[rollei_list] Re: Tessar vs Sonnar
- From: Jerry Friedman <tinycameraco@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 08:38:48 -0700 (PDT)
Hi Eric:
Your point is well taken about the sonnar's innate design superiority. When i
used 35mm film, I used either TMax 100 or much more usually TechPan. I found
that both lenses produced images that were capable of considerable enlargment.
And the limitations of both lenses in this sense were largely the same. Perhaps
with a faster film like TMAX 400 it would be clearer which lens held up better
as enlargements grew is size. I do not know but perhaps the salient point here
is that both lenses were on Rollei cameras and therefore perhaps both were
carefully made in a design that was capable of standing up to time/abuse. I
just do not know enough (perhaps even a little) about how the lens barrels are
made, how they fit into cameras, the materials/care used etc. to know why one
lens is necessarily better than another in actual practice. All of which takes
us back to the original Planar/Xenotar issue. Given that both lenses were in
the same cameras made by the same camera manufacturer, perhaps this quality
(rollei) attention helps account for why both lenses perform so well. I do
know this, however, that Minox lenses, also four element optics, are not merely
made of "better quality glass" than other lenses, but are also carefully
constructed and then put into a curved film frame so that corners are extremely
sharp. And you would be amazed at what a Minox can do with TechPan when other
subminiature lenses of quality (ie-four element Tessins lenses) are not as
capable of great enlargement despite the negative being larger. And yes, for
the sake of apples and apples, the Minox enlarger is largely responsible for
this but even other enlargers will do well. Someday I will understand all this.
But i have learned a great deal from this thread's regulars.
--- Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Jerry - I don't know about "better" but I think it is hard to argue
> that the Sonnar is a more highly corrected lens than the Tessar. The
> lens designer has several additional degrees of freedom with which to
> work...
>
> Of course on this list saying something is difficult to argue is the
> kiss of death ;-)
>
>
> Eric Goldstein
>
>
> On 5/12/06, Jerry Friedman <tinycameraco@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I stand corrected Nick as I meant to write Rollei 35s . But, the sonnar is
> > still little better than the tessar for general photography. Some have
> argued
> > that unit focusing (35s) is better than front element lens focusing (35)
> and
> > perhaps this accounts for the sonnar's better closeup performance.
> >
> > Jerry F.
> >
> > --- Nick Roberts <nickbroberts@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Eh? The Rollei 35T has a Tessar, not a Sonnar. No wonder the Tessar on
> your
> > > Rollei 35 is as good!
> > >
> > > Nick
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: Jerry Friedman <tinycameraco@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Sent: Friday, 12 May, 2006 12:47:34 PM
> > > Subject: [rollei_list] Tessar vs Sonnar
> > >
> > >
> > > I have the same experience Richard. The Tessar on my rollei 35 is as good
> as
> > > the sonnar on the rollei 35T. Similarly, the sonnar on my Contax cameras
> is a
> > > great lens. Were there no difficulties in enlarging 35mm images-compared
> with
> > > 6x6cm- I would be tempted to depend more heavily upon these small jewels.
> > >
> > > Jerry F
> > > ---
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > ---
> > 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
> >
> >
> ---
> 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
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---
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
Other related posts:
