THC, no, not that kind. Taylor-Hobson-Cooke

[boojum]

I was thinking LTM because it can be adapted to M mount. I shall see what there is with M mount. They seem a nice lens. And it would close the circle I have from the mid to late 50's. Thanks for the help.

I spent a month or so near Woerden. I was impressed with the Netherlands. I could not find anywhere in the country one thing I looked for: a pothole. ;o) Everything is quite orderly without being oppressive. The food is good and the farmer Gouda, well, I do think you guys keep the best for domestic consumption. My friend and I had five Goudas after dinner all from within 20 KM of the restaurant. You do keep the best. And I did go to A'dam just to see the Rembrandts. What can I say? And all the Hollanders I asked agreed with, "We built this country and if we have to we can build another." All in all, the time was wonderful and well spent.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I was thinking LTM because it can be adapted to M mount. I shall see what there is with M mount. They seem a nice lens. And it would close the circle I have from the mid to late 50's. Thanks for the help.

I spent a month or so near Woerdenl, the time was wonderful and well spent.

A month in Woerden? Not much to do there IMO. (I'm only joking.)

Thank you!

My lens was adapted, the original mount did not fit anything else than the Foton, I guess. The adaptation to Leica M must have been very laborious, the curve for the rangefinder was done by hand, but works great. It's as if the lower portion of the mount comes from a 50mm Summicron collapsible LTM.

Erik.

This is not far from Woerden:

gelatin silver print (hektor 50mm f2.5) leica II

 

[dexdog]

Is this the Cooke Atomal Anastigmat of the preceding photo? What mount is it for? Looks very cool!

This lens is M39

 

[xayraa33]

Is this the Cooke Atomal Anastigmat of the preceding photo? What mount is it for? Looks very cool!

Like others have said, it is mounted for LTM cameras..others were mounted for Contax RF mount (very few) and even for M42 for SLR use.

 

[boojum]

A month in Woerden? Not much to do there IMO. (I'm only joking.)

Thank you!

My lens was adapted, the original mount did not fit anything else than the Foton, I guess. The adaptation to Leica M must have been very laborious, the curve for the rangefinder was done by hand, but works great. It's as if the lower portion of the mount comes from a 50mm Summicron collapsible LTM.

Erik.

This is not far from Woerden:

gelatin silver print (hektor 50mm f2.5) leica II

Here's a pic near Woerden. There is a killer chocolate store in Woerden. You want to know how to piss off a Hollander? Ask if he speaks English. You guys are a remarkable lot, and bragging just is not done. I was seated in front of "The Night Watch" and asked the fellow next to me if he wasn't awfully proud to be in the presence of so famed and wonderful Dutch painter. "Well, sort of." The fellow who put me up for more than a month initially offered to guide me to a good B&B. But we hit it off so well he offered me to stay. He is a polymath and a very good photographer, Dutch university trained, videographer and recording engineer and a truly good sort. How many people would take in a stranger for more than a month? An extremely gracious man.

But the photo ---

Sony A7M II, Sony 24 - 240, 36mm, f/4.0, 1/30. ISO 100

​

 

[boojum]

erik van Straten, as much as I would like an Amotal I will have to bring my skill level up quite a bit to justify it. My photos are not diminished by poor resolution but rather poor composition, color, interest and drama. But I am working on it. Hope springs eternal.

 

[Rob-F]

Here's a pic near Woerden. There is a killer chocolate store in Woerden. You want to know how to piss off a Hollander? Ask if he speaks English. You guys are a remarkable lot, and bragging just is not done. I was seated in front of "The Night Watch" and asked the fellow next to me if he wasn't awfully proud to be in the presence of so famed and wonderful Dutch painter. "Well, sort of." The fellow who put me up for more than a month initially offered to guide me to a good B&B. But we hit it off so well he offered me to stay. He is a polymath and a very good photographer, Dutch university trained, videographer and recording engineer and a truly good sort. How many people would take in a stranger for more than a month? An extremely gracious man.

But the photo ---

Sony A7M II, Sony 24 - 240, 36mm, f/4.0, 1/30. ISO 100

​

That's a Picture-perfect picture, Boojum!

 

[boojum]

That's a Picture-perfect picture, Boojum!

Thank you. It is further proof that even a blind hog will find a root once in a while. The Netherlands is a beautiful place that the Dutch have made from swamps and bays. They are a wonderful crowd and genial hosts. And I have never seen a place where more couples do things together. Food shopping, other shopping, walks, bike rides, dinners, brews, whatever. I cannot recommend highly enough a visit. And they do get miffed if you ask if they speak English. They are taught early on in school and most speak English better than I do. Go. Visit.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Thanks Boojum, lovely shot. There are nice spots in The Netherlands, thats true!

Erik.

 

[David Hughes]

I had to go back and re-take my history lesson after reading "Taylor Hobson Cooke." I remembered there was something confusing about these names. It had to do with the "Cooke Triplet." That lens was actually designed by Dennis Taylor, but named the Cooke Triplet because Taylor worked for Cooke, the manufacturer. And the other thing was that Dennis Taylor apparently had little or nothing to do with Taylor, Taylor and Hobson, a British company; which in turn, apparently had nothing to do with Cooke, an American company. What I wondered is how "Cooke" got into the name "Taylor Hobson Cooke." So according to Wikipedia, Cooke Optics is also a British optical company based in Leicester, and is a "spin-off" of Taylor-Hobson and can be regarded as the successor of Taylor, Taylor and Hobson. Now I wonder if the present Cooke Optics is in any way related to the American Cooke company. (I'm sure my old brain will remember all this for at least five minutes.)

I was looking for something last night and found a leaflet from the mid 1950's in the BJP 1954 Almanac. "Taylor-Hobson" at the top was marked "Trade Mark" and at the bottom was the address of "Taylor, Taylor and Hobson" in London. One of their lenses was the "Cooke Portrait" and their factory was mentioned as being in Leicester.

No mention of lenses for roll film or 35mm cameras, by the way.

Regards, David

 

[Ambro51]

The lens is a six element. They are calibrated in T stops, rather than f stops. BTW, the Foton is superior to the Leica.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Taylor, Taylor and Hobson is a very old business. They are the makers of famous optics for cinematography like the Speed Panchro in the 1920's and later and they collaborated with Leitz of Germany since the early thirties. They made optical elements for lenses as the Xenon and the first version of the Summilux.

Erik.

 

[boojum]

I am starting to regret this thread. It started as a naive query. Now I feel like I am in with a bunch of whoopee pre-game tailgaters encouraging me to get on board the THC train. LOL If the market comes back I will probably get an Amotal. Jeffo's cine lens photos are amazing. I may be deluding myself but the cinema lenses seem to do light and color better, Or I am programmed to appreciate cinema light and color more? Regardless, the result is the same, I like 'em. I am not quite sure I have earned an Amotal but perhaps if I filch one quickly enough no one will notice. Other folks' photos with this lens are good, B&W for how it handles light.

Now that I have expressed way too much interest which has been engendered by you hoodlums, what should I be looking for in an Amotal? Or is there a workable cine lens in the same price range to consider? This is kind of funny as the color here for about six months of the year is gray, with occasional splashes of color. This ain't no tropical clime.

 

[Ambro51]

A few years ago I lent Mike Eckman my Foton for a Full review. Take a look at his review, and you’ll see a full gallery of images from the TTH lens. BTW, he gave the Foton the highest “rating” he’s given ( 16.3 ). https://www.mikeeckman.com/2019/07/b...ll-foton-1948/take a look at all the images he took, the BW shot of the steeple is Great, here’s a color teaser...

 

[boojum]

A few years ago I lent Mike Eckman my Foton for a Full review. Take a look at his review, and you’ll see a full gallery of images from the TTH lens. BTW, he gave the Foton the highest “rating” he’s given ( 16.3 ). https://www.mikeeckman.com/2019/07/b...ll-foton-1948/take a look at all the images he took, the BW shot of the steeple is Great, here’s a color teaser...

I'm beginning to dislike you guys more and more. LOL Thanks for the help, I guess. ;o) Maybe if I sell the kids, . . .

 

[boojum]

OK, a query for the RFF Braintrust on distinguishing the various Amotal 2" lenses. On eBay there are LTM's with the attaching ring knurled but not in a continuous knurl: https://www.ebay.com/itm/265515689613?hash=item3dd1f7e68d:g:Oo8AAOSwq4Nh7iVx

Then there are Amotal 2" lenses with a continuously knurled attaching ring: https://www.ebay.com/itm/334085020853?hash=item4dc904dcb5:g:3KkAAOSw11Ng-H6h

And then there is the Amotal with the M-mount: https://www.ebay.com/itm/373596732016?hash=item56fc19ba70:g:q9cAAOSw4eFgsk2J

So there are three different identifiable lenses, maybe more. What is the meaning of the three styles? And do the different styles mean the lenses are different inside as they are outside?

 

[Erik van Straten]

OK, a query for the RFF Braintrust on distinguishing the various Amotal 2" lenses. On eBay there are LTM's with the attaching ring knurled but not in a continuous knurl: https://www.ebay.com/itm/26551568961...8AAOSwq4Nh7iVx



So there are three different identifiable lenses, maybe more. What is the meaning of the three styles? And do the different styles mean the lenses are different inside as they are outside?

The original Cooke Amotal Anastigmat 2 inch f/2 was made with a mount for the Foton (1949), an American camera (Bell and Howell). The Foton was not a big succes. It is a very heavy camera. Later some of the Cooke Amotal lenses for the Foton were adapted for other cameras and quite recent some of them were adapted for Leica M. Optically they are all the same. They are "ELC" coated (Electro Layering Ceramic), also called "Blue Circle"-coating. Some of the Amotal and Speed Panchro lenses have a small blue circle engraved in their name ring.

Some lenses were marked by T-stops (transmission stops) instead of f-stops to indicate the light losses.T-stops were "true" or effective aperture stops and were common for motion picture lenses,so that a cinematographer could ensure that consistent exposures were made by all the different lenses used to make a movie. This was less important for still cameras and only one still lens line was ever marked in T-stops: for the Bell & Howell Foton 35mm rangefinder camera. Bell & Howell was normally a cinematographic equipment maker, the Amotal.

The Foton's standard lens was the Taylor, Taylor & Hobson Cooke Amotal Anastigmat 2 inch f/2 (T/2.2) (1948; camera USA; lens UK, a Double Gauss).The quarter stop difference between f/2 and T/2.2 is a 16% loss.

I guess the Amotal is not very different from the very famous early Speed Panchro lenses (with the same focal length) from the same maker.

Erik.

 

[Ambro51]

Buy a Foton. It’s better than a Leica. Yup

 

[xayraa33]

OK, a query for the RFF Braintrust on distinguishing the various Amotal 2" lenses. On eBay there are LTM's with the attaching ring knurled but not in a continuous knurl: https://www.ebay.com/itm/265515689613?hash=item3dd1f7e68d:g:Oo8AAOSwq4Nh7iVx

Then there are Amotal 2" lenses with a continuously knurled attaching ring: https://www.ebay.com/itm/334085020853?hash=item4dc904dcb5:g:3KkAAOSw11Ng-H6h

And then there is the Amotal with the M-mount: https://www.ebay.com/itm/373596732016?hash=item56fc19ba70:g:q9cAAOSw4eFgsk2J

So there are three different identifiable lenses, maybe more. What is the meaning of the three styles? And do the different styles mean the lenses are different inside as they are outside?

They are all adapted or "hacked" lenses close to something Sonnar Brian Sweeney would do but on a larger scale..only the front 1/3 of the lens is the original Foton Amotal lens that has been screwed on to a specially machined and engraved body with a calibrated tube cam for RF use and proper focus. Most of the LTM ones look like the ones adapted by an Italian machine shop for American camera stores like Peerless..there is more than one style and some have different knurling , some engraved with Made in Italy and some not. The M mount version on * Epray looks to be a one off and different than the usual all aluminum Italian adapted ones. These Cooke Amotal lenses were also adapted for RF Contax and for M42 for Praktica or Edixa SLRS, also done in the 1950s .

 

[rfaspen]

I highly recommend getting the version with the Italian made mount. Historical and very likely proper calibration. Plus, LTM gives you more flexibility.
The first one is mounted in an Industsr 26/61. I have one of those.....by far the cheapest lens I own, and I'm not talking about purchase price. That one looks a bit beat up and then attached to a cheap mount..... maybe if the price was much lower I'd consider it. The last is mounted in an LTM summicron mount. Probably fine, but not historical or flexible as the Italian mount. Plus, it's from kevincameras, which isn't a bad thing, but he/they are typically much higher priced than market. However, I have never bought from them, maybe worth the much (sometimes way much) higher cost?

Anyway, I like the Italian mount. I'm thinking I would like one too 😉