> "One curious example is the f2.8 Tessar, liked in 50mm form but much 
> less so
> in the 80mm versionunless for the Hasselblad where it was admired!"
> 
> Since that Tessar came much later perhaps Zeiss' work on the earlier 
> 80mm
> F2.8 Tessar helped.  I did find that in 1931 Zeiss listed *a Tessar
> *f2.850, 60, 75, 80mm This was designed by Merte. It is fairly 
> common
> and usually
> really good but the original 80mm version for the 6x6cm Super Ikonta 
> was
> said to different and less liked by users. So it does coincide with
> Richard's note about the Tessar on Zeiss' own cameras.
> 
> The only notation specifically for the Rollei 2.8A reads as follows: 
>  "*Tessar
> *f2.8 80mm for Praktisix SLR and a few were sold on Rollei cameras. 
> This
> seems to have been an old or pre-war design and was not up to the 
> standard
> expected. There seems to have been a close out in Jan. 1964. The 
> f2.8 Tessar
> had previously been a problem on the Rollei 2.8A in 1950-1951 when a 
> batch
> were sold with Tessars at No2,300,000-3,000,000, which are wartime 
> or just
> post-war numbers. Customers found these of poor quality and the 
> factory
> recalled them. Thus they became a real collectible through scarcity. 
> A
> little later Rollei supplied some cameras with Jena f2.8 80mm 
> Biometars and
> these were much more successful. [It is not known what happened to 
> the
> Tessar cameras, but they may have been rebuilt with Biometars and 
> sold e.g..
> in E. Germany but this is a uncertain.]"
> 
> Interesting comments about the possibility of 2.8A models being 
> retrofitted
> with Biometars, but no one knows for certain.
> 
> Peter K
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/14/06, Carlos Manuel Freaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Peter, I think Richard K explained several times a
> > possible cause: Tessar design limits, they
> > manufactured Tessar for 3 decades but never a Tessar
> > 2.8/80 for the 6x6 format, it seems 2.8/80 is an
> > extreme design limit for this lens type and then the
> > optical design and glasses must be very exact. Zeiss
> > manufactured the Tessar 2.8/60 for the 4x4 however the
> > increased focal length from 60mm to 80mm increased the
> > problems too and it seems they could solve the main
> > design problems for 1938 when Rollei started to
> > develop the 2.8A prototype, but you know this lens
> > never was %100 satisfactory, for the reasons Richard K
> > explained several times .-
> >
> > All the best
> > Carlos
> >
> >
> >
> > --- "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx> escribió:
> >
> > > Carlos,
> > >
> > > Very interesting. Seems odd though that having been
> > > building Tessars for 3+
> > > decades that CZJ would have had issues at this time.
> > > Do you know any reason
> > > why this would have happened?
> > >
> > > Marc, any input?
> > >
> > > Peter K
> > >
> > >
> > > On 11/14/06, Carlos Manuel Freaza
> > > <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Marc:
> > > >        On 1934 CZJ developed a Tessar 2.8/80 lens
> > > > prototype for the Rolleiflex Standard, but it had
> > > bad
> > > > quality and F&H rejected the lens.
> > > > On 1938 CZJ re-designed the Tessar 2.8/80 and this
> > > > time F&H accepted the lens performance developing
> > > the
> > > > 1939 Rolleiflex 2.8A 2.8/80 prototype (PR 149) but
> > > the
> > > > production couldn't begin due to the war, this
> > > protype
> > > > was the basis for the 1948 2.8A prototype with
> > > some
> > > > changes.
> > > > I think it's evident the 1938 and 1939 Tessars
> > > 2.8/80
> > > > were bought for the 1939 prototype commercial
> > > > production and it did not happen due to the war.
> > > >
> > > > All the best
> > > > Carlos
> > > >
> > > > --- Marc James Small <marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > > I have no explanation for the
> > > > > existence of the Prewar 2.8/8cm CZJ Tessars --
> > > > > the first Rolleiflex batch was of only 2 lenses
> > > > > and was completed on 2 FEB 1938;  the other
> > > > > Rolleiflex batches date from the first half of
> > > > > 1939.  The Ikoflex lenses all date from 1939
> > > save
> > > > > for the final batch of 3 which 29 DEC 1941
> > > during
> > > > > the heart of the war years.  All of the Prewar
> > > > > lenses were produced to a design dated 27 JAN
> > > > > 1933 but, for that matter, ALL Prewar 2.8/8cm
> > > CZJ
> > > > > Tessars were produced to that design save for a
> > > > > single batch of 2 lenses for the Super Ikonta
> > > > > B/BX made to a design dated 20 SEP 1938, but
> > > that
> > > > > was clearly a test for a planned upgrade which
> > > > > did not occur because of the war.
> > > > >
> > > > > We do know that Franke & Heidecke was
> > > > > substantially concerned over Zeiss Ikon's move
> > > > > from the f/3.5 Tessar in the Ikoflex II and
> > > > > II/III to the f/2.8 lens in the Ikoflex III and
> > > > > probably intended to follow suit, though this
> > > was
> > > > > precluded for some years because of the outbreak
> > > > > of War.  I would suspect that F&H caboosed their
> > > > > order onto the Zeiss Ikon order, as eight of
> > > > > these blocks were made in unison in four linked
> > > > > groups and were finished on the same day,
> > > > > probably so that both Zeiss Ikon and F&H enjoyed
> > > > > a price break from production economics.  I do
> > > > > not have any Rolleiflex 2.8 lens numbers handy,
> > > > > so I cannot be certain of this, but it would
> > > seem
> > > > > that the lenses used in the 2.8 came from lenses
> > > > > ordered by Rolleiflex and not from left-over
> > > > > Ikoflex III lenses.  Here is a precis of these
> > > ten
> > > > > bocks:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1 309 988 to 1 309 989        2 lenses
> > > Rolleiflex
> > > > >    1 FEB 1938
> > > > >
> > > > > 2 309 601 to 2 310 600  1000 lenses     Ikoflex
> > > III
> > > > >    3 JAN 1939
> > > > > 2 310 601 to 2 311 600  1000 lenses
> > > Rolleiflex
> > > > >    3 JAN 1939
> > > > >
> > > > > 2 446 301 to 2 448 300  2000 lenses     Ikoflex
> > > III
> > > > >    17 APR 1939
> > > > > 2 448 301 to 2 449 300  1000 lenses
> > > Rolleiflex
> > > > >    17 APR 1939
> > > > >
> > > > > 2 581 001 to 2 582 000  1000 lenses     Ikoflex
> > > III
> > > > >    15 JUN 1939
> > > > > 2 582 001 to 2 582 000  1000 lenses
> > > Rolleiflex
> > > > >    15 JUN 1939
> > > > >
> > > > > 2 602 101 to 2 603 100  1000 lenses     Ikoflex
> > > III
> > > > >    18 JUL 1939
> > > > > 2 603 101 to 2 605 100  2000 lenses
> > > Rolleiflex
> > > > >    18 JUL 1939
> > > > >
> > > > > 2 790 310 to 2 790 312        3 lenses  Ikoflex
> > > III
> > > > >    29 DEC 1941
> > > > > (the last batch is recorded as being "MUSTER",
> > > or
> > > > > a sample lot, perhaps made as a training
> > > exercize of
> > > > > some sort.)
> > > > >
> > > > > We do not know the production run of Ikoflex III
> > > > > cameras as such records were destroyed,
> > > > > apparently, in the Dresden Fire-Storm, but it
> > > > > must have been small -- the camera was only
> > > > > introduced at the Leipzig-Meße in April, 1939,
> > > > > and was no longer being actively sold by early
> > > > > 1940, though Carl Zeiss, USA, still seems to
> > > have
> > > > > had some unsold stock on its shelves as of 1 OCT
> > > > > 1941 -- at the hefty price-tag of $219.  I would
> > > > > guess that less than a thousand cameras were
> > > > > marketed, but it might have been twice that --
> > > no
> > > > > one knows for certain.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Zeiss-Opton lens is a simpler story,
> > > > > indeed.  There were three batches produced at
> > > > > Oberkochen:
> > > > >
> > > > > 535 001 to 540,000      5000 lenses     1950
> > > > > 570 001 to 573 000      3000 lenses     1950
> > > > > 782 384 to     ?          500 lenses?   1953
> > > > >
> > > > > There is no design information available on the
> > > > > 1950 lenses, but the 1953 batch was made to a
> > > > > design dated 28 APR 1951.  9,870 2.8's were
> > > > > manufactured.
> > > > >
> > > > > We have a total of 10,005 CZJ lenses and 8500 ZO
> > > > > lenses, for a total of 18,505 lenses intended
> > > for
> > > > > use on cameras with a total production of 12,000
> > > or
> > > > > less.
> > > > >
> > > > > Marc
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > Rollei List
> > > > >
> > > > > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
> > > > > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > with 'subscribe'
> > > > > in the subject field OR by logging into
> > > > > www.freelists.org
> > > > >
> > > > > - Unsubscribe at
> > > rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > with
> > > > > 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging
> > > > > into www.freelists.org
> > > > >
> > > > > - Online, searchable archives are available at
> > > > > http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > Correo Yahoo!
> > > > Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y
> > > antispam ¡gratis!
> > > > ¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar
> > > > ---
> > > > Rollei List
> > > >
> > > > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > with 'subscribe'
> > > > in the subject field OR by logging into
> > > www.freelists.org
> > >
> > === message truncated ===
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Correo Yahoo!
> > Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
> > ¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar
> > ---
> > Rollei List
> >
> > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
> > in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
> >
> > - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> > 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into 
> www.freelists.org
> >
> > - Online, searchable archives are available at
> > http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Peter K
> Ó¿Õ¬

---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' 
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: