gilpen123
Gil
Still waiting who won.......
New Found Folder Love
- Thread starter ljsegil
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 75
- Views 9K
gilpen123
Gil
So he'll get Tysoned ....
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Maybe. Not if you get into this sort of thing with other Asatruars much.
Who'd need to? I live in the south. I have access to rosary peas, common red newts and castor beans.
Last edited:
Jamie123
Veteran
Asatruars? Had to google this and still don't quite get the reference? Where do you think I'm from???
Anyways, we can keep this up for years...it's just a question of who gets in the last word before the thread gets locked 🙂
hanskerensky
Well-known
Administrator(s) Urgent ! Please close this thread before someone gets hurt !
FallisPhoto
Veteran
You think they'd do that? There have been no obscenities or abusive language. We could throw in a camera reference every now and then so we stay on topic though; that wouldn't hurt. As for Asatruars, we don't turn the other cheek, and we don't give up. Not ever. Period. I'd open a whole new thread if this one got locked. I might open a dozen. Anyway, let's see... camera stuff...
Oh yeah...
ljsegil said:
Larry, the Weltur arrived today. Definitely needs new bellows, because these are awful. Looks like an easy job though; they seem to be glued in from the front, like on a Bessa RF. I may be wrong about that though -- I won't know for sure until I take the old bellows out. The leatherette doesn't look bad. I can redye that and give it a coat of protectant. Needs new paint. The shutter seems to be working as it should, but the linkage would probably work better if the shutter were turned a little bit counterclockwise. Alternatively, I could do something about the shutter release button so it would depress about an eighth of an inch less and the linkage wouldn't "jump ship." No neck strap on this one, so I'll replace the missing carrying handle/strap. HEY! This one has the 645 insert in the back! It's slightly bent, but I can fix that. Other than that, and maybe adjusting the rangefinder, it just looks like it needs a good cleaning and polishing.
ljsegil
Well-known
How about another actual camera question for the thread followers, if any actually remain intact. Are the lenses (Voigtlander Heliar, Zeiss Tessar, Schneider Xenar, pick the manufacturer of your choice) used in these folders of the same quality (construction, glass type, alignment, spacing, etc.) as the same types of lenses that these companies made for use in their large format offerings? Or might these lenses be more like the those of the Kodak Brownies and their ilk with cheaper components of lesser quality than the premium offerings of the same company? Just curious, perhaps for example Voigtlander had a range of specifications for lenses of Heliar/Dynar design, all being called Heliars (appropriately, as they are), but not necessarily meeting the same level of design sophistication, element manufacturing tolerances, assembly control, etc. Perhaps such a scheme would enable the manufacturer to produce cameras at different price points to maximize sales volume and profit margins, while still being able to advertise a camera with a lens of reputed excellence.
Just wondering, and wandering. Anybody know anything or care to speculate? I wonder if records of such practices would even exist anymore, given the wartime destruction of so many of these companies.
I would like to think that such practices did not exist and that our folders have lenses of the same excellence as any and in fact all those of the same type produced by their respective manufacturers. But, at some time somebody thought to differentiate Cadillac from Chevrolet. I doubt GM was the first with such an idea.
Just stirring the pot a bit,
Larry
Just wondering, and wandering. Anybody know anything or care to speculate? I wonder if records of such practices would even exist anymore, given the wartime destruction of so many of these companies.
I would like to think that such practices did not exist and that our folders have lenses of the same excellence as any and in fact all those of the same type produced by their respective manufacturers. But, at some time somebody thought to differentiate Cadillac from Chevrolet. I doubt GM was the first with such an idea.
Just stirring the pot a bit,
Larry
gilpen123
Gil
10,000 posts each or more, can't imagine someone looking at each member's archive post seing one liners ....you will, no you won't, yes i will, no you wont asatruar Lol. This might even go to Fred Miranda and Photo.net if both are locked from posting at RFF.......
Jamie123
Veteran
They may if we keep up the silliness for long enough. I might also help if someone gets called a Nazi or we start debating American health care politics 🙂
Anyways, opening up another thread doesn't count. This will be decided here and only here!
hanskerensky
Well-known
Old photomagazines of the late forthies and the fifthies are a fun to read and give sometimes valuable information about lenses too.
So do i recall an article from the early fifthies that writes about the fact that with the introduction of new glass-materials and the aid of electronic (!) calculators many of the well known lenses (Tessar etc.) were re-designed and performed better then before in correcting optical errors. This had especially a good effect on front-cell focusing lenses.
Also nice to know that in the early fifthies having a lens with a wide aperture started to be fashionable. So what happened, many manufacturers made their lenses accordingly with bigger apertures while fully knowing that these had more optical errors then the older lenses.
So do i recall an article from the early fifthies that writes about the fact that with the introduction of new glass-materials and the aid of electronic (!) calculators many of the well known lenses (Tessar etc.) were re-designed and performed better then before in correcting optical errors. This had especially a good effect on front-cell focusing lenses.
Also nice to know that in the early fifthies having a lens with a wide aperture started to be fashionable. So what happened, many manufacturers made their lenses accordingly with bigger apertures while fully knowing that these had more optical errors then the older lenses.
FallisPhoto
Veteran
If we are talking about lenses made in the same time period, well, a Xenar in a Retina is of about the same quality as a large format Xenar, for example. Obviously they are not exactly the same, since they were ground on different machines; The overall quality is pretty much the same though.
However, the various companies periodically redesigned their lenses as time went on, and they took advantage of better and more efficient manufacturing techniques when they could. For example, if you look at a Skopar lens on an old Voigtlander Avus, you will often find little bubbles in the glass. A few years later, the bubbles disappeared from their lenses. They had found a better way to cast the glass. When electronic calculators came along, pretty much everyone redesigned their lenses. They did it again when they got computers. Zoom lenses can be pretty good these days (although still not up to prime quality). It wasn't long ago at all though that pretty much all zoom lenses sucked some serious ass. Then there was the process of lens coating. When that came along, all the lenses improved too; and then again with multicoating. A Skopar lens made today is very different from one made 70 years ago.
Of course this excludes Kodak lenses. For example, Kodak made a practice of naming several lenses Ektars. A Kodak Ektar can be anything from a commercial Ektar to a Schneider Xenar.
With me winning.
Last edited:
ljsegil
Well-known
Going to visit a Baha'i temple on Sunday. Beautiful building, gardens, nice opportunity for some people shots, don't know if one can photograph inside the temple. Thinking about taking the Zeiss Super Ikonta C with the f/4.5 Tessar lens, but concerned that I will lose any close focus capabilities which may be nice in the gardens and for building detail, and if cameras permitted inside may be difficult to use, depending on light, with the 4.5 max aperture.
Could be sensible and carry the 35mm ZI rangefinder with an assortment of sweet Zeiss ZM lenses, up to f/1.5 but not much better than the folder for close-up work, but if I really want to get close and enjoy the medium format benefits that the Ikonta provides over the 35mm ZI, I should instead bring the Rollei SL66, most versatile system of all (and heaviest, bulkiest, etc). Interestingly, all three systems use Zeiss glass. Perhaps I have a bias in my preference for lenses, certainly seems too much a preponderance for pure chance.
Ah, too many cameras, too little a mind.
Can't really lose with any of those choices when you come down to it. Any old way, weather permitting, should be a treat and a good chance to exercise some film of some size (including Kodachrome if I decide on the ZI). Nice to be able to have these folder quandaries. Gives life a nice new lift, a touch of folder heaven right here in the usually not so photogenic Midwest, although the Bessa/Heliar performed beautifully in Wisconsin, especially for shots of Copper Falls. Since it and the Welta are off being buffed, I don't have to add their variables into this equation (partial differential equation by this point, and I certainly no longer remember how to solve that, as if I ever could do it well, only enough to pass the course).
All in fun, and the most is always with photos involved, of course,
Larry
Could be sensible and carry the 35mm ZI rangefinder with an assortment of sweet Zeiss ZM lenses, up to f/1.5 but not much better than the folder for close-up work, but if I really want to get close and enjoy the medium format benefits that the Ikonta provides over the 35mm ZI, I should instead bring the Rollei SL66, most versatile system of all (and heaviest, bulkiest, etc). Interestingly, all three systems use Zeiss glass. Perhaps I have a bias in my preference for lenses, certainly seems too much a preponderance for pure chance.
Ah, too many cameras, too little a mind.
Can't really lose with any of those choices when you come down to it. Any old way, weather permitting, should be a treat and a good chance to exercise some film of some size (including Kodachrome if I decide on the ZI). Nice to be able to have these folder quandaries. Gives life a nice new lift, a touch of folder heaven right here in the usually not so photogenic Midwest, although the Bessa/Heliar performed beautifully in Wisconsin, especially for shots of Copper Falls. Since it and the Welta are off being buffed, I don't have to add their variables into this equation (partial differential equation by this point, and I certainly no longer remember how to solve that, as if I ever could do it well, only enough to pass the course).
All in fun, and the most is always with photos involved, of course,
Larry
ljsegil
Well-known
Went with the Super Ikonta C, shot with Portra 400NC and a little Acros, results awaited. Gardens a little disappointing this time of year, much construction, no photos inside, but fun was had nonetheless and I didn't miss the bulk of the SL66 and the 6x9 format was more appropriate for the shots I saw than 6x6 would have been. These folders with their excellent optics and mechanics open up a new realm of MF photography that I had never known I was missing, but certainly gratefully appreciate now. The lucky members of this forum already in the know have been quietly enjoying quite a photographic treat that many of us have been missing, much too our own unknowing loss. Near perfect MF quality in your pocket, a dream realized. Thanks to all for your input and help.
Larry
Larry
Ernst Dinkla
Well-known
There has been much praise for Kodak´s American Tessar and Heliar designs from the late 30´s till the 60´s. Rudolf Kingslake period. From the Anastigmat Specials to the Commercial Ektars they were all designed without computers to my knowledge. Calculators have been used way before that time but not electronic calculators or computers. The new glass varieties usable in the Tessar / Heliar designs became available in that period too but were used in lenses above the folder camera category. I wonder whether later Tessar designs became that much better on resolution. The better coatings made more difference in other aspects, flare, contrast, etc.
Brian Wallen´s pages on Kodak cameras and lenses are no longer available it seems. Would be a big loss if that is forever.
Edit, they are not lost ...http://www.bnphoto.org/bnphoto/Kodak_index2.htm
Ernst Dinkla
Last edited:
Ernst Dinkla
Well-known
I understand your point of view but the samples are not the best choices. There is a lot of difference between Cosina Skopars of today and the German Skopars of the past. The Cosina Skopars not belonging to the Tessar/Heliar group and all of them different in design. It is true that the Ektar name covered a wide range of designs but not with the Commercial addition, the last were Tessar designs like the Xenars are.
Ernst Dinkla
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Exactly my point.
Once again, that's my point. Lenses change over time and you can't just go by the name. In the case in point, a "Skopar" you bought 50 years ago is entirely different from a "Skopar" you can buy today. On the other hand, with cameras of the same time period, the quality is pretty much the same between formats; for instance a Retina's Tessar and a Super Ikonta's Tessar are of pretty much the same quality.
In some cases, "Ektars" actually were Xenars -- rebadged.