Lens Specifications List

[Randy]

Perhaps this can be found somewhere...and if so, someone please direct me to it - but I sure could benefit from a concise list of lenses that outlines:

1 - Name of lens design (Tessar, Petzval, etc, etc)
2 - Includes a diagram of the lens formula
3 - Lens intended use (and perhaps suggestions of how it can be, or is being used effectively - close-ups, landscape, portrait, etc)
4 - Known focal length range (ex. 90mm - 350mm)
5 - Known manufacturer or marketer names (B&L, Kodak Ektar, SK Symmar, Xenar, Yamasaki Congo, etc)
6 - Perhaps years of manufacture

Probably more I could list, but these are what come to mind. I know there is probably a giant expensive book available, but I was wondering if anyone had compiled a list on the web that included some of the info from my list.

[Dan Fromm]

Short answer, ain't no such thing. A Lens Collectors Vade Mecum is as close as you'll get and it is incomplete and riddled with errors. You can also work through the many catalogs my list (download it from http://1drv.ms/1w0vbMD) points to. My list includes directions for buying the VM.

Self help is the only kind of help you can get. You're not asking for much, you're asking for a hell of a lot.

[StoneNYC]

There are often lists by brand of LF lenses, in particular modern lenses (Fijinkn, Schneider, Nikkor, Rodenstock) you can find other semi-modern brand info like Goerz and Docter Wetzer(spelling?) and ultra-high end old lenses like Voigtlander catalogue that's been digitalized.

But each one is separate, most aren't done BY the manufacturer although Schneider is pretty good at keeping full lists of their entire catalogue online.

Once you read a particular lens lines lens type like a Schneider Symmar-S you can google that lens and read up on what type of lens design it is (non-symmetric 6 elements in 4 groups) and a list of the entire line, like this...

https://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/symmar-s/

That's about the closest you'll get to a list.

IF on the other hand you want to MAKE a list of your research and then share it with the rest of us, that would be great :)

[jcoldslabs]

I don't know of any online resource that is as comprehensive and concise as what you are asking about. I second Dan's recommendation for the Lens Collector's Vade Mecum. While it is flawed in some respects, it has served me well over the years in helping to identify lenses by type (Petzval, rapid rectilinear, Tessar, plasmat, dialyte, triplet, etc.) and manufacturer. Being a PDF the search function is particularly useful. Once downloaded it's like a Web resource on your desktop. And you can't beat the price.

J.

[John Kasaian]

Kingslake's A History of the Photographic Lens, while not exactly what you're looking for it does cover whom made what, diagrams and even gives some examples. Used copies aren't hard to find---I got an ex-library for around $5 from Abe's, IIRC.

[IanG]

Dan's right "A Lens Collectors Vade Mecum" is the only comprehensive resource, the major problem is that it's not been updated since 2001 and since then much more information has become available via the internet.

It's easy to criticise it for it's flaws but the authors must have spent years collating the data and almost certainly expected to continue updating it. Much of the work must have been done before the arrival of the internet.

Could there be another newer resource ? Probably but who's going to do the groundwork, information would need to come from Primary sources and cited, not be lifted from the Vade Mecum. I'm lucky because I have quite a large number of British Journal Photographic Almanacs going back over 60 years and they serve me quite well as a resource for many aspects of photographic history, cameras, lenses, equipment, formulae etc, plus many other books.

You only need to look at Camera-wiki.org (http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Main_Page) to see how slowly data builds up on a collective site, it's as Dan says "a hell of a lot" of work.

Ian

[Mark Sawyer]

Here's one that gives elements/groups, which lets you deduce to an extent:

http://www.graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html

[IanG]

Of course there's the pages on this website (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/) scroll down to lenses.

Ian

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

Hello from France

Another good starting point is Henri Gaud's lens list posted in 2012 to the French MF+LF photography forum
http://www.galerie-photo.org/n3-f2,138284.html

Nothing less than 764 lenses are listed from a 16 mm Zeiss Luminar to a 2400 mm Boyer Apo Saphir.

A typical entry in the list reads as follows

Schneider Angulon 90 mm F/6,8 F/45 CI 158 mm AC 81° 130 gr Format couvert entre : 6x8 cm & 4x5 inch

manufacturer / lens name / focal length / min aperture / image circle = CI at 1:10 magnification ratio / field angle = AC / weight / covered format (= format couvert ) at 1/10 magnification ratio

[Randy]

Thanks all. I guess the best place to start is with the links you have provided...and my own meager lens collection, and expand from there.

[StoneNYC]

Hello from France

Another good starting point is Henri Gaud's lens list posted in 2012 to the French MF+LF photography forum
http://www.galerie-photo.org/n3-f2,138284.html

Nothing less than 764 lenses are listed from a 16 mm Zeiss Luminar to a 2400 mm Boyer Apo Saphir.

A typical entry in the list reads as follows

Schneider Angulon 90 mm F/6,8 F/45 CI 158 mm AC 81° 130 gr Format couvert entre : 6x8 cm & 4x5 inch

manufacturer / lens name / focal length / min aperture / image circle = CI at 1:10 magnification ratio / field angle = AC / weight / covered format (= format couvert ) at 1/10 magnification ratio

Wow this list was great! I didn't even know there was a Nikkor 420 M lens! Crazy.

I was able to convert this to a spreadsheet for easy navigation (did it on my iPhone) this is excellent.

Thanks!

[Louis Pacilla]

Wow this list was great! I didn't even know there was a Nikkor 420 M lens! Crazy.



This must be a typo. No way they made both a 450M & 420M. Never happened.

[StoneNYC]

This must be a typo. No way they made both a 450M & 420M. Never happened.

I thought so too, but I think I've seen one, it might be a process lens that just happens to have the same letter designation.

[Dan Fromm]

Oh. Henri's list. Oh. Henri is a fine photographer, an adventurous publisher and one of the French LF forum's stalwarts.

His list contains errors that I haven't been able to get him to correct. Some of them have to do with coverage. For at least some lenses in a family, such as, let's say, Apo-Saphirs, he somehow obtained coverage degrees for one focal length and used that to calculate coverage in mm for all focal lengths offered. For lenses longer than the one he started from this can give larger coverage than the manufacturer claims.

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

Hi all!

I made a mistake regarding Henri Gaud's lens list,
http://www.galerie-photo.org/n3-f2,138284.html
Henri G. uses a magnification ratio of 1:30, not 1:10 like I quoted from memory.

This is specified in the same archived discussion here
Re: Liste optique MàJ 0105212 Envoyé par: Henri Gaud Date: 02/05/2012, 10:42
"Le calcul de base n'est pas fait à l'infini mais au rapport 1/30, l'infini étant peu utilisé en grand format, et en introduisant une tolérance de 7% (déduction pratique de terrain). "

i.e.
"Calculation for the image circle is not done for infinity, but for a magnification ratio of 1/30 ; true infinity is seldom used in large format [comment by EB : true for Saint Ansel Adams, but plain wrong for Saint Richard Avedon ;)] and a tolerance of 7% is introduced (a value derived from practical tests in the field)"


The estimated variation of the image circle IC vs. the magification ratio M is:
IC(M) = IC(infinity) x (1+M)
I have no idea of the actual "fudge factor "used by Henri Gaud for the image circle ;-) +10% vs infinity ?

Like for tripod max load, there is no ISO standard for defining what is the image circle of a large format lens.
For Rodenstock Apo Ronars, from official specs, the listed IC diameter clearly corresponds to the limit of the peripheral image field where the MTF contrast falls below about a few %. There is still a visible image beyond that, but considered by the manufacturer and its customers as unacceptable for a high-performance repro lens.

A few years ago, Schneider-Kreuznach for its brand-new line of digital view camera lenses, specified a "variable" image circle diameter, according to the sharpness criteria required by the customer.
This was quite puzzling, since we all believed in an absolute value for the image circle listed by the same manufacturer for its "film" view camera lenses!!!

And for aficionados of Petzval lenses, it would be quite difficult to choose between the diameter of a "central" sharp image (which is very narrow for a Petzval lens) and the diameter of a full non-vignetted image (much larger, but with fuzzy swirling effects due to massive astigmatism).

Unlike modern lenses, delivering a sharp image up to the very edge of the illuminated image circle, many old lenses have a large "fuzziness transition zone" between the center and the limits of the illuminated circle.

And regarding Boyer lenses, the best is to read our specialists,
"Optiques Boyer: A short history of the company with an incomplete catalog of its lenses.
Dan Fromm (USA) & Eric Beltrando (France)"
http://www.galerie-photo.com/boyer-lens-optic.html

(sotto voce:
Same that we have Schmieder's BWV reference, Bach-Werke-Verzienchnis, for JS Bach's works, we now have Dan & Eric's Boyer Werke Verzeichnis, DEBWV.
Probably Dan regrets every day not to be French, but this is another story ;) )

[Dan Fromm]

A few years ago, Schneider-Kreuznach for its brand-new line of digital view camera lenses, specified a "variable" image circle diameter, according to the sharpness criteria required by the customer.
This was quite puzzling, since we all believed in an absolute value for the image circle listed by the same manufacturer for its "film" view camera lenses!!!

That belief is as reasonable as our belief that there's a fixed value for depth of field. It all depends on how much the negative is to be enlarged.


(sotto voce: <snip> Probably Dan regrets every day not to be French, but this is another story ;) )

Well, when I received my draft notice I had an opportunity to run away to Canada -- "a teaching job will be found for you" -- and chose not to take it. I didn't have an opportunity to run away to France back then. But I recognize that there's much to be said for being French.

[Alessandro]

Here you go :)

http://www.allenrumme.com/lensdb/DBIntro-1.html