At 10:53 PM 2/1/2010, Eric Goldstein wrote: >We need to check that and specifically what Matanle claims. A MF >Tessar's optimal design aperture at the time of the recalculation >(late 50s) would have been f/5.6 at best; f/6.3 more likely. As these >lenses were designed at f/3.5, they would certainly not be best an >anything below f/8 EricThere are two different lenses under discussion here, and I thought I had made that clear. Matanle speaks of the 2.8/50 CZ Tessar on the Contaflex Super B and later miniature-format SLR's. This lens was recomputed at the same time as the 3.5/75 CZ Tessar for the T and as part of the same project by the same designers, working under Hans Sauer.
Again, my own experience is that the 3.5/75 JSK Xenars in the later Rolleicords are adequate lenses but hardly of stunning capabilities. I have used T's on several occasions and have always found the Tessar a grand lens.
Bear in mind that a lot of my photography has been under low-light condition, so I rarely go above f/5.6 with any of my cameras. I will acknowledge that f/4 is the borderline condition for the Prewar front-cell-focusing 2.8/8cm CZJ Tessar as used in the Super Ikonta B and BX folders, but I understand from several users of the Ikoflex III that the unit-focus 2.8/8cm CZJ Tessar used on those cameras was capable of decent images wide-open.
But, yes, a lens designed with a maximum aperture of f/3.5 will probably not shine at f/4!
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