[rollei_list] Re: changing lens formulas
- From: "Eric Goldstein" <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 11:11:36 -0500
I don't fully agree with this. There was significant individual
variation out of the factory with any legacy lens, even those with the
finest quality control. This was well-known that respected dealers
often lent cameras to their high-end shooters to test before buying,
and that some would go through several different cameras before
settling on a "keeper." Many will tell you that Tessars in some focal
lens and speeds were better performers out of the factory than
others... particularly true of view camera lenses.
Also, it is known with certainty that the Zeiss Tessar used on the F&H
cameras was recomputed with new glass types at least once in the late
50s, and it is likely this happened on more than on occasion.
When you get into tessar-types, you are really opening a can of worms,
as design and execution of this lens type is critical to good
performance.
Eric Goldstein
--
On 11/4/07, Mike Kovacs <mskovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Peter: my own opinion based on many Tessar samples, collected from a
> variety of different cameras/mounts, is that a Tessar is a Tessar. It
> is said the West German Tessar was recomputed and improved in the 1960's
> with the Contaflex Super cameras.
>
> Unless you know the full history of your Automats, there are many
> factors that can affect the performance of the lens. E.g. alignment of
> the lens panel, mirror/focus screen/viewing lens adjustment, match in
> focal length between viewing/taking lenses, unknown "swaps" of
> viewing/taking lenses, unknown swaps of the front element of your taking
> lens, etc.
>
>
>
> Peter J Nebergall wrote:
> > I've brought this up before -- w/o clear answers. I have an OS#2, and
> > two Automats. All have "Tessars." The OS2's is uncoated, and smaller in
> > front diameter than the Automats'... One Automat has a coated Opton.
> > The other clearly has a piece of replacement glass, a much later "Carl
> > Zeiss Tessar." -- this is NOT a Jena lens, but one from later.
> >
> > Zeiss East and Zeiss West were both making Tessars. How identical were
> > they? And the much later CZ Tessar -- was it the same, or was it an
> > improvement?
> >
> > My cameras, the CZ blows the Opton away, but the lens is in better
> > condition, so that, rather than design, might be the operant...
> >
> > Peter Nebergall
> > ---
> > 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
>
>
---
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:
