Ektar or Tessar for a beautiful bokeh?

[John Berry]

Pick a shutter that has some blades in it.

[John Kasaian]

Nor are all Ektars Tessars. .

[Duane Polcou]

I once had a college professor
Who would never let me second guess her
Then one day while showing an old pic
I was just too quick
For I knew a plasmat from a tessar

[John Kasaian]

WF Ektars are double gause, the 203 f7.7 is a dialye and the Aero Ektars were Biotars.

[Mike Anderson]

... tetrapyloctomy...

Excellent. I can't wait to work that one into casual conversation.

[Ole Tjugen]

Don't forget the Xenars which are also Tessars and my single coated 480mm f 4.5 is rely a bokeh machine;--)))

Cheers Armin

Nor are all Xenars Tessars. Admittedly I think it's only the very old Xenar Typ D f:3.5 which isn't, but..


Anyway there are so many variables (degrees of freedom) in the basic Tessar construction that it is impossible to generalise about bokeh or indeed anything else. Bokeh is a design decision, or influenced by other design decisions, and can be anything even in a basic simple Tessar-type lens.

[IanG]

Nor are all Xenars Tessars. Admittedly I think it's only the very old Xenar Typ D f:3.5 which isn't, but..

Also the 5 element pre-WWII S-Xenar f2.8.

Ian

[Lynn Jones]

Tessars tend to be more contrasty with better tone separation than plasmats and other wider angle lenses. I have had some problems with Xenars over the years and of course I grew up with Commercial Ektars as the stars in the photo world. However, with Calumet and Ilex, their tessars were an improvement on Commercial Ektars based on some new optical glasses and computer design. You can find them as f 6.3 Caltars, Ilex paragons, B&J Acutars, and BBOI Acu-Tessars.

With lenses such as 4 element tessars, there is no particular advantage to multi coating, single coating is just as good. The only reason some of these were multi-coated were because is because the puplic expected it assuming that they would be better which, of course, that wasn't necessarily true.

Lynn

[E. von Hoegh]

With lenses such as 4 element tessars, there is no particular advantage to multi coating, single coating is just as good. The only reason some of these were multi-coated were because is because the puplic expected it assuming that they would be better which, of course, that wasn't necessarily true.

Lynn

A Tessar has 4 internal sufraces, and there is (under some conditions) a noticeable difference between single coated and multicoated Schneider Xenars.

[IanG]

A Tessar has 4 internal sufraces, and there is (under some conditions) a noticeable difference between single coated and multicoated Schneider Xenars.

There might be but unfortunately Schneider never Multi coated the Xenars even those released in the begining of the last decade (2000).

Comparing an early 1950's CZJ 150mm f4.5 T coated Tessar to one of the last 150mm f5.6 Xenars produced both have excellent coatings but the Tessar has a distinct blueness which would need filetering out for colour work. I've used both lenses in conditions where the Zoom lenses on my Canon's have flare issues and both have been flare free so that may say a lot about the design.

Ian