John Robertson
Well-known
Och well ! they are allowed one dog!! I think EVERY manufacturer has had at least ONE of these!! 
))
However beware if you mention any, their owners will defend them to the death!!!
))However beware if you mention any, their owners will defend them to the death!!!
Last edited:
OldNick
Well-known
Hi, Memphis.
What aperture did you use on the two kiddie pics? They seem a little softer than what I recall from the two lenses I have, but I seldom shoot them wide open.
Great shots, by the way.
Jim N.
What aperture did you use on the two kiddie pics? They seem a little softer than what I recall from the two lenses I have, but I seldom shoot them wide open.
Great shots, by the way.
Jim N.
raid
Dad Photographer
I just posted a thread on testing lenses. It includes results of the Steinheil and nine other tele lenses.
Raid
Raid
peterc
Heretic
Steinheil 85/2.8 at 2.8
Peter
Peter
raid
Dad Photographer
The out of focus points appear as fog. Very nice effect in this photo, Peter.
Raid
Raid
peterc
Heretic
Thanks, Raid. I've been quite pleased with the Steinheil 85. It generally performs well and the OOF performance is smooth throughout.raid amin said:
Peter
John Robertson
Well-known
Very attractive image Peter, the oof area (hate the bokeh word!!!) is lovely and smooth.
My 6 x 6 Adox Golf had a four element Steinheill lens, and gave similar lovely results. I sold it to a guy in our camera club far too cheaply, and bought a new disasterous Fuji 645 folder. Sadly the guy won't sell the Golf back, as he uses it a lot!! The Fuji is land-fill somewhere!!
My 6 x 6 Adox Golf had a four element Steinheill lens, and gave similar lovely results. I sold it to a guy in our camera club far too cheaply, and bought a new disasterous Fuji 645 folder. Sadly the guy won't sell the Golf back, as he uses it a lot!! The Fuji is land-fill somewhere!!
peterc
Heretic
Just for fun, here's some colour with the Steinheil.
Peter
Peter
peterm1
Veteran
I found this oooooooooooooold thread and decided it was an appropriate place to ask a question - not about the Culminar which I know seems highly regarded but on a WA lens from Steinheil. I have an opportunity to buy a Steinheil 35mm f2.8 auto Quinaron in chrome finish and Exacta mount. Looks pretty nice but need CLA to replace the lube. I would use the lens with adapter on M43 cameras.
The lens is the type displayed here: https://archive.is/EWrac#selection-113.14-113.24
I know Steinheil lenses were and are highly rated generally but wonder if anyone has experience with this 35mm lens specifically. I believe that there is a later version which came in "zebra" livery, which some posts suggest were pretty good or better but do not know if optics were upgraded at all between the old and new versions.
So my questions are:
1) Any good - if so how good?
2) Any info on Steinheil naming conventions - were names simply for specific lens focal lengths or did they differ with optical design?
3) Any indication of price of this specific lens? (I made an ebay search but there seems to be considerable variation)
4) Image samples?
The lens is the type displayed here: https://archive.is/EWrac#selection-113.14-113.24
I know Steinheil lenses were and are highly rated generally but wonder if anyone has experience with this 35mm lens specifically. I believe that there is a later version which came in "zebra" livery, which some posts suggest were pretty good or better but do not know if optics were upgraded at all between the old and new versions.
So my questions are:
1) Any good - if so how good?
2) Any info on Steinheil naming conventions - were names simply for specific lens focal lengths or did they differ with optical design?
3) Any indication of price of this specific lens? (I made an ebay search but there seems to be considerable variation)
4) Image samples?
Kevin Brown
Established
A bit left field, but for the curious - the final iterations of the Bolsey B cameras, the B3 and Jubilee came equipped with 45mm 2.8 Steinheils and are very sharp. Don't know if they're Tessar-type or triplets. Anyone know?