Tessar lenses

p.giannakis

p.giannakis

Pan Giannakis
Local time
3:36 AM
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
6,431
Location
Stafford - UK
View My Gallery
Hi everyone,

I have noticed that some Tessar lenses consist of 4 elements in 3 groups and other Tessars (i.e. XA1) are 4 elements in 4 groups.

Does this difference in groups affect the performance of the lens in any way?
 
Hi,

I wouldn't describe a 4 element lens as a Tessar unless the rear two were cemented together to form a compound lens, although they may be derived from it. I just looked in the Olympus XA1 brochure and they merely describe it as "D. ZUIKO 35mm f4, 4 elements in 4 groups". Elsewhere in the brochure they add "top quality" to the description and that's about it.

Sorry I can't help more.

Regards, David
 
The original Rudolph design was a cemented pair in rear, and an air spaced pair in front. I.E. 4 elements, 2 groups.

Like most designs, others come along later and make alterations. The Planar design has like 25 variations, many with different numbers of elements.

The numbers don't matter, what matters is how well the design tweaks handled what they were trying to do (reduce aberrations, increase speed, etc.)
 
I have two 50mm Tessars, a 3.5 and a 2.8. They are in Exakta mount. For some unknown reason they never worked very well on the Exakta. But on the Sony a7 with adapter they are marvelous. I shot a number of shots at a college graduation last year and they are some pf the best work I've ever had. Very well pleased am I.
 
My Tessar lenses:

Nikon 45/2.8 P AIS. This lens due to the few elements and also because it has the latest NIC (Nikon Intergrated Coatings) is the most contrasty lens that Nikon ever made. The focus really pops due to the contrast.

My Fujica 100/3.5 is a Tessar and it has wonderful bokeh and OOF.

I have a Super Rokkor (Minalta) 45/2.8 in LTM. No detents for the aperture, but features a very cool heavily scalloped focus ring that is like having six focus tabs. Kinda swirly dizzy bokeh. LOL.

I had a chrome Leica 90 Macro Elmar, but I lost it in trade towards a Leica SL. This Tessar is highly corrected. Very sharp, but only F4.0.

Cal
 
p.giannakis said:
Hi everyone,

I have noticed that some Tessar lenses consist of 4 elements in 3 groups and other Tessars (i.e. XA1) are 4 elements in 4 groups.

Does this difference in groups affect the performance of the lens in any way?
Click to expand...

I think those 4e4g "Tessar" lenses in those Japanese compact cameras (Like Yashica Electro 35 FC, MC, etc..)are actually Unar. With the help of modern coating, the extra glass to air surface is not a problem anymore, and I guess they are easier to produce than Tessar. So.
 
Calzone said:
My Tessar lenses:


I have a Super Rokkor (Minalta) 45/2.8 in LTM. No detents for the aperture, but features a very cool heavily scalloped focus ring that is like having six focus tabs. Kinda swirly dizzy bokeh. LOL.



Cal
Click to expand...

The 45mm f2.8 Super Rokkor was neither a Tessar nor a Heliar; it was sort of in between, with a 5-element/3-group design (cemented triplet up front and two single elements behind the aperture).
 
PAN F said:
The 45mm f2.8 The Super Rokkor was neither a Tessar nor a Heliar; it was sort of in between, with a 5-element/3-group design (cemented triplet up front and two single elements behind the aperture).
Click to expand...

I have this too and it produces fine images. The rotating aperture ring as you focus is annoying but you do get used to it. Entirely usable wide open with excellent central sharpness and very pleasing slow loss of sharpness moving to the frame's edge. It's also nice and compact.
 
The FSU 50 to 55 mm f3.5 to f2.8 lens line-up are of a Tessar design.

I do like my I-22 and I-61 l/d lenses plus my DDR made Zeiss Jena Tessar on my Praktica LTL SLR.
 
Darn, I was hoping the super-rokkor 45/2.8 was a tessar. Now I'm not sure if I have any. At least not in M or LTM.... I should look through "the collection" now 🙂
 
All Tessars and Tessar-formula lenses are four element lenses in 3 groups. The first two elements (in front of the iris) are separate, thus two groups, and the last two elements (behind the iris) are cemented into a single group (the third group in the formula).

Lens-Zeiss-Tessar-01-s.jpg
 
I would like to know what this lens is, it is from my Olympus Stylus Infinity (35mm f3.5).

As this is somewhat a Tessar (maybe), what is the difference. I just can't believe this little lens:

Sardis by John Carter, on Flickr

Crop by John Carter, on Flickr

I have some Tessar designs and they are all great, but the Japanese went one step beyond (maybe). Especially on these cheap P&S cameras. I still own my Olympus Stylus Infinity which I bought new. Every year I run a roll through it. I has the best fill flash setting I have found.
 
Thanks, Chris. I was thinking that it had to be this format of 4 elements in 3 groups to truly be a Tessar.

Do Tele-Tessars have the same format?

- Murray


Chriscrawfordphoto said:
All Tessars and Tessar-formula lenses are four element lenses in 3 groups. The first two elements (in front of the iris) are separate, thus two groups, and the last two elements (behind the iris) are cemented into a single group (the third group in the formula).

Lens-Zeiss-Tessar-01-s.jpg
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Fuji 35/2 LTM and Canon 35/1.8 LTM
2 3
Replies
46
Views
2K
rfaspen
rfaspen
p.giannakis
The concept of micro-contrast
2 3
Replies
51
Views
4K
peterm1
peterm1
M
Nikon 85 f1.4 AiS Sonnar Double Gauss hybrid
Replies
2
Views
425
Freakscene
Freakscene
das
West German Contax 35mm f/3.5 Planar Design Question
2
Replies
28
Views
4K
JakobN
J
B
Why bottom loading?
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
5K
johnf04
J
Back
Top Bottom