Both are 1-1-2 configurations. Both are based on the Cooke Triplet. The Elmax was a 1-1-3 also based on the Cooke Triplet, later simplified to the 1-1-2 of the Tessar.
The relative power of the groups is important. I do have the Canon 5cm F3.5 and a pre-war uncoated Elmar, Post-War coated Elmar with perfect glass, and a perfect-glass Varob (Enlarger version Elmar) mounted in an RF-coupled Mount. Add to the list to lenses to compare. Years ago I did a comparison between the post-war Elmar and Industar-50 collapsible and they were virtually identical. A lens can be computed independently and still arrive at the same solution. Sometimes a lens designer has to avoid patents, possibly explaining the 1-1-3 of the Elmax. The last element of the Cooke Triplet is split into three cemented elements of lesser power. The real Triplet of the Elmax was collapsed into a Doublet, now giving the 1-1-2 configuration of the Tessar. Neblette, Photographic lenses 1973 edition, lists the Elmar as a Tessar type lens.
The relative power of the groups is important. I do have the Canon 5cm F3.5 and a pre-war uncoated Elmar, Post-War coated Elmar with perfect glass, and a perfect-glass Varob (Enlarger version Elmar) mounted in an RF-coupled Mount. Add to the list to lenses to compare. Years ago I did a comparison between the post-war Elmar and Industar-50 collapsible and they were virtually identical. A lens can be computed independently and still arrive at the same solution. Sometimes a lens designer has to avoid patents, possibly explaining the 1-1-3 of the Elmax. The last element of the Cooke Triplet is split into three cemented elements of lesser power. The real Triplet of the Elmax was collapsed into a Doublet, now giving the 1-1-2 configuration of the Tessar. Neblette, Photographic lenses 1973 edition, lists the Elmar as a Tessar type lens.
Last edited: