Heliars

[Jim Galli]

I was curious about that too because I looked at the old 1910 catalogs and it sure looked similar to the modern one. Can you dig us up a diagram and post it?

[Tim Deming]

Hi Jim,

here is an advertisement from 1929, the lens designs not extremely clear, but you can see the element construction. This has the "new "dynar" heliar diagram (in both f4.5 and f3.5 versions).

[Jim Galli]

Thanks Tim.

[Ole Tjugen]

Here's a set from about the same time:

Original Heliar, New Heliar, and Universal Heliar:

[rob]

the serial #s of my 18cm and 36cm heliars are 152xxx and 252xxxx, respectively. Are they both original heliars or the 36cm is new heliar?
The skopar is voigtlander version of tessar, is this correct?

[Dan Fromm]

The skopar is voigtlander version of tessar, is this correct?

Sort of. Plain skopars are 4/3 tessar types, apo-skopars are 5/3 heliar (whatever that means) types.

[Ole Tjugen]

the serial #s of my 18cm and 36cm heliars are 152xxx and 252xxxx, respectively. Are they both original heliars or the 36cm is new heliar?
The skopar is voigtlander version of tessar, is this correct?

Dan has already answered your second question, so I'll deal with the first:

I don't know, why don't you tell us?

Stop down the lens, and look at the reflections from a point source (or any lamp). Pay special attention to the weak reflection. Tilt the whole lens a litle (or a lot). If the weak reflection moves the same way as the others, it's an "original" heliar. If it moves the opposite way, it's a dynar-type Heliar.

The good thing about the two types of Heliars is that it's very easy to tell the difference. Very much easier than the difference between a triplet and a reverse Tessar - I'm still not sure about the Xenar Typ D!

[Tim Deming]

the serial #s of my 18cm and 36cm heliars are 152xxx and 252xxxx, respectively. Are they both original heliars or the 36cm is new heliar?
The skopar is voigtlander version of tessar, is this correct?

You'll need to look at the reflections of a light source in the lenses to find out. See my comment's as well as Ole's above for how to do this.

Your 36cm heliar dates from around WWII (approx. 1940-1945) , so probably a new heliar --but it would be good to know if this is true or not. Please post once you find out.

[resummerfield]

I have a 42cm Heliar with a serial number of 2756xxx, which dates it around the end of WW2. Examining it with a point light, I see 3 upside down reflections in front and 2 right side up reflections in back, and when tilted the weak reflections move in opposite ways. So according to both Tim and Ole it is a dynar type Heliar. However, I have had this lens disassembled and I don’t recall the center element having clipped corners as per Ole’s diagram of the New Heliar on post 14. Instead, the center element looks much like the Original Heliar.

[Ole Tjugen]

That diagram of the new Heliar is really only wholly valid for the f:3.5 Heliars for "hand cameras". Undoubtedly there are minor differences between the f:3.5 and the f:4.5 versions, as well as between shorter and longer focal lengths in each series. I think we can safely disregard things like how the individual elements are beveled for mounting.

The reflections are the main distinguishing feature, at least without complicated equipment or de-cementing!