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 > > > > > //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 > > //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 //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list