Protar 9.5cm?

**Ian Greenhalgh** · 11-May-2013, 16:58

Hi folks

I can find no reference online to a 9.5cm Protar yet I have seen one for sale.

Anyone got any info? What will it cover?

**Dan Fromm** · 11-May-2013, 18:50

Ian, Protar is a trade name, not a design type. It includes quite a number of different designs, maximum aperture from f/4.5 to f/18, with very different coverages.

There are sources of information on the Internet that Google searches won't find. Visit http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/zeiss_4.html to learn more about Protars.

There are sources of information that are not on the Internet. Buy a copy of A Lens Collector's Vade Mecum.

**Ian Greenhalgh** · 11-May-2013, 21:49

I have a copy of the Vade Mecum Dan.

I should have specified, it's a CZJ f9 Protar 9.5cm.

**Louis Pacilla** · 11-May-2013, 22:33

Originally Posted by Ian Greenhalgh

I have a copy of the Vade Mecum Dan.

I should have specified, it's a CZJ f9 Protar 9.5cm.

Sounds like a Series IIIa Protar which in that size should cover up to 97 degrees stopped down all the way.

**Ian Greenhalgh** · 12-May-2013, 00:56

Cheers Louis, that is what I needed to know, it says 9.5cm is for 6x9.

**Dan Fromm** · 12-May-2013, 05:44

Originally Posted by Ian Greenhalgh

I should have specified, it's a CZJ f9 Protar 9.5cm.

Yes you should have. Giving incomplete information when asking a question is unkind, makes you look like a fool or a game-player.

And you should have followed the link I gave you. I don't know where Louis found the catalog page he posted, but the link I posted will take you to it. I posted the link to make you aware of the cameraeccentric site, a small trove of catalogs.

**Ian Greenhalgh** · 12-May-2013, 05:47

Dan, your attitude stinks, please stop being so preachy, it rubs people up the wrong way. Calling people fools is not going to endear you to anyone and just makes you look like a know-it-all old grouch, quite frankly. Not impressed.

**Ole Tjugen** · 12-May-2013, 11:47

Ian, Dan answers 100s of these questions every year. Anyone could do a search here on this forum, and found out that calling a lens just a "Protar" is almost as useless as calling it a "lens".

Without Serie or max aperture, we're all equally lost when it comes to determining Protars. Giving enough information to work on - i.e. everything you have - is common courtesy.

**ridax** · 12-May-2013, 14:40

As posted by other people on this forum years before, the IIIa Protar is actually anastigmatically corrected up to 60° only. It was advertised a century ago as usable within 97° (or sometimes more) if stopped down but even then Zeiss admitted the 60°-only anastigmatic field.

I've actually checked the edge sharpness, and I find the residual astigmatism just awful there. You may or may not find the field sharpness acceptable for your particular needs but I'd rather not buy this lens for wide-angle usage without trying it first. I use (and love) mine within that 60° only.

**Ian Greenhalgh** · 12-May-2013, 17:45

Originally Posted by Ole Tjugen

Ian, Dan answers 100s of these questions every year. Anyone could do a search here on this forum, and found out that calling a lens just a "Protar" is almost as useless as calling it a "lens".

Without Serie or max aperture, we're all equally lost when it comes to determining Protars. Giving enough information to work on - i.e. everything you have - is common courtesy.

I made a minor mistake, I forgot that Zeiss weren't the only people to make Protars.

Does it give Dan the right to speak to me like he did? Of course not, and it's not the first time he's called me unsavoury names, hence I spoke up. In future, I don't care to have any discourse with him whatsoever due to his attitude.