Anticomar f2.9 100mm,( 125, 150, 165, 180mm) Seen at No51,36x for a 165mm, this is a
Q15 type, and is still a rather flary lens. Was it off a 9x12cm Makina or another type of camera such as a
Peco plate.? Well, no 9x12cm Makina has been noted but other Plaubel cameras were made.Probably no! As
above, Plaubel lenses sold or were mounted for other makes and they seem to have made other sizes, rather
than just the Makinas for which they are so well known. A f3.2/100mm No542,82x was mounted for 9x12cm
and a T-P 1/4 plate got a 150mm one. An 18cm f2.9 Anticomar has been noted for Primarflex but may be an
old lens remounted. (MCM Oct 1946). The H&D list says it was in 75-180mm but without further application
details, but note two above.
It has been noted as f2.9/100mm at No112,69x on a Makina, and on Makina III (late 1940's) as No115,33x,
and IIIR at Nos 101,69x and119,31x.
(a) There are references to the very first as a 3-glass design, and other makes at the time make the use of an
f3.0 triplet for Press use quite normal.
(b) There seems to have been a change to a 4-glass Q15 design about 1931-2, while still on the Makina I. This
should have lead to a real improvement in performance but was given little publicity and is now rather forgotten.
(c) The range was given interchangeable lenses by exchange of front and rear cells before 1935. This is
indicated in B.J.A. 1935 p306 on the Makina II although updates of Makina I to II ocurred and this may or may
not have involved attention to the lenses. This is said from the literature: an early Makina with a 3-glass f2.9
has provision for a wide angle lens, but the distance scale is not calibrated and it does seem to be a update or
conversion.
(d) Later in 1936, the Makina IIS was altered to take complete lenses in front of the shutter, with a decrease in
the register, and this involved lens changes, especially to the TeleMakinar but probably also to the Anticomar.
Tentatively one factor regarding sharpness may be that the Makina does not really have a normal tripod
mount. Plaubel sold an excellent base plate which was clamped on using the two 1/4in screw sockets and
was provided with a central tripod socket, but it is rather scarce. A replica plate was made and the
f4.2/100mm used on a tripod under careful conditions. The sharpness was excellent. It was then used
handheld but still mounted on the plate and the results were nearly as sharp. But after removing the plate,
there was a definite decrease. It may be that the lenses often suffered from slight tolerances in the mounting
and rigidity of the bodies, especially when well used. This would be most acute with the big f2.9 lens.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks