jesse1dog
Light Catcher
So I've done a bit of reading but remain a bit perplexed!
I can find a drawing of the lens elements of the Tessar lens design.
But that is it isn't it?
The Tessar is a registered name for a lens design.
There seems to be no real indication of the quality of a lens with just a name of Tessar.
I understand some have coated surfaces.
Some focus by moving the front elements.
Some focus with the whole lens moving.
Some are f3.5 - some are f2.8.
Are there any with a larger aperture than this?
So in general, are there good Tessars and bad Tessars ie have some cameras by reputation and results got good Tessars and some bad ones?
I can find a drawing of the lens elements of the Tessar lens design.
But that is it isn't it?
The Tessar is a registered name for a lens design.
There seems to be no real indication of the quality of a lens with just a name of Tessar.
I understand some have coated surfaces.
Some focus by moving the front elements.
Some focus with the whole lens moving.
Some are f3.5 - some are f2.8.
Are there any with a larger aperture than this?
So in general, are there good Tessars and bad Tessars ie have some cameras by reputation and results got good Tessars and some bad ones?
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
Tessars are very good actually, espoecially when closed at f 5.6 or so.
They have a beautiful look for the OOFA
They were surpassed in design by the 6 and 7 elements and the cost of the latter only
came down in the 70s,
Tessar is registered by Zeiss, so you will not be dissapointed if it is in a decent camera
In the Old Zeiss-Ikons for exxample
They have a beautiful look for the OOFA
They were surpassed in design by the 6 and 7 elements and the cost of the latter only
came down in the 70s,
Tessar is registered by Zeiss, so you will not be dissapointed if it is in a decent camera
In the Old Zeiss-Ikons for exxample
jesse1dog
Light Catcher
The one on my desk top is a Carl Zeiss Jena 2.8/50 in an old Werra with a Prestor RVS 750 shutter.
I'm told that Tessars are not as subject to fungus as other lenses - not sure if I believe this!
I'm told that Tessars are not as subject to fungus as other lenses - not sure if I believe this!
Dr. Strangelove
Cobalt thorium G
As far as I know, there are no faster than f/2.7 Tessars. Tessar is the name registered by Zeiss, but many other companies had Tessar type lenses. Xenar by Schneider is one, but there were many others. Japanese companies did not use the name "Tessar", but many Japanese fixed lens rangefinders and autofocus compact cameras had a Tessar type lens, some until the end of the film camera production. Currently some high end cell phone cameras have a Tessar type lens, most notably the Nokia N73, which actually has a Carl Zeiss Tessar branded lens (made by whoknows what company).jesse1dog said:
Tesser type lenses can be bad like all lens designs, but most of them are pretty good for the price, especially when stopped down 2 stops or more. The main advantage of the Tessar design was that it was only slightly more expensive than a three element Cooke triplet, but it produced sharper images at wider aperture. The best ones produced acceptable results even wide open, whereas triplets would be quite soft at the corners.