PDA

View Full Version : Anyone know anything about a Voigtlander Collinear Series ll no. 6 f 6.3 focus 12 1/4



Bill, 70's military B&W
5-Oct-2012, 14:26
I picked this lens up at a 'lot sale', I do not know very much about it. It is at Flutot's being CLA'd right now.
It is a no. 6 I saw the exact same lens except it was a no. 8 for sale on line for about $2500. And yes I checked each and every part of the name/description.
I know nothing about vintage lenses, and I have not been able to take a picture with it yet. Does anyone have any knowledge about this lens. I've been talking about it on the Camera and Accessories section of the Forum but I have not come up with any really good information.
For example, what is this lens worth, what are it's special attributes? I was told that it will easily cover 8x10.
Carol says that the shutter is the best ACME shutter she has ever seen, but she also said that ACME shutters are of a poor design.
Any help/information would be appreciated.
Thanks, Bill

81560

goamules
5-Oct-2012, 14:51
Is this deja vu, all over again?
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?94906-Voigtlander-Collinear-Series-ll-no-6-f-6-3-focus-12-1-4-inch

CCHarrison
5-Oct-2012, 15:19
Catalogue page for the lens

Dan

81561

Bill, 70's military B&W
5-Oct-2012, 18:23
goamules, and CCHarrison, I was trying for even more information, this section of the Forum is just for lenses, Thought I might learn more,
This time I have a picture. Carol says it's in great condition, and the shutter works great.
I'm hoping for someone who actually used a lens like this to tell me about it.
Can I fit it on a Linhof lens board and use it on all my cameras? Will I have to drill a lens board to fit it or will it fit a standard size?
Thanks for all the help, I'm just trying to learn more, some practical information.
Bill

sanking
7-Oct-2012, 11:00
goamules, and CCHarrison, I was trying for even more information, this section of the Forum is just for lenses, Thought I might learn more,
This time I have a picture. Carol says it's in great condition, and the shutter works great.
I'm hoping for someone who actually used a lens like this to tell me about it.
Can I fit it on a Linhof lens board and use it on all my cameras? Will I have to drill a lens board to fit it or will it fit a standard size?
Thanks for all the help, I'm just trying to learn more, some practical information.
Bill

As has already been mentioned, the Voigtlander Collinear is a good lens with performance about on par with that of the Goerz Dagor, assuming good samples of each. Both lenses are formed by the combination of two anastigmatic objectives, each composed of three cemented lenses. The lenses themselves are different. In the Dagor the indices of refraction of the three lenses increase in the the direction of incident light. In the collinear there is a meniscus of low refraction between a double convex positive lens of refraction, and a double concave negative lens of medium refraction. Both types are based on patents from the late 1890s.

Dagors and Collinears cover about the same angle, up to about 80º-85º but with performance falling off significantly beyond about 75º. There are only four air-to-glass surfaces so contrast is quite good with these lenses, even uncoated. I don't know very much about the history of production of the Collinear but some late examples may be coated. Based on the shutter I guess your Collinear is probably uncoated.

Sandy

Bill, 70's military B&W
7-Oct-2012, 13:48
Sandy,
Thanks, I'm trying to understand what you said. Optics is not my strong suit.
Here are my thoughts, optics af all kinds has gone thru an evolutionary process. From ancient telescopes to todays current level. Why is this antique a desirable lens?
I do not know how old it is, but I'm pretty sure that it's older than I am. Modern lenses should out perform old lenses simply because of advances in the science/technology.
I know a guy who has a Model-T. I appreciate that, I understand it's place in history and the desire to collect/own a piece of history.
Everyone who contributes, says it's a good lens, a desirable lens...etc.
I'd like to know why...I hold it in my hand and look at it... it is not one of those shiny brass lenses that look so cool. I do not see any coating on the glass. Owning it because it is a collectors item, I understand. What I do not understand is what makes this lens so special. More than one person says that it should have good contrast, it will cover 8x10,... well there are a lot of modern lenses that have those same qualities, better glass? better technology?
I still do not get it. I would not want to drive that Model-T to work everyday, but riding in it once or twice a year is nice.

I definitely will take it out and shoot it when I get it back. I hope to be able to mount it on a Linhof board so it will fit my cameras.

Would anyone have any idea what this is worth?

Thanks, Bill

Dan Fromm
7-Oct-2012, 14:17
Bill, your analogy with cars isn't very good.

Recently designed lenses shine with respect to the earliest modern lenses (that is to say, anastigmats) in two respects. Coverage and maximum aperture given coverage. Recently designed lenses take advantage of coating to use more air-spaced elements without loss of contrast. The biggest gains since coating was invented and lens design programs were written have been in zoom lenses for small formats. These beasties are essentially impossible without coating. Some that came to market were barely possible with what we now call single coating. The Angenieux 8x8B on my first Beaulieu cine camera, for example, had very low transmission. Newer higher ratio zooms are much brighter and flare resistant.

The really big and significant improvements in LF lenses since anastigmats were introduced have been in wide angle and telephoto lenses. The latest most best have advantages over ancient anastigmats of the same focal lengths and coverage, but between the extremes the improvements aren't that great.

To name names, tessar types have long been used as normal lenses. Plasmat types of the same focal lengths have more coverage than tessar types, are much preferable for LF when much in the way of movements are needed. But for formats and focal lengths where a tessar type has more coverage than is needed newer types' advantages are minimal. When coverage isn't an issue decent lenses of the same focal length produce results that are hard to tell apart, differences in design type nothwithstanding. We get hung up on worrying about this nonsense because we're more concerned with inputs than with outputs.

For me, older anastigmats' charm has been their combination of image quality (high) and price (low). Good lenses cheap, that's the ticket. Expensive good lenses are out of reach for such as me. For more on this, read http://www.galerie-photo.com/telechargement/dan-fromm-6x9-lenses-v2-2011-03-29.pdf

I can't explain the current bokeh fad that abuses ancient non-anastigmats (Petzval lenses, mainly) by shooting them on formats larger than they cover. That cult's participants seem happy and harm no one. Let 'em be, don't question their tastes.

You've been expressing concern about making a bad mistake for some time now. If this is because you can't afford mistakes, then pay the price for recently designed lenses or don't shoot large format. Not matter what we all say, photography isn't a poor person's hobby and it never has been. Not being able to afford the toys (or tools) you want isn't a crime. Do what you can within your budget and be happy.

Bill, 70's military B&W
8-Oct-2012, 17:25
Dan, You have helped me a lot, really. I read most of your experience with lenses that you 'made work' on the Graphics. You are very industrious and skillful, and you must have one hell of a curiosity factor in you. Do you have any other papers you wrote? I'd really like to read them.

I do not have enough experience on the bokeh fad, believe me it's in the 35mm world too. Mostly when a lens is being sold.

As far as making mistakes, well I'm good at it, I almost did not send the lens to Carol because I didn't think it was worth repairing. That would have been a mistake.
I'm like you in that I like a bargain, I always enjoy getting it done at half the price. I do try to budget the photography gear, and I think I've done pretty good so far. I'd bet most feel the same way, what with prices of film gear as low as it is. Folks that bought a long time ago probably are not so happy.

Speaking of money, I've asked many times with no response yet, what would this lens be worth? Just curious.
Thanks again to everyone, when I get this lens back I'll want to mount it on a Linhof lens board and take it out and shoot it.
I'll let you know how that goes.
Bill

Steven Tribe
9-Oct-2012, 02:02
As far as value goes, it is difficult as these are not in the market very often.
The price you found for a no. 8 cannot be compared with a no. 6, as the value of classic lenses that cover 11x14" and more (like the no. 8) is suffering from ultra inflation!
I would find the current price for something like the Goerz Dagor (series III) no.5 (270mm) in a working shutter and add a few extra % for novelty value.

premortho
13-Oct-2012, 17:14
I'm not going to address the dollar issue, because it doesn't matter...you already own the lens. What I would like to discuss is the quality of drawing. Voightlaanders have always leaned toward a quality of roundness, or 3 diminsionallity which some of us love. Compared to a Zeiss which is almost clinically harsh and flat. Before the use of computers in lens design, each lens grinder had his own "touch". Sort of like brush stroke charistictics of oil paint artists. Leica built it's reputation on the Elmar lenses which are well known for their quality of "roundness" Leica built upon that base and made lenses for every purpose since then. So, all of these classic lens makers have their own signature. And the question should be ; does my pre-visulation of what I want to produce co-incide with what this lens produces? Voightlander probably never made more than 25% of what Zeiss or Bausch & Lomb produced, but they are highly valued by those who appreciate their qualities. If I could afford a lens of that quality, I'd insure it for $2000.00 and tell my heirs to not sell it for less than 1200. I would never part with it until I could no longer squeeze the bulb to make the exposure.

Bill, 70's military B&W
13-Oct-2012, 19:26
premortho,
Thanks, that was very encouraging to hear, that addresses what I've been wanting to hear. I can't wait to get it back form Carol Flutot and take it out and shoot it. She says the ACME shutter is working fine.

At 12 1/4" I figure it to be 305-310mm. I have a Fuji W 300mm 5.6 in a Copal #3 that I will be comparing it to. Very sharp modern versus sharp with old fashioned roundness quality?

I'm serious here (inexperience is talking), what kind of pictures would show that roundness off to it's best advantage? Portrait, landscape, waterfall, trees/clouds, pretty girl on a park bench...etc.
Do you have any suggestions on what/how to shoot to more easily see the differences in the 2 lenses? I'll post some comparison prints just as soon as I get my darkroom up and running.

Thanks, Bill

premortho
14-Oct-2012, 05:22
Well, Bill...Thanx for the kind words. You are going to have to work a little to be able to see the differences. Perhaps the easiest way is to learn on still lifes. It certainly is the fastest way. I use freestyle's aristo brand ortho lith film for two reasons (1) it's ortho, which means easy to develope and has a unique signature, and (2) it's cheap, so you can do a lot of experimenting. Suppose you have an old oak topped table that the finish is gone from, a pewter dish or old tin pie plate, 3 tomatoes or green peppers, two photofloods (250 watt, blue) And maybe a pair of brown sunglasses (they help you see the contrast more like the film sees it). I like to shoot these from the point of view of sitting on a chair at a table, and head on. So set up the tripod and mount the camera where you would normally sit.

Bill, 70's military B&W
14-Oct-2012, 09:57
premortho, thanks I'll try that, never would have thought of blue floods. DO you get them at Home Depot? Or do you use a filter/housing?

premortho
14-Oct-2012, 10:47
OK..chapter two. I start by setting one photoflood at about a 45 degree down angle from the right side of scene 3 or 4 feet away. Sort of like a red neck version of Rembrandt lighting. Next, I meter the side at the brightest reflection I can find. Hopefully, this will be the highest highlight in the scene. I use a Weston master 3 because it is the easiest for me to use. Now remember, the meter is set to read out whatever light hits it as medium gray...same color as a Kodak Gray Card. In other words, if the meter reads 100 foot-candles,and you simply read off an exposure and shoot that way, that specular hi-lite will come out medium gray. So, what to do? Well, on the Weston calculater dial are a whole bunch of marks that indicate full stop changes. So I shift the 3X exposure mark up to 100 foot seconds. Specular highlite should be about right. Note that the arrow that originally on 100 foot-candles is now on 25 foot candles. Notice that 6.5 foot-candles is 2 stops down. Now check the light on the darkest part of scene you want to capture...if it's 6.5 or above it's all there but may be a little flat, so move the fill light (the left one) in or out to where everything is above 3.25 foot-candles and sort of subtely easing up (the foot-candle scale). We are trying to avoid the all too easy to get soot-and-whitewash look here.
Well, Bill...Thanx for the kind words. You are going to have to work a little to be able to see the differences. Perhaps the easiest way is to learn on still lifes. It certainly is the fastest way. I use freestyle's aristo brand ortho lith film for two reasons (1) it's ortho, which means easy to develope and has a unique signature, and (2) it's cheap, so you can do a lot of experimenting. Suppose you have an old oak topped table that the finish is gone from, a pewter dish or old tin pie plate, 3 tomatoes or green peppers, two photofloods (250 watt, blue) And maybe a pair of brown sunglasses (they help you see the contrast more like the film sees it). I like to shoot these from the point of view of sitting on a chair at a table, and head on. So set up the tripod and mount the camera where you would normally sit.

premortho
14-Oct-2012, 11:15
So, I've got the meter set for asa 16 (for this film) and the arrow pointing at 25 foot-candles,so what's next? We have to decide how much of this pic is going to be sharp...or shoot it at f32 and see what we get. Hmmm 3 seconds at f32, well why not? But first, I must remember to close the shutter, set shutter on bulb, put in the film-holder, making sure it is seated right, pull dark-slide, cock shutter (if necessary) wait a few seconds for vibes to die down, and gently release trigger. Don't forget to put the dark slide back in with the black side out (means exposed, at least to me) and develope it under a dim red safelite until both sides of the film look about the same, then at least one minute in water bath (stop bath) and into hypo. keep in hypo till at least twice as long as it took to clear. Then a good rinse in 10 changes of water or 30 minutes of running water.

premortho
14-Oct-2012, 11:28
So now it's later, neg has dried, geez...it looks thin, too thin, but what the hell, let's do a quick and nasty contact print. Cut off a couple of 1 inch strips from a 5X7 paper, and use these to get exposure right. Or close to right. Contact print whole print, develope, wash, and etc. You may be pleasantly surprised, or even un-pleasantly surprised...but you learned something. It helps if you keep notes

Bill, 70's military B&W
14-Oct-2012, 18:11
premortho, I'm reading "Way Beyond Monochrome" right now, puts me to sleep every night. So I'm reading up on the Zone System.
I picked up a Sekonic 558 spot meter, and for about an hour after I read the instructions I understand the basics.
Foot-candle power is beyond me, I'm not really sure about EV. I know that EV is in stops.
I'll keep reading and I'll have to come up with a definition of candle power and how it relates to what scales my meter gives me.
But I am interested in the still life, I'll try it, using the blue floods. Do you buy them at Home Depot or is there a filter involved?

Do you recom that I set this still life up with the Voigtlander Collinear Series ll no. 6 f 6.3 focus 12 1/4 inch, and then shoot it again with the Fuji W 300mm f/5.6? Will a still life show me the differences between the 2 lenses. I am really curious to see the 'roundness quality' that lens is supposed to have. I like the idea of a contact print to compare, it removes a lot of variables.

My roses are really doing well right now, I'd really like to do a still life on a rose too. There is a lot of detail in the whole flower. I hope to be able to show it's translucent qualities. That means good lighting, right?

I'll try to follow your guidelines, wish me luck. I'm still waiting for the lenses to be sent from Flutot's.

Thanks, Bill

premortho
15-Oct-2012, 07:24
Bill, blue PHOTO-FLOODS are light bulbs that I install in clamp on work light reflecters. The reflecters and bulb holders are usually less than $10.00 apiece. You can't buy photo-floods at HD. So far as I know, you have to get them from a photo store. e.g., freestyle, B&H, Adorama, etc these are IIRC, 5400Kelvin temp bulbs. 5400 K makes ortho film think it's seeing daylight. Originally for outdoor color film shot indoors. They are usually around $5.00 apiece.
premortho, thanks I'll try that, never would have thought of blue floods. DO you get them at Home Depot? Or do you use a filter/housing?

premortho
15-Oct-2012, 07:44
We live in an information age...and sometimes we become so overloaded with info that the basics get left out. The foot candle was/is the footstool the whole exposure house of cards is built on. When I used the example of 100 foot-candles, it was a number I picked out to represent a power of less than daylight, but still, to our eyes, bright. But the film doesn't see it the way our eyes do. And foot candles expresses the reality of what is going on better than anything else because it is so simple to grasp. Suppose for a minute you have a birthday cake. It is 1 foot square. the med choc icing is the same reflective quality as a gray card. You put 100 birthday candles on it. Light it. Turn off all other light. Now that's not exactly 100 official usda approved footcandles, but it is very close. Now take half of those candles away (every other one) and light it up again. Now you grasp what i stop less light really is. Because the simple to understand foot-candle, so easily represented, explained it all to you.

premortho
15-Oct-2012, 07:59
So, Bill, now that you know much more about a foot-candle than you think you ought to, remember photography means, in English, writing (or drawing) with light. And ye humble foot-candle, in use since at least Hurter & Drifeld (spelling) in the 1880's. Or H&D scale or lux log scale. OR YE FAMOUS CHARISTIC SCALE of exposure. You know the famous imaginary film that has a perfect rise from the lower left corner all the way to the upper right corner, that we compare real Tri-x to. Or whatever film tickles our fancy at the moment. Why don't you experiment with lighting wit those still lifes you were asking about.

Bill, 70's military B&W
15-Oct-2012, 19:54
premortho, thanks, and I'm trying to follow your lead. My mail problem is foot-candles. I get the concept of doubling and halving the #of candles equals the changes in f/stops being doubled or halved. You are so right about living in an information age and can't see the forest for the trees...
My Sekonic 558 does not use candles, it uses EV, I do not have that one down exactly pat yet either. I know that EV's are 1 stop apart. I think they go from EV -2 to EV 19.
That is 21 stops. That is probably all the stops from a dark closet to the surface of the sun. I hope someone helps clarify that one for me, and why in the hell did they start with negative numbers? Another pet gripe of mine, I have Yamaha Receivers in my house and the volume starts in negative numbers, what the.... Who thought of that, negative light, negative sound...

Back on topic, so I'll have to follow you substituting EV for candles, I think I can do that, just follow the trend.
I understand meter gives 18% gray which is Zone 5, meter highlight and you have to adjust 3 stops "TO place" that highlight on Zone 8. Got that!
I got the mechanics of shooting the picture and the developing. I also like using a contact print, it eliminates many variables.

I've seen the charts, that ideal film with the perfect slope, I even recognize Hurter & Drifeld and the original H&D Scale. I bought Ilford HP5+ film, a bunch of it. I'll have to check on ortho lith film. Those reflectors and bulb holders, I'm going have to pick some up. Sound very useful.

Another thing I'm going to have to do is get a Linhof board and mount that Voigtlander to it. Then it can be used in more than 1 camera. Right now I can't use it in any camera.
I have several Linhof lens boards but each is already drilled. I'm going to have to find one that is undrilled. Probably on e-bay, I guess. Gotta go to bed, working a lot of hours.

Thanks for your help, Bill

premortho
16-Oct-2012, 04:06
Well, you've got the concept of light being measured in volume as opposed to linierly, and that's good enough. Now what I did is use the "computer" on my lightmeter to give you these numbers. I'm sure that you grasped the sunny 16 rule. So enter sunny 16 on the read out part of your meter. I used f 16 at 1/15 of a second, Why? because the ortho film I like to use gives good results at asa16. Reading across the meter from this setting, I get 225 foot-candles, or E.V. 12. So, if I have not managed to outsmart myself, a bright, sunny day should give you an E.V. of 12. Years ago, some manufacturer wanted to get into the exposure meter business. But to horn in to the old ballgame, it had to be NEW, SIMPLER, FASTER TO USE, and MORE ACCURATE BESIDES. So, bingo, some genius comes up with Exposure Values, because the plug and play crowd could be conned into thinking wow, and now we got something to sell.

Bill, 70's military B&W
16-Oct-2012, 17:57
premortho, yes I agree, but it still does not answer "Why negative numbers with regards to light and sound???"
And yes, I remember the Sunny 16 Rule.
But am I right??? Does EV measure the total light present and quantify it? From -2 to 19... In EV is that the least and the most light imaginable, and they just plot it out over 22 stops?

Bill

Jim Graves
16-Oct-2012, 20:45
82168 = 1 Foot Candle

premortho
17-Oct-2012, 04:10
J Graves, Yuk, yuk...now that's funny. And I guess, the gallery has tired of hearing about foot-candles. I don't know the answer about minus numbers...but I can propose a theory. Perhaps the e.v. system was set up to quantify all of the light measurable and put it on this simple scale. Over time, instrumentation improved and previously un-dreamed of low levels of light were now measurable.

Dan Fromm
17-Oct-2012, 05:19
I have a Kodak Retina Ib (small b) in front of me. It has a Synchro Compur shutter with the dread EV interlock. According to it, EV 9 is equivalent to 1/2 second at f/16, 1/4 @ f/11, 1/8 @ f/8, ... Now stop speculating and count on your fingers to find out what other EV values mean.

premortho
17-Oct-2012, 16:04
Yes, My Weston meter gives the same results for EV 9. Dan explained what I didn't, that ev 9 is a finite volume of light that can be properly exposed on the ASA16 Ortho film at; f22-1 sec; f16, 1/2 sec.; f11 @ 1/4, f8 @1/8, f5.6 at a 15th, and f4.5 at a 25th.

Dan Fromm
17-Oct-2012, 16:10
premortho, Exposure Value has nothing to do with quantity of light. It simply defines a set of equivalent shutter speed/aperture combinations. The brightness required to get good exposure at EV n depends on the film speed.

Remember, my humble little Retina has no metering system. All that its little shutter knows are aperture and speed. It knows nothing about film speed.

Bill, 70's military B&W
30-Oct-2012, 17:44
I just found a site where it lists date of manufacture, my lens was made in 1910. Glass looks pretty good too.
I'll post some pictures when I ever get to go and shoot.
Bill

Jim Graves
30-Oct-2012, 18:42
Whats the link to the site? And what else is on it?

Bill, 70's military B&W
31-Oct-2012, 15:54
I stumbled across the site, here is the road map:
Start at Large Format Photography Forum home page, then click on portrait lenses, then scroll to the bottom and click on Serial numbers and years.

The section on portrait lenses was very interesting.

Bill