Why doesn't Cosina Voigtlander clone Leitz Thambar?

shortstop

shortstop

Well-known
Local time
3:42 PM
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
524
In another thread (M240 + Thambar) xayraa33 says: Why doesn't Cosina Voigtlander clone this great lens ?
I think it's a wonderful idea. What do you think?
 
They do. Take any of thier sharp fast lenses and smear vaseline on the front element :p

JK... I don't own that particular lens but do have a few (for reflex ) with similar personality.
It's too specialized to be profitable is my guess.
I'm enthusiastic about a special look and yet , only pull the biotar 1.5/75 for example out once or twice a year.
Cheers!
 
f16sunshine said:
They do. Take any of thier sharp fast lenses and smear vaseline on the front element :p

JK... I don't own that particular lens but do have a few (for reflex ) with similar personality.
It's too specialized to be profitable is my guess.
I'm enthusiastic about a special look and yet , only pull the biotar 1.5/75 for example out once or twice a year.
Cheers!
Click to expand...
Undercorrected spherical aberration is NOT the same as a greasy front element.

Cheers,

R.
 
Oh Roger... I appreciate as I'm sure many do your experience and the wealth of information you have provided all these years to our community .
But dude.... you could take the fun out of a winning lotto ticket!

Peace :D
 
Market is miopic. How many replicas of the same lens are there? (I mean not only focal lenght, but also characteristics).
People wants always the same thing and magazines are full of lens1 vs lens2 reviews also if at the end in real photography nobody is able to say which shot belongs to which lens. It's ridicolous. I know lens makers can earn not so much in doing a true new lens; but I think the prestige would increase. Leitz is a myth also for its Thambars also if the production has been limited. I and xayraa33 say:why COSINA VOIGTLAENDER... It's not casual. CV has already done a few years ago a courageous choice. and he was right. should just continue on the same road.
A dream for a dream lens.
 
I wonder how limited? The Lomo Petzval lens sold in very high numbers, and a lesser known KS project for a medium-format Petzval lens also made its goal. The "Petzvar" is a much more practical lens, as it has a normal diaphragm and focusing helicoid: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1162663202/the-petzvar-f-38-120-mm-medium-format-petzval-port

I think there would be a market for a Thambar, but at what price? $500? $1,000? More? Would it sell in an RF-coupled LTM or M mount, or is it more practical to make one that relies on SLR or live view for focusing? I'd like to try a Thambar some day, but that doesn't seem like it'll ever happen. Honestly, if I had $3-4,000 to spend on a soft focus lens, I'd get a Cooke PS945.
 
Kobayashi san has tried this out. A Nokton 50mm f1.5 with aberrations and flare etc. It exists as a prototype and I have shot with it. Tuulikki calls it the "baby boomer" lens. The result is quite magical - nice halo'ed subjects at f1.5 -f2 but contrast and aberrations disappearing at smaller f-stops. So far no plans for a production run.
The Heliar 75f1.8 has some of the characteristics of the Thambar at f1.8 - though to as exaggerated as a Thambar. Softer contrast and some halo/flare showing. By about f2.8 it is quite normal - and damned good!
 
5127214098_2768c5a6bc_b.jpg


Heliar 75mm f1.8 @ f1.8 - some kind of LOMO film, covered to black/white in Lightroom. The Thambar is much more diffused and with stranger bokeh - but the 75f1.8 is very pleasing.
Wonder what would happen if you stuck a filter with a small semi transparent disc on it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom