16.5cm ƒ3.5 Tessar in Compound 3- anything special?

[blind_sparks]

I've recently picked up an interesting lens - a Carl Zeiss Jena 16.5cm ƒ3,5 Tessar in a Compound No. 3. I've seen a ƒ2,8 Biotessar in a #4 Compound on the webs, but there is a scarcity of information in regard to the 3.5's. I was wondering if I have something special, in that I can't seem to find any information about these lenses in shutters. I've seen a few on the 'bay in barrels and recessed/focusing mounts. As far as I can determine the lens comes from 1929-30. The len's serial is 10616XX; the shutter is an ominous 6669XX.

According the the catalog from the time via cameraeccentric, lenses of this sort were offered in the barrels and recessed focusing mounts with no mention of a price for shuttered versions.

http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/zeiss_2.html
(Skip to the fourth to last page)

Was this a special order sort of situation? Is there a camera that it would have been provided with in this configuration? I guess I'm mostly curious if anyone else has seen on of these monsters and could relate experiences. No pressing reason, just want to know - I currently have it mounted to my Nagaoka.

[IanG]

It's in the CZJ advert in the 1929 British Journal Photographic Almanac in a choice of 4 mounts including Compur or Compound shutter, £16 10s. The advert doesn't say which shutter but usually it depended on the size of the lens

Cameraeccentric also have the 1933 CZL lens catalogue and it's in there as well, so it was a standard lens, the largest f3.5 Tessar Zeiss siold in a shutter at that time. You'll have to tell us what the quality is like. I have a CZZJ 165mm f6.3 Tessar ina Compur which despite being 99 years old is a good performer.

CZJ also made the 165mm Tessar in f6.3, f4.5, f3.5 and f2.7.

Ian

[drew.saunders]

That looks very much like the one I have. Mine's 3400xxx, which puts it at about 1950 or so. Mine is also "T" single coated. I've gotten quite a lot of use out of it since buying it in early 2009 from Camera Eccentric. It has good coverage for 4x5, I don't recall running out of image circle very often. Here's a pic I took of it that looks like they didn't really change the lens much from when yours was made to when mine was made:


I sent it to SK Grimes to get the shutter overhauled (it was stuck on many speeds) and get it mounted. Other than your shutter likely needing work, you should get a lot of use out of it. I've since added a 67mm Lee holder to it via many layers of gaffer tape so that I can use my Lee hood (and filters) on it so I don't have to worry so much about lens flare.

A few of my better images made with it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drew_saunders/3375881933/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drew_saunders/4183412882/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drew_saunders/5049231212/

This one shows what can be done at close distance wide open at 3.5 (alas, my subject moved, so instead of the eyes being in focus, the teeth ended up in focus, which I think still works):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drew_saunders/5048609393/

Drew

[blind_sparks]

Thanks for all the info!

That looks very much like the one I have. Mine's 3400xxx, which puts it at about 1950 or so. Mine is also "T" single coated. I've gotten quite a lot of use out of it since buying it in early 2009 from Camera Eccentric. It has good coverage for 4x5, I don't recall running out of image circle very often. Here's a pic I took of it that looks like they didn't really change the lens much from when yours was made to when mine was made:


I sent it to SK Grimes to get the shutter overhauled (it was stuck on many speeds) and get it mounted. Other than your shutter likely needing work, you should get a lot of use out of it. I've since added a 67mm Lee holder to it via many layers of gaffer tape so that I can use my Lee hood (and filters) on it so I don't have to worry so much about lens flare.

Drew

Plenty of air-bubbles in my example as well, from what I can tell. Like Drew has said, I can't seem to run out of space in terms of image circle. I was fortunate to have an example that was worked well enough from the get go - a bit slow at the highest speed and a tad fast at the two slower speeds (1sec sounds like 3/4sec, 1/2sec sounds like 5/8sec...close enough!). It suffers from lower contrast compared to Drew's coated example. I'll post some examples when I get home.

I'm also looking for a filter system, and I've found a correctly sized (catalog confirmed) 57mm>Series 8 adapter...it's a tad pricy =). The lens threads seem to be about 54mm. I would like something better than holding a Wratten ND gel in front of it.