Printable View
Anyone have experience with the Serrac?
I'm considering it for a Graflex (Series or Super) D 4x5 SLR - probably the 8" / 203mm - though I haven't seen many photos made with it.
I've read it's a Tessar type, and that it's sharp.
Besides being a little faster and longer, how does it compare (open vs. stopped) to the 190mm f/5.6 Ektar on the 4x5 Super D?
How does it compare to a f/2.9 Pentac?
Would love to see any photos, especially portraits, made with the Serrac.
Thanks,
Bill
I've recently acquired a 6" f3.5 Dallmeyer Press lens fitted to a Dallmeyer Press Reflex camera actually the camera is a rebadged Ensign Reflex. Both Dallmeyer and TTH give lenses different names depending on the final use, so this Press lens is a called a Dalmac if sold separately. My two TTH Cooke 5¾" f4.5 lenses are identical one is called a TTH Cooke Luxor Anasiggmat and the other, sold fitted to a Thornton Pickard Ruby Reflex, is called a T-P Cooke anastigmat.
My Dallmeyer adverts don't list an 8" Serrac there is an 8½" version though which covers &"x5", but that doesn't mean they didn't make an 8", TTH Cooke don't list my 5¾" lenses in their adverts but some camera manufacturers used them on Quarter plate reflex cameras.
Is the f4.5 Serrac a desirable lens ? It's the f2.9 Pentac that commands high prices and people chase after, Pete Watkins (a member here) saw one at a recent camera fair we both attended early Oct but the seller wanted far to much for a poor example in badcondition, I didn't bother looking.
I need to replace the torn shutter curtains on the Dallmeyer camera before I can test the lens, I have plenty of quarter plate film and a small number of film adaptors for the 7 or 8 plate holders. My experience with Dallmeyer lenses in the past is restricted to their enlarger lenses and they were good sharp lenses but lower contrast than modern coated lenses as you'd expect.
Be aware that the Serrac was availble in 3 different mount, standard, sunken for Reflex cameras, and also in an Acme shutter, Dallmeyer imported and distributed Acme & Packard shutters and a few oth items made in the US. Later they mad Packard Ideal shuttersa nd Grafmatic backs under licence.
Ian
The Serrac is a decent lens, but nothing special. It is perhaps a little better than some, but as an uncoated Tessar-type I think you can find better alternatives. The 190mm coated Ektar is most likely a better lens, especially if in the special mount for the Super-D.
If you would like to see what a Dallmeyer Serrac can do. Have a look at some of Eric Hosking's early work for which he used an 8 1/2 inch Serrac and a 12 inch Dallon. http://www.erichoskingtrust.com/page...1001-full.html. The Serrac I believe was used to take the picture of the Barn owl in flight. The 8 1/2 inch Serrac was a lens favoured by a number of the early bird photographers.
I have one but I am ashamed to say have never used it. I bought it without a flange however I have just discovered that it takes the the same size flange as an Ilex size 4 shutter. So It seems I do have one. I cannot understand why I never tried that flange before. I suppose you just do not expect a flange for an American Gundlach Turner Reich to fit a British Dallmeyer lens.
Thanks all for the replies.
I ended up buying the 8" f/4.5 brass Dallmeyer Serrac (hopefully will post some examples with it in a bit).
I had the chance to buy a 190mm f/3.5 coated aluminum Dalmac, but it was $100 more, so I went with the Serrac.
In the sales literature for companies like Zeiss, Ross, TTH etc the slower lenses are always recommended for the best definition, that's borne out by my experience with Tessar's my sharpest is an f6.3 ,ade in 1913.
I'll see if I can fit my 6" f3,5 Press lens to a Speed Graphic board to test it, so I'll be interested to see/hear what you find with your Serrac.
Ian
Here are some photos shot over the weekend with the 8" f/4.5 Serrac on a 4x5 Graflex Super D. HP5+ D76 1:1 13 minutes.
Attachment 83429
Attachment 83430
Attachment 83431