PDA

View Full Version : Turner-Reich modifications?



ridax
28-Nov-2017, 16:11
I've browsed the web for Gundlach Turner-Reich convertible anastigmats and found what seemed to be two different types of those. Both were 12" in focal length but one was composed of 17" and 25" halves, and the other, of 21" and 28" halves. If the optical systems of both were identical the 21" + 28" combination should be longer in focus then the 17" + 25"....

I did not find any data on this lens modifications. Could anybody please clarify the difference between those?

Thanks.

Dan Fromm
28-Nov-2017, 17:09
ridax, please post your source for a 12" T-R triple convertible with 17" and 25" cells.

I asked because your question prompted me to look in all of the catalogs behind http://www.piercevaubel.com/cam/catalogsgundman.htm. In all of them the 12" T-R triple convertible Ser. II has 21" and 28" cells and no 17" or 25" cells are mentioned in the tables for the T-R Ser. II.

ridax
28-Nov-2017, 17:37
I've just realized the shorter half was not 17" but 19.7" (500.4mm).... but it's still not 21". And the longer half is marked 25" (635mm), not 28".

This is the one I've actually bought (it hasn't come to my place yet, though):

https://www.ebay.com/itm/122797673716

And another 12", reported to be composed of 19.7" and 25" halves, is shown here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/zanes-photography/5776286795/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/zanes-photography/5776829748/

The serial numbers are pretty close BTW.

Dan Fromm
28-Nov-2017, 18:10
Thanks for the links. The first is to an f/7.0 lens. The catalogs I looked in showed f/7.5ers first (1900-1903), then f/6.8 1906 (or earlier, Pierce Vaubel doesn't have '04 or '05) through 1932. In all years, 12" = 21" + 28".

Your new treasure may be later. I have no idea how much later.

pjd
28-Nov-2017, 18:57
I've got one of those 19/25 convertible Turner Reich lenses. Don't think 21/28 inch cells fit in that shutter, so be careful if you buy more TR cells to make up a convertible set. On the other hand, my Zeiss D set of Protar VII cells (48/41/35/28cm) does fit that 19/25 shutter (cells with a 57mm slip on diameter).

Mark Sampson
28-Nov-2017, 20:07
Hmmm, Makes me wonder when Gundlach stopped making lenses- probably pre-WW2. Did they go under in the Depression or were they swallowed up by another company?

David Lindquist
28-Nov-2017, 22:27
Hmmm, Makes me wonder when Gundlach stopped making lenses- probably pre-WW2. Did they go under in the Depression or were they swallowed up by another company?

I have a 1950 Popular Photography buying guide that shows a number of Gundlach large format lenses including the Turner Reich.
David

ridax
29-Nov-2017, 01:03
Thanks for all the answers.

I'm mostly interested in using the single elements of this lens, and a 28" would be more attractive to me then a 25". But the f/6.8 combinations of 21" and 28" cells are only offered now on e-bay (BIN) for more then twice the bid I've won the 19.7" + 25" for, so I started from the cheaper end.

I'll soon be able to compare their performance to that of my Protar VII cells but still I'll have no clue if my 19.7" and 25" are equal in image quality or better or worse then the 21" and 28" Turner-Reichs, and if I'd better look for those or forget them.... Does anybody by any chance have any experience with both the Turner-Reich versions?

Corran
29-Nov-2017, 09:00
I wouldn't expect much from the single elements. I had a 12" TR triple (of the 21/28 type) and both the single elements were pretty bad, even stopped way down. I sold that lens for like $100 here on the classifieds a few years ago.

David Lindquist
29-Nov-2017, 09:07
To expand on my previous post, this 1950 Pop. Photo. buying guide lists the Gundlach Turner-Reich as available in six focal lengths, from 5 to 15 inches. They are described as coated and "highly corrected for color." The 12 inch lens is made up of a 28 and a 21 inch component. The next buying guide in my collection is 1956, Gundlach is not listed there.
David

EdWorkman
29-Nov-2017, 10:00
Did anyone do the math?
I get, from the reciprocal of the sum of reciprocals of 19.7 and 25, not 12 but 11", and 12" for 21+28
Well it's not math but arithmetic, and I'm old , so please verify

ridax
29-Nov-2017, 10:18
I wouldn't expect much from the single elements. I had a 12" TR triple (of the 21/28 type), and both the single elements were pretty bad, even stopped way down.

Thank you. So those aren't on par with ser.VII Protars.... that makes the TR's of little interest to me, and the only possible alternative is perhaps a Wollensak Ia (bought one also but again haven't got it yet).

In fact, I was very sceptical about any single elements of any convertibles for years (having tried half-Dagors, Convertible Symmars and Sironars, etc., etc.). But the VII Protar was reported in this forum to be way better so I purchased it, and I really liked it. Wollensak Ia was said to be about as good (except in coverage) - I'll verify that with my own eyes soon.... But I am told different things on the T-R, including that it suffered from a lot of sample-to-sample variations. If it did, I guess my question about the version-to-version difference in just pointless.

And BTW there also is an older 8/4 Wollensak I (aka Royal Anastigmat) on the 'bay now. Any advice if its singe cells are worth trying?

ridax
29-Nov-2017, 10:25
Did anyone do the math? I get, from the reciprocal of the sum of reciprocals of 19.7 and 25, not 12 but 11", and 12" for 21+28. Well it's not math but arithmetic, and I'm old , so please verify

That formula is only an approximation. One can get different focal length combinations from the same single cells by changing the distance between those cells. What would the image quality be, is another question....