beginners question on copals

[Cor]

I knew one of the lens gurus was going to correct me, but you are right off course, it's the shutter from a CU-5 Polaroid I was referring to (I indeed have lens front mounted on a MP-4 shutter, a 300mm Ronar, which has it's own aperture, but needed an adapter ring). All the lenses I have remounted (3 or 4 of them) had the same length ie the length in the old shutter or barrel was the same in the Copal Polaroid shutter, none of these lenses (mostly Symmar and G-Clarons) have deep rear cells

(unlike the 165mm Angulon in an old dial set Compur shutter, it came to me shimmed with a piece of paper, removing that paper causes the aperture blades touch the rear element, with the paper shims it has the correct height according to the old Schneider brochures, contact printing 8*10 film of shots made with this old lens show no sharpness issues..)

Best,

Cor

Interesting. But the MP-4 shutter has no diaphragm, so isn't very useful.



Look here http://www.skgrimes.com/products/new-copal-shutters at Press and cock-and-shoot shutters. The diaphragm is located closer to the back of the barrel in all Press shutters, including Prontor Press shutters, than in the same size cock-and-shoot shutter. This can be a problem when trying to use a Press shutter with a lens whose rear cell goes deep into the shutter.

You didn't mention that the barrel of the Copal Press shutters Polaroid sold with Tominon lenses in them for, e.g., the Polaroid CU-5 is longer than standard.

[rdenney]

Are you sure? I thought that lenses' mechanical designs conform to the shutter standards.

But they are sometimes optimized with shim spacers, though I've only seen spacers in one of my lenses (and don't remember which one, now).

Another point is that there is more to the shutter than just the front and rear cell threads and spacing. I've reported in another thread that I have several lenses designed to fit a Compur #00 shutter that will not fit a Prontor Press #00 shutter, and not because of the location of the aperture or shutter blades. The lens makers sometimes have little decorative elements that assume a shutter shape that is not part of the thread standards. That is true at the very least with my 70's-era 47/5.6 Super Angulon and my 50's-era 65/8 SA, both of which require the flat front of the Compur and foul the body of the Prontor, which has too small a recess down to the threads (I am prepared to believe the Prontor is really a #0 shutter modified to fit some #00 cells). The 121/8 Super Angulon is a different issue--it was designed for a special shutter--it's a No. 0 on the inside but has larger threads for cell mounting and board mounting, presumably because of the bulk and weight of the lens. For a while I mistakenly thought it was the elusive No. 2 shutter because of the size of the hole required in the board (about two inches), but I was corrected on this forum.

To the OP: Of course, this is probably not relevant to your Sinaron-S, which is really a Rodenstock APO-Sironar-N. I also have a 210 Sinaron-S mounted in a Copal No. 1 shutter, and it had no shims in it. I guess I can't guarantee that the lens came in that shutter--sometimes, the Sinaron lenses are not in a shutter, because they were mounted in a DBM board for use with the Sinar camera-mounted behind-the-lens shutter. Without the Sinar shutter, the DBM lenses are not that useful, unless you can find a regular shutter to put them in. Sinar sold them both ways.

As others have said, it is not in practice useful to switch lens cells between shutters routinely. Aside from any shimming or fitment issues, it exposes the shutter blades to dirt and other contamination. Also, the glass facing the shutter on many lenses is quite exposed and vulnerable.

Rick "the good thing about standards is that there are so many of them" Denney

[Dan Fromm]

Now that you mention it, Rick, some cells won't seat properly in a #0 dial set Prontor press because they hit the dial before they're properly seated. Is that what you meant?

I have a couple of small lenses -- 90/6.8 Beryl, 47/5.6 SA -- in rim set #00 Prontor Press. The SA came from the factory in one.

Dan "there are, alas, exceptions to many rules" Fromm

[Leigh]

Are you sure? I thought that lenses' mechanical designs conform to the shutter standards.

All manufactured products and components conform to dimensional tolerances.

Sometimes the accumulated tolerances cancel and you get an assembly that's close to nominal.
Other times they all go in one direction or the other, thus increasing the error.

Modern computer-controlled machines enables components with much tighter tolerances to be made at reasonable cost.
This eliminates the hand-fitting that was required for lenses made using manual equipment.

- Leigh

[rdenney]

Now that you mention it, Rick, some cells won't seat properly in a #0 dial set Prontor press because they hit the dial before they're properly seated. Is that what you meant?

I have a couple of small lenses -- 90/6.8 Beryl, 47/5.6 SA -- in rim set #00 Prontor Press. The SA came from the factory in one.

My 47/5.6, which is the early 70's version with a black barrel with two chrome stripes and the label inside the filter ring, will not seat in a modern (90's-era) rim-set Prontor Press #00 shutter. The barrel of the front cell angles in to a corner, and then has a flat surface from there to the base of the threads. That corner has a small ridge on it which is designed to almost (but not quite) kiss the front surface of the Compur shutter. That ridge runs into the front face of the shutter before the threads seat. I'm not sure if the ridge is the problem by itself. Perhaps machining that ridge off would solve the problem. I'm sure Schneider machined the barrel differently if they intended to mount it in a Prontor shutter. Of course, the later 47/5.6 SA's were mounted in #0 shutters, and that would have been the case starting in the late 70's (Schneider lists the MC version of this lens in a #0 shutter), so I'm thinking the Prontor shutter you have is probably from the 50's.

My 65/8 is the earlier 50's and early 60's version with the bright aluminum barrel on the front cell. It also has a ridge that runs into the front face of the Prontor before the threads fully seat. I thought about filing it off myself, and I still might. The Prontor shutter is nice--it's the outer size of a #0 shutter and thus is a lot easier to adjust than the tiny Compur #00. It's self-cocking and runs well. But I'd need to make an aperture scale for it.

Rick "who uses Compur 00 shutters but his fat fingers don't like them" Denney

[Ari]

Now that you mention it, Rick, some cells won't seat properly in a #0 dial set Prontor press because they hit the dial before they're properly seated. Is that what you meant?

At least that's what I meant, with my limited knowledge of lens and shutter design.

[toprock03]

Hah wow ok a lot of information here.

to sum it up - it wont matter if i have different copals as long as i have a shutter/lens board for each of my lenses (which i plan on doing). if i keep it simple like that and dont start mixing and matching shutters and lenses I should be golden correct?

[Leigh]

You should view an LF lens just like any other camera lens.

You don't take apart the lenses for your 35mm or MF camera. Why would you disassemble an LF lens?

You seem hung up on the name of the shutter for no reason that I can understand.
It makes no difference whether the shutter is a Copal or a Compur or a Prontor or a Seiko or whatever.

The lens is identified by the manufacturer, focal length, aperture, and lens series, not by the shutter in which it's mounted.

For example, in your original post you said:
"I have a copal 1 210mm sinaron s 5.4 lens."
No.
You have a 210mm f/5.6 Sinaron-S lens in a Copal #1 shutter. (I think your 5.4 is a typo, should be 5.6)

- Leigh

[tlitody]

Hah wow ok a lot of information here.

to sum it up - it wont matter if i have different copals as long as i have a shutter/lens board for each of my lenses (which i plan on doing). if i keep it simple like that and dont start mixing and matching shutters and lenses I should be golden correct?

In theory yes. In the real world maybe. Depends if you buy new or used. If used there's no telling until you try everything out to see if people have been fiddling with things or replacing front or rear elements from other lenses etc etc. Generally everything is OK.

[rdenney]

Hah wow ok a lot of information here.

to sum it up - it wont matter if i have different copals as long as i have a shutter/lens board for each of my lenses (which i plan on doing). if i keep it simple like that and dont start mixing and matching shutters and lenses I should be golden correct?

Here's my definition of keeping it simple: To start out with, buy lenses in shutters that work. Then, mount each one of them on a board that fits your camera and already has the right size hole for your shutter. For modern lenses in modern shutters, those hole sizes are standardized. That's all. High-quality lenses in shutters that work (even if they need their normal periodic maintenance sooner rather than later)--and sometimes even already mounted on a board for your camera--are so cheap these days that there's not much value in trying to put pieces together.

When you've got the basic lenses you need and some experience using them, then you might find a screaming deal on an interesting lens with a bad shutter, or on a good shutter with no lens, and start your collection of parts that require a more specialized understanding. But there is a bit of an entrance fee for that sort of play, and that fee is in collecting bits of information over a long period, or the willingness to part with some cash to someone like S. K. Grimes to put it all together for you.

Many photographers have lived long, happy, productive lives without ever reaching the point of mixing and matching shutters and lens cells.

Rick "start at the beginning" Denney