Wollensak Series III Wide Angle

[wfwhitaker]

The 159mm Wollensak Series III Wide Angle Velostigmat came in two versions of which I'm aware: the f/9.5 and the f/12.5. Can anyone tell me of any significant difference between the two lenses (other than the obvious difference of speed). A search of this site has not yielded an answer.

[John Kasaian]

Will,

The f/9.5 is usually labeled "WA" (Wide Angle)and the f/12.5 "EWA"(Extreme Wide Angle) because the f/12,5 has a slightly larger image circle to work with. IMHO a coated example is preferred over an uncoated one. My f/9.5 "WA" yellow dot version is a peach!

[Clayton Tume]

John

have you made an enlargement with your f9.5?

I ask because I bought a late coated version of one of these and yesterday had my first shot at exposing some film with it. I had the glass cleaned and shutter lubed to make sure it was working at its optimum. First impression of the neg is plenty of cover but not as sharp as I was expecting. I would say it would be adequate as a contact print but an enlargement would quickly show up its deficiencies.

Now I'm wondering if these lenses were only intended to make contact prints?

Or maybe the f12.5 is sharper?

Or I got a bad one?

cheers

Clayton

[John Kasaian]

Clayton,

I find the coating helps a lot, but even the more modern 159mm Wollys IMHO, won't perform like an SA, especially when it comes to enlarging. Whether this is due to the formula or because of my specific example I can't say since my experience with WAs and EWAs is pathetically limited. Quite honestly, I don't know how to evaluate lenses other than by my own satisfaction with one. If anyone who can test lenses(like Kerry or Chris) needs a coated 9.5 to test against a sampleing of 12.5s and other 9.5s I'd be happy to loan them my example for the cause.

Cheers!

[fishfish]

To answer Clayton's question about enlarging images made with the f/9.5 lens, I have taken several 8x10 negatives produced with that lens up to 16x20 (ok, so it is only a 2x enlargement, but it still counts as enlarged!) and they are still very sharp.



As to the difference between the f/9.5 and the f/12.5, all I could come up with was that the f/9.5 lenses were possibly the later model, and avaliable coated (my version was).



Hope this helps

[Brian Ellis]

The 12.5 has a larger image circle than the 9.5, sorry but I don't remember the exact numbers. I've owned two of the uncoated 9.5s, both were excellent wide angle lenses for 8x10. I don't think the 9.5 is necessarily newer than the 12.5, I believe both were offered simultaneously at least for some period of time. The 9.5 was the more expensive of the two. Both lenses have been discussed quite a bit here since they're one of the very few small, inexpensive wide angle lenses that will cover 8x10 with room for movments. I paid about $200 for one of mine and $300 for the other.

[Mark Sawyer]

I own an early uncoated f/12.5, and my experience is identical to Clayton's with the later f/9.5. Beautiful contact prints, then I got an 8x10 enlarger and found the negativews didn't hold up well. Ignorance was bliss...

Still a great lens for contact printing, which is what I do 90% of the time, but I have this great fear now that I'll use it to shoot something that just needs to be 16x20. I took a chance and blew $25 on a newer coated f/12.5 in a bad shutter; it's in transit now. We'll see...

[Richard Årlin]

Just got a 12,5 108mm (5x7) incredibly tiny. Expect to use it on a 4x5 camera filling the gap between a 75mm f.5,6 SA and a 5,6 Apo Symmar without adding weight. Hopefully you can enlarge it x2

[Richard Årlin]

a 150mm that is

[Mike Phifer]

John is correct. I have an old reference that has the 12.5 Extreme Wide Angle covering 95 degrees. The Velostigmat series 3 at f9.5 covering 90 degrees. There also was a 1a at 6.3 that was convertible and covered 63 degrees, a process at f10 covered 50 degrees, a 4.5 series2 that covers 53 degrees. My guess is the basic lens design of the wide angles are similar to the Zeiss Protar's. However, this is just a guess.

[Ernest Purdum]

Mike,

The f9.5 has eight elements in groups of two elements each. It has eight air to glass surfaces, so coating is particularly helpful. At the time it was introduced it was considered unusually fast for a wide angle.

In 1922, the f12.5 was referred to in Wollensak's catalog as the "new Series IIIa". It figures that it would be a later design than the f9.5, since it has the same series number with a letter after it. I am quite sure that I have seen a diagram of this lens showing four individual elements, but I can't put my finger on it now.

Like the Protar series VII, the Wollensak Series 1a Convertible has four elements, all cemented, in each cell.

Like so many other process types, the f10 apochromatic is a dialyte, type, four individual elements.

References regarding coverage of the f9.5 and f12.5 are mostly ambiguous if not downright confusing. You'll see figures that don't mean what the lens is capable of, just what angle is used in covering the rated plate size at infinity. You'll also see listings of the f9.5 only at full aperture and the f12.5 both at full aperture and at a small opening.

Wollensak seems to have gone back and forth regarding whether one or both the f9.5 and the f12.5 would be in production, if only one, which, and in what focal lengths. The 8X10 lenses seem to be much more common than the other sizes. Richard, I think you are fortunate in finding your 108mm.

[Richard Årlin]

Speaking of the IIIa 159mm I am also fortunate to have aquired a 158mm Cooke wa anastigmat f.6,5 series VIIb in a syncro compur shutter (8x10) and a 133mm f.6.3 (sic) in barrel (5x7). Lovley little lenses

[Mark Sawyer]

Richard- how does the 158mm Cooke compare with the 159mm Wollensak in terms of sharpness, sharpness at the corners and coverage?

Also, where do you live, when will you be out of the house, and do you leave a window unlocked? ; )

[Richard Årlin]

The Cooke Wideangle anastigmat series VIIb seems to be universally aclaimed, there's a lot of information on it, here and in the f.32 site. Cooke is planning to make a series VIIc as well as the 2 convertibles and the portrait lens. It was made in a lot of different lenghts 82mm thru 222mm.

[M. J. Rossano]

Richard - Do you know whether the barrel-mounted Cooke VIIb lens cells fit any standard shutter sizes? Also, have you actually received an affirmation that Cooke will be putting the VIIc into production? I know that they've gotten a some requests for this lens, but haven't heard yea or nay for sure.

[Richard Årlin]

Mine was fitted to a synchro compur, much to the astonishment of people interested in this particular lens since the cells are very closely spaced. The one who made it had to machine custom parts etc but it is perfect. I made a sinar board packard shutter behind the lens adaptor for the 133mm. I only payed £38 or something for that lens. Barbara at the Cooke has more or less promised it will be made after the new 4x5 convertible. I want the VIIc 82mm. I will gladly part with a 75 and a 90mm Super Angulon to get it.

[Chad Jarvis]

My old f/9.5 was labeled 6-1/4" Extreme Wide Angle Velostigmat Series III. I don't think the WA vs. EWA rule can necessarily be trusted. Mine was uncoated in a #3 Betax.

There must 100 different variations of these lenses, and in my opinion much of the discussion is academic. They're just sweet little lenses that are so small (the lens itself is about the size of a quarter), even in a shutter they'll fit in your pocket. Pain in the ass to focus, though.

[Richard Årlin]

there is one ex.wa 108mm at ebay now http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7511280974&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

[uphereinmytree]

what size lens caps should I find for the series III? (barrel measures 47.5mm) any ideas what the original caps looked like?

[Fr. Mark]

I was recently given one of these lenses with a front lens cap. The cap feels like heavy gauge steel, enameled with “Wollensak” engraved onto the front slightly italic. The cap is black felt lined. The shutter is a Rapax and works reasonably well, though I don’t have shutter tester. I was surprised to find it covers the ground glass on my recently restored 8x10 Carlton by the Rochester Optical company. I built a bellows and fabricated some brass parts, and had only tried it with some meniscus/close-up lenses. Compared to those, this is way sharper! I’m going to mount the lens onto a home built lens board and it’s going to live in the “go places” 8x10 kit. Mine is a f12.5 6.25”/159mm Velostigmat Extreme Wide Angle No. 520865