Steinheil Quinon 50/2

[laptoprob]

Does anyone know about this lens? appearantly it is a Sonnar type, so that might be interesting. Steinheil made them in various mounts, also LTM.

There is very little about this lens on the net.

thanks,
Rob

 

[bmattock]

Does anyone know about this lens? appearantly it is a Sonnar type, so that might be interesting. Steinheil made them in various mounts, also LTM.

There is very little about this lens on the net.

thanks,
Rob

Rob,

The Quinon is a 'double-gauss' design, I believe. Typical of even modern 50mm prime lenses in that sense. Tessars were more common, but only as fast as f2.8; and they have a very different look to them - sharper edge to edge, wheras the gauss and double gauss typically have a sharper center.

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Arts/photography/photproces/photogralens/carlzeiss/carlzeiss.htm

Steinheil *did* make them in LTM, as far as I know, but they also made them in 39mm thread mount for the Braun Paxette camera. The two have identical mounts, but different flange-to-film distances, so the one won't work on the other. Use caution if you buy.

http://www.cameraquest.com/braun.htm

I like Steinheil lenses, but they were always considered second-drawer to companies like Schneider, even if only just a bit. I have a 135mm f4.5 in LTM, which I like but man does it have flare problems (even with a factory hood). I have been wanting a Steinheil 85mm f2.8, which is a bit of a cult lens that is just being 'discovered'. I'd love to have one, but they keep going for just a bit more than I want to spend.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[raid]

I sold my Steinheil 135mm lens a few months ago since it did not perform as well as my Canon or Nikon 135mm lenses. Also, it was built not at the same level of quality as the other two lenses.

 

[bmattock]

I sold my Steinheil 135mm lens a few months ago since it did not perform as well as my Canon or Nikon 135mm lenses. Also, it was built not at the same level of quality as the other two lenses.

I agree that the Steinheil 'look' is not the same as the Nikon or Canon 'look'. They represent different generations of technology, and different countries that at the time, were quite different in their approach to lens manufacture and design. Some people like the Steinheils (and other German manufacturers) to obtain a certain 'look', although the famous war photojournalists of the time certainly jumped ship to the Japanese LTM lenses (notably Nikkors) when they first discovered them.

I do find that the Steinheil I have (actually I have two, haven't tested one) of a very high quality manufacture - certainly on par with my Canon LTM lenses - I have no Nikon LTM lenses.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[peterc]

I have been wanting a Steinheil 85mm f2.8, which is a bit of a cult lens that is just being 'discovered'.

The Steinheil 85/2.8 is a nice little lens. I lucked into one (with case) a few weeks ago and have been generally happy with the results. With colour film it gives that 50's look.

Peter

 

[Trius]

So far I like my Steinheil Cassar 50/2.8 on my Tower 51 (see shots in my gallery)... Some other shots not posted show the flare to which Bill refers. Since I haven't taken the lens apart to check for haze, I can't say definitively whether the flare is a lens problem or a haze problem.

Once I clean the camera up, I plan to do some more testing, including wiht colour film. The lens seems sharp, but it seems to be a tessar design, so YMMV.

 

[former member]

I saw a picture of Paxette lenses. The lens mount to film distance is way-big compared to the Leica. Someone in Japan made a custom adpater that was guestimate focus only. I am looking for a Luxon or other "xenon" type to try to remount in a Leica-type helical. I missed one on Ebay for $20 last week, so I will be looking. At that price, it's certainly worth it to satisfy my curiousity.

 

[OldNick]

All of the photos in my gallery except for the "airport shot" were taken with a couple of Steinheil 85s that I have, one in Leica mount and another in Exacta mount. I am quite pleased with them, expecially the one for the Leica. Using one on an SLR without automatic aperture control is a pain.

 

[raid]

I saw a picture of Paxette lenses. The lens mount to film distance is way-big compared to the Leica. Someone in Japan made a custom adpater that was guestimate focus only. I am looking for a Luxon or other "xenon" type to try to remount in a Leica-type helical. I missed one on Ebay for $20 last week, so I will be looking. At that price, it's certainly worth it to satisfy my curiousity.

Wouldn't it be great if you can find a soution to this little problem and then have owners of such lenses be able to use them on LTM bodues.

 

[doubs43]

I like Steinheil lenses, but they were always considered second-drawer to companies like Schneider, even if only just a bit. I have a 135mm f4.5 in LTM, which I like but man does it have flare problems (even with a factory hood). I have been wanting a Steinheil 85mm f2.8, which is a bit of a cult lens that is just being 'discovered'. I'd love to have one, but they keep going for just a bit more than I want to spend. Best Regards, Bill Mattocks

As Bill knows, I picked up a Steinheil Culminar 135mm f/4.5 lens in LTM about a week ago. It shows no signs of ever having been on a camera. I paid $17.06 plus shipping. It takes a 42mm push-on cap and accessories which makes finding a hood difficult. Bill warned me about the flare and I'd like to have a hood before I give it a try. The Culminar comes up on ebay with some regularity so they're not hard to find.

I also have the 85mm f/2.8 Culminar which uses the same 42mm push-on accessories. Mine is in Exakta mount and is quite nice. I'd like to have one in LTM but, as Bill has said, they've caught the fancy of people and go rather high.

Build quality of both is quite good but not up to Leitz or Zeiss standards. Steinheil never intended to compete with those manufacturers but they did turn out a very nice lens for much less investment.

Walker

 

[raid]

I have read about the Steinheil 85mm lens being a good lens, but few people suggest that the 135mm lens is as good. Flare was also a problem, as pointed out above by someone.

 

[raid]

There is now one for sale at $40:

http://cgi.ebay.com/135-4-5-STEINHE...ryZ30030QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem


No clue how good this lens is.

 

[wlewisiii]

I got one of the 135/4.5 lenses in a trade awhile back. The only time I've used it, it was a gloomy f8 kind of day, so no flare problems 🙄 Otherwise the look of the shots was interesting and I certainly intend to give it a good workout once the contest is past. But I'd have to say the Contax mount J-11 I gave Brett was constructed better.

William

 

[laptoprob]

Quinar!

Quinar!

Yea, yea, the 85 and 135 Steinheils are more known. I will soon have the Quinon 50/2 in my hands. According to Frank Mechelhoff the Quinon is a Sonnar type.
How can I tell? I will take trial shots to compare to the Summicron and the Canon 1,2. Those are Planar/Gauss types if I'm correct.

The lens sure looks small!

It is accompanied by a factory passport stating it is made for Leica.

 

[laptoprob]

Here are some bigger photos:

 

[OldNick]

Those photos show an interesting lens. Let us know how it turns out. From what I could find on the Web, many of them were made for the Exacta. Again, from the Web, I concluded that your lens was developed later than the 85 & 135mm lenses most of us are familiar with. I suspect it will work out just fine.

 

[laptoprob]

Frank (author of the atricle in Taunusreiter.de) sent me an email with the diagram. It is in deed a true Sonnar type!
I can't wait...

Rob

Block diagram was included in this email:

Hi Rob,

i found this in
qUINON
Hans-Martin Brandt
Das Photo-Objektiv
Friedrich Vieweg & Sohn
Braunschweig
1956

It is indeed a classical Sonnar type (same scheme as the Zeiss Sonnar 2/50)



Hope this helps. Please gimme a report if this lens turns out to be good.

cheers, Frank

 

[raid]

Maybe this thread will result in Steinheil lenses bring in more money when sold. It is good to know that there are many manufacturers who made excellent lenses.