goamules
Well-known
Lens enthusiasts usually describe designs based on their air-separated groups. So a lens with three distinct groups, or three individual single elements, are called "triplets". Just as any lens with only one group (or element) is called a Meniscus, though technically that would be a single piece of glass.
You are also misleading the role of Cook when you say, "a true triplet also called an anastigmat".
That term, and the first anastigmat lenses were by Paul Rudolph at Zeiss, the first lenses that used the new Jena glass, in the late 1880s. They were the first lenses that had no astigmatism, so they came up with that name. Later, ANY lens that was corrected for astigmatism started to be called "Anastigmat", with many companies infringing on Zeiss' term. So Zeiss came up with a new name for their lenses, Protars.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Thank you Garrett and David for this interesting information.
Leica II, Hektor 50mm f/2.5, Tmax400.
Erik.
Leica II, Hektor 50mm f/2.5, Tmax400.
Erik.
David Murphy
Veteran
I'll grant you we are discussing lens history here, and thus are blurring optical history and optics - not quite the same subject - at least as far as terminology is concerned and I'll leave it at that!
In any event, back to the Hecktor itself. It does (regrettably) seem that the going price of a 5 cm model with clean glass is at least $800 now. I've always been intrigued as well by the Hektor 2.8 cm - such a tiny wide, although based on my experience with the uncoated Zeiss Tessar 2.8 cm (F8) for Contax I'd opt for a coated Hektor 2.8 cm. I'm really impressed at how small and light these early Leica lenses are - even ones that are rather demanding optically to manufacture.
In any event, back to the Hecktor itself. It does (regrettably) seem that the going price of a 5 cm model with clean glass is at least $800 now. I've always been intrigued as well by the Hektor 2.8 cm - such a tiny wide, although based on my experience with the uncoated Zeiss Tessar 2.8 cm (F8) for Contax I'd opt for a coated Hektor 2.8 cm. I'm really impressed at how small and light these early Leica lenses are - even ones that are rather demanding optically to manufacture.
Dralowid
Michael
The Leica Way by Andrew Matheson, an old book that has been reprinted several times has depth of field scales for most of our favourite focal lengths.
But surely, the depth of field for a given focal length, at a given distance and at a given aperture is the same whatever the lens?
See this and there must be loads of others:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dof-calculator.htm
But surely, the depth of field for a given focal length, at a given distance and at a given aperture is the same whatever the lens?
See this and there must be loads of others:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dof-calculator.htm
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
Managed to source a 22mm screw-in filter for the Hektor. But it's a hefty Y3 filter, though.
Imagedowser
Member
hektor
hektor
Such a beautiful glow. It seems to just hang in the air in most of these shots regardless of subject matter…. a veritable time machine of imagery…. Change the car model , hair style, clothing design and your in the '30's. Priceless.
hektor
Such a beautiful glow. It seems to just hang in the air in most of these shots regardless of subject matter…. a veritable time machine of imagery…. Change the car model , hair style, clothing design and your in the '30's. Priceless.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Thank you, Imagedowser!
Leica II, Hektor 50mm f/2.5, Tmax400.
Erik.
Leica II, Hektor 50mm f/2.5, Tmax400.
Erik.
goamules
Well-known
I was just finishing off a roll of Ektar 100 with my Hektor last night. We'll see how it looks in color. Hektor-Ektar, has a good sound to it.
wetmonkey
Member
22mm filter, the same on summaron 35/3.5 ltm?
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Leica II, Hektor 50mm f/2.5, Tmax400.
Erik.
Erik.
Jerevan
Recycled User
As with any lens, it is more about where you point it and how you print it.
goamules
Well-known
Wide open, then stopped down twice.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Leica II, Hektor 50mm f/2.5, Tmax400.
Erik.
Erik.
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
"Achtung Panzer!"
Leica IIIc, Hektor 5cm f/2.5, Rollei RPX 400
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Rick, nice shot. Is this somewere in Germany?
Leica II, Hektor 50mm f/2.5, Tmax400.
Erik.
Leica II, Hektor 50mm f/2.5, Tmax400.
Erik.
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
Houffalize in Belgium actually. This Panther tank was pulled out the river some time after the war.
Path up to the castle in La Roche
Path up to the castle in La Roche
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Strange to turn a tank of the enemy into a monument. In Germany I've never seen tanks as monuments: they were the losers. In Russia however I've seen T34 tanks as monuments. Saves sculptors.
Erik.
Erik.
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
There are a few more Panthers out there, one in Breda (donated to the city by the Polish 1st Armored Division) for example. And I know of one other in the Belgian Ardennes. In La Gleize, a King Tiger sits in front of the museum there.
Hektor 5cm f/2.5, close to wide-open, Fomapan 100
Hektor 5cm f/2.5, close to wide-open, Fomapan 100
kiemchacsu
Well-known
I just discover this wonderful thread.
Erik, many wonderful photos you posted here.
Could you elaborate a little bit more on the technique of "adaptation of the histogram?
Thanks.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Thank you, Trung. The software of the Epson scanners has a densitometer. You can mesure every single part of the negative. First, go to the Epson software and set the histogram-curve to 0 - 255. Then, find with the densitometer the lightest spot of the negative and adapt it to a value slightly lower than 255 with the white triangle. Then, find with the densitometer the darkest spot of the negative and set that with the black triangle one step above 0. Then use the grey triangle to set the darkest spot to 1. You should now have the right adaptation of the histogram. Set your monitor to maximum brightness to do this.
Erik.
Erik.