PDA

View Full Version : How about the Rodenstock Geronar WA 90mm/F8 lens ?



captli7
17-Dec-2017, 19:29
I've a the lens above mentioned, but I really don't know how it's performance ? 6 elements with 4 group made?
welcom some experienced photographer advances.

xkaes
18-Dec-2017, 07:04
This lens is a single-coated, four element in four group design. Rodenstock states that it has two "working" apertures -- f16 & f22. Wider than that it will not cover 4x5, but at any f-stop the resolution drops quickly towards the edges. At least it's small, light, and inexpensive.

Greg
18-Dec-2017, 07:21
A used f/8 90mm Nikkor, Super Angulon, or Fujinon will way out perform a Geronar WA and they can be had now for bargain prices. Rodenstock in their literature markets this lens for "students and beginning photographers" which should clue you off to its capabilities.

Pere Casals
18-Dec-2017, 08:48
This lens is a single-coated, four element in four group design.

IMHO the WA f/8 series are Multicoated 6 element in 4 groups, IIRC... isn't it a double Gauss ?

Image circle is 170mm, while 4x5 requires some 154mm, so allowing some movements.

Not a bad performer, here (http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html) Mr Perez measured a very acceptable performance for the 150mm version in that practical test, so not a bad product in general.

The 150mm:

f/11 60 38 24
f/16 76 48 34
f/22 48 54 48

That particular sample showed some weakness in the corners under f/22, but also showed excellent center shapness at f/16, still this is not a lab test, and each sample is different.

It is Copal 1, if it was Copal 0 it would be even more compact.

Dan Fromm
18-Dec-2017, 09:10
Papi, if this list https://www.graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html is correct the 150/6.3 Geronar is a triplet and the 90/8 Geronar is a 4/4 double Gauss. You can't reason from one to the other.

xkaes
18-Dec-2017, 09:20
I've got the Rodenstock literature -- the three plain Geronars are triplets and the WA Geronar is a 4 element optic. All are Copal #1 except the 150mm which is #0. They were all designed to be inexpensive. Rodenstock calls them "budget-minded" and producing "good" results so, of course, they are not multi-coated.

Pere Casals
18-Dec-2017, 10:52
Papi, if this list https://www.graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html is correct the 150/6.3 Geronar is a triplet and the 90/8 Geronar is a 4/4 double Gauss. You can't reason from one to the other.

Dan, yes, you are right, if the lens in the C.Perez list is a 150mm plain triplet then the 90 WA pointed by OP should be a better lens than that triplet.

The right test is here, page 6 http://www.arnecroell.com/lenstests.pdf

MTF performance is measured for just the Geronar WA 90mm f/8. And it shows a good performance, in the same page we have MTF data for other reputed lenses to compare.

Tests made by Arne Cröll, http://www.arnecroell.com/

Still we should remember that this is not high technology lab test and always there is the sample to sample variation... of course...




I've got the Rodenstock literature -- the three plain Geronars are triplets and the WA Geronar is a 4 element optic. All are Copal #1 except the 150mm which is #0. They were all designed to be inexpensive. Rodenstock calls them "budget-minded" and producing "good" results so, of course, they are not multi-coated.

Yes, here also says 4/4 for WA 90, page 6: http://www.arnecroell.com/lenstests.pdf

But it says Multicoated, for a 1984 WA 90mm sample, serial 1058XXXX.

What I was not understanding is it was Double-Gauss with 4/4 instead six elements, some sources around (that should be wrong) cite 6 elements...

Dan Fromm
18-Dec-2017, 10:57
Papi, there are many 4/4 double Gauss wide angle lenses. ( ( | ) ), where | stands for the diaphragm.

xkaes
18-Dec-2017, 11:13
But it says Multicoated, for a 1984 sample, serial 1058XXXX.

I'll believe that when I see some actual documentation from Rodenstock. Their official literature from 1984 -- not the linked creation -- does not say that it is multi-coated. More importantly, that's illogical. They state it is a budget, intro, student lens. That means they cut every corner they could. The first thing to go would be multi-coating -- just like all the other budget lens lines from other manufacturers, ex. Minolta's Rokkor vs Celtic lines.

Pere Casals
18-Dec-2017, 12:13
I'll believe that when I see some actual documentation from Rodenstock. Their official literature from 1984 -- not the linked creation -- does not say that it is multi-coated. More importantly, that's illogical. They state it is a budget, intro, student lens. That means they cut every corner they could. The first thing to go would be multi-coating -- just like all the other budget lens lines from other manufacturers, ex. Minolta's Rokkor vs Celtic lines.

hmmm... there are a lot of Geronars around showing "MC" stamped.

172955

172956

Jac@stafford.net
18-Dec-2017, 12:53
It is difficult to find a Geronar that is not MC.
Let's not confuse Xkaes with facts.

Pere Casals
18-Dec-2017, 13:29
Papi, there are many 4/4 double Gauss wide angle lenses. ( ( | ) ), where | stands for the diaphragm.

Yes Dan, I was a bit confused by the 35mm doble Gauss usual designs, that includes the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 I have, of the around 78 significative D-Gauss designs for small formats since 1936 to 2010 none is 4/4, and only 3 (I think)are 5 elements, the rest being 6 or more. It is clear that this rule does not stand for LF.

These are those designs:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/DoubleGauss2text.svg/594px-DoubleGauss2text.svg.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/da/DoubleGauss3text.svg/602px-DoubleGauss3text.svg.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/DoubleGauss4text.svg/592px-DoubleGauss4text.svg.png

Jac@stafford.net
18-Dec-2017, 14:11
Pere: Solid Gold info. Thank you!

Dan Fromm
18-Dec-2017, 15:08
Papi, 6/4 and more complex double Gauss types derive from Rudolph's original symmetrical f/3.6 (and slower) Planar of 1896 through H. W. Lee's asymmetrical f/2 Opic (for TTH) of 1920. There weren't many for large format. Dallmeyer's f/1.9 (f/2 at 200 mm/8 inches) Super Six comes to mind. So does the extremely rare 200/2.0 S.F.O.M, made for an aerial camera that shot 4.5" x 4.5" on 5" roll film. All relatively narrow angle lenses, typically 50 degrees. FWIW, I've and a 6"/1.9 Super Six and a 200/2.0 S.F.O.M. Great heavy monstrosities, as those little lenses for 35 mm would be if scaled up to cover 4x5, and very difficult to put to use. My 4"/2.0 TTH Anastigmat, an updated Opic, is good for 2x3 but that's not LF.

Slow (typically f/6.3 and slower) 4/4 double Gauss types are wide angle lenses, cover 80 to around 100 degrees depending on design and manufacturer's intentions. Examples include EKCo's WF Ektars, Wollesak's f/6.8 w/a Raptars, TTH's Ser. VIIb Eistal, some, possibly all, of Meyer's Aristostigmats, ...

The cross-sections you posted are all for small and tiny format lenses, have no relevance to LF photography.

JAC, seeing those cross-sections didn't improve my life. How did seeing them improve yours?

Jac@stafford.net
18-Dec-2017, 15:19
JAC, seeing those cross-sections didn't improve my life. How did seeing them improve yours?

I am easily amused, Dan. :) Lens profiles have nothing to do with the quality of my life. For me, the pictures matter regardless of the optics.

Peace, Dan

Dan Fromm
18-Dec-2017, 15:36
Lens profiles have nothing to do with the quality of my life. For me, the pictures matter regardless of the optics.

Exactly.

Jac@stafford.net
18-Dec-2017, 16:25
Exactly.

Thank you, Dan.

My aesthetic comes from from naturally defective vision. Surprise? Simple compositions which can be taken in all at once, then reconsidered are all I can do. I'm not quite blind. :) Yet.

Samples available.

Pere Casals
18-Dec-2017, 18:05
JAC, seeing those cross-sections didn't improve my life. How did seeing them improve yours?


Lens profiles have nothing to do with the quality of my life.

For sure...

But those profiles bring on an interesting reflexion:

King pictorial lens designs (and derivatives) of the XX century have been the D-Gauss for 35mm and Plasmat (also invented by Rudolph, from Dagor concept....) for LF, taking absolute prominence specially since anti-reflective coating was comercially feasible, allowing 8+ air-glass surfaces and still controlling flare.

Those cross sections just illustrate the titanic industrial effort made to improve performance or product competitivity in the market, and how complex was the thing. Sure that a proficient lens designer would appreciate the beauty of some designs by wondering why design evolved in a particular direction, or recognizing sound innovations that still rule how lenses are designed today.

For 35mm it is no problem that elements are larger than image circle, but this is way different for LF, so D-Gauss and Plasmat are the best industrial solution for each of the situations...

So we have that Rudolph shaped both D-Gauss and Plasmat... in the case of D-Gauss improving Alvar and B&L designs, in the case of Plasmat improving Dagor

It should also be noted that the single Gauss lens solution was achieved by one of the best minds in the XIX century, Mr Gauss, only a man like that could saw such a solution in that times.

IMHO it is nice to sometimes remember what innovation effort made that people...

captli7
18-Dec-2017, 18:10
It's multi coated.

captli7
18-Dec-2017, 18:14
at this page how to add photo?

Jac@stafford.net
18-Dec-2017, 18:31
[...] Those cross sections just illustrate the titanic industrial effort made to improve performance or product competitivity in the market, and how complex was the thing. Sure that a proficient lens designer would appreciate the beauty of some designs by wondering why design evolved in a particular direction, or recognizing sound innovations that still rule how lenses are designed today. [... snip excellent, helpful historical view.]

Thanks for the insight. It is difficult to understand the depth of lens design without such help.
.

xkaes
18-Dec-2017, 18:33
I'll believe that when I see some actual documentation from Rodenstock.

I'll wait for some genuine Rodenstock literature -- which one would think should be very easy to provide. In Rodenstock's literature that I have, it states about the Geronar lenses:

"If a lens is to be budget-priced, savings have to be made somewhere."

Since there is no legal definition of "multi-coating", it's easy for any manufacturer to call their single coated lenses "multi-coated". Minolta could have done it with their Celtic line since some elements of the same lens had a single amber coating and others a single magenta coating. More than one coating of different colors. Minolta could have done it with their Rokkor-X line since some elements of the same lens had more than one layer and others just a single layer. Minolta clearly stated in their literature, unlike most, that their lens elements only had multiple layers where it was beneficial. Minolta avoided the entire issue by calling what they did Minolta Achromatic coating, instead of "multi-coating". Vivitar (AKA, in many cases, Kiron) went in the opposite direction and created VMC (Vivitar Multi-Coating) lenses that can appear to have 48 different colors in the same lens -- just to impress prospective buyers, I guess. Contax/Zeiss took another direction by claiming their lenses had superior T* multi-coating. Reality is a lot different. Despite the sales pitch for many of their high-priced lenses -- many of which were made by Tomioka in Japan -- not all elements were multi-coated. Just look at a Contax 500mm f8 CAT and compare it to a Yashica 500mm f8 CAT. They were both made in the same Tomioka optical factory in Japan. It's immediately obvious that the Yashica version is multi-coated. The Contax version -- different optical design -- appears single coated. All Contax needed to justify the T* label was to have one side of one element "multi-coated", whatever that means.

So a "multi-coated" Geronar can mean just about anything under the sun. Rodenstock states up front that "savings have to be made somewhere." And we know it's not the shutter. If you think that the coating on a Geronar is the same as on a Sironar, I've got a Contax Zeiss 500mm f8 Mirotar I'd like to sell you.

172963

Bob Salomon
18-Dec-2017, 19:05
I'll wait for some genuine Rodenstock literature -- which one would think should be very easy to provide. In Rodenstock's literature that I have, it states about the Geronar lenses:

"If a lens is to be budget-priced, savings have to be made somewhere."

Since there is no legal definition of "multi-coating", it's easy for any manufacturer to call their single coated lenses "multi-coated". Minolta could have done it with their Celtic line since some elements of the same lens had a single amber coating and others a single magenta coating. More than one coating of different colors. Minolta could have done it with their Rokkor-X line since some elements of the same lens had more than one layer and others just a single layer. Minolta clearly stated in their literature, unlike most, that their lens elements only had multiple layers where it was beneficial. Minolta avoided the entire issue by calling what they did Minolta Achromatic coating, instead of "multi-coating". Vivitar (AKA, in many cases, Kiron) went in the opposite direction and created VMC (Vivitar Multi-Coating) lenses that can appear to have 48 different colors in the same lens -- just to impress prospective buyers, I guess. Contax/Zeiss took another direction by claiming their lenses had superior T* multi-coating. Reality is a lot different. Despite the sales pitch for many of their high-priced lenses -- many of which were made by Tomioka in Japan -- not all elements were multi-coated. Just look at a Contax 500mm f8 CAT and compare it to a Yashica 500mm f8 CAT. They were both made in the same Tomioka optical factory in Japan. It's immediately obvious that the Yashica version is multi-coated. The Contax version -- different optical design -- appears single coated. All Contax needed to justify the T* label was to have one side of one element "multi-coated", whatever that means.

So a "multi-coated" Geronar can mean just about anything under the sun. Rodenstock states up front that "savings have to be made somewhere." And we know it's not the shutter. If you think that the coating on a Geronar is the same as on a Sironar, I've got a Contax Zeiss 500mm f8 Mirotar I'd like to sell you.

172963
If Rodenstock states in their literature or on their web site that something is then it had better be so! German law is quite sensitive about false claims.
Regardless of your feelings and thoughts. These lenses meet every photographic definition of multi coating!
While these lenses have been out of production for several years the Rodenstock printed literature from when they were current defiantly show them to be MC coated lenses. Just go looking for one of their lens brochures from the mid 80s.

BTW, the reason that they were discontinued was that the cost to manufacture them approached the manufacturing costs of the higher end Rodenstock lenses. So cost savings at manufactured costs were negligible during their later production. And major lans manufacturers like Rodenstock have very sophisticated and automated procedures and production for their cells. Not MC the lens compared to MC is not an issue compared to R&D, molds, tools, production, etc. more of an issue would be the glass types and number of elements and glass size.

Jody_S
18-Dec-2017, 22:45
Rodenstock was producing thousands upon thousands of LF and process lenses at the time, I don't imagine it was a significant cost factor to leave the elements in the vacuum coating chamber with a bunch of other elements and give them the same treatment. On the other hand, I heard somewhere that the real difficulty with a double-gauss 4/4 lens is with alignment, so perhaps this is why their 'budget' lens ended up costing nearly the same as their higher-priced 'prime' products, at least before the advent of CNC machining and computerized testing.


Edit: overnight I realized I confused geronar with gerogon.

Bob Salomon
18-Dec-2017, 22:55
Rodenstock was producing thousands upon thousands of LF and process lenses at the time, I don't imagine it was a significant cost factor to leave the elements in the vacuum coating chamber with a bunch of other elements and give them the same treatment. On the other hand, I heard somewhere that the real difficulty with a double-gauss 4/4 lens is with alignment, so perhaps this is why their 'budget' lens ended up costing nearly the same as their higher-priced 'prime' products, at least before the advent of CNC machining and computerized testing.


I do own a 240mm Geronar in barrel that I purchased for something like $30 8 or 10 years ago, I tried using it for night photography of urban scenes but I got some rather strangely-shaped internal reflections from strong lights (looked like a cone from a black hole viewed from the side and slightly above). It was different from any flare I've ever seen with any lens, period, and I've always wanted to use that 'flaw' creatively if I could come up with a suitable concept.
The real culprit was sales volume. They were making more abundantly more Apo Sironar N and S lenses as well as Grandagon lenses and fewer and fewer Geronar and Geronar WA lenses. So the Geronar costs began to compete with the higher end lenses.

Bernice Loui
19-Dec-2017, 00:21
There is little reason for optics manufactures like Rodenstock to NOT multi coat their lens offerings due to the sheer volume of optics produces and production line equipment required. Essentially, they are set up for high volume multi coating. Any variations to this would cause optics production significant grief.

Pop Foto story about the intro of the Rodenstock Geronar at PMA 1982, offered as a value performance LF optic, multi coated. There would be no good reason for Rodenstock to offer the 90mm WA without muti coating.

https://books.google.com/books?id=qiCBviGKHuEC&pg=RA7-PA8&lpg=RA7-PA8&dq=rodenstock+large+format+lenses&source=bl&ots=aO1hlV6Q_L&sig=j_KRXD6JKqXYGuQd_UehGk6DyUE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYrofZwpXYAhUL5IMKHagVB2k4RhDoAQgoMAE#v=onepage&q=rodenstock%20large%20format%20lenses&f=false


Awful lot of words spent over much of nothing. IMO, there is little wrong optical performance wise with the Geronar 90mm WA. as with any optic design, it is a done to a set of trade offs. One could "crow" over how the 90mm f6.8 or f4.5 Grandagon and similar lenses are "superior" to the Geronar 90mm WA, reality is the Grandagon bigger, heavier, bulkier then the Geronar. Yes, there are differences in image circle and etc, but in real world image making, Both and other similar WA optics are quite capable of producing expressive images.


Bernice

Pere Casals
19-Dec-2017, 03:55
the depth of lens design.

I wonder how designer productivity evolved also in this industry. In the begining of XIX century one of bests mathematicians in human history was required to invent the single Gauss, decades later a great masterly optician like Rudolph could think those impressive industrial designs, with impressive hard effort, and today a well trained technician can use any computer to design incredible gear with mouse clicks and ajusting some parameters to see how it works...

I bit I compare it with electronic design, today a team of electronic designers make wonders that some time ago were science fiction...

Pere Casals
19-Dec-2017, 04:15
The real culprit was sales volume. They were making more abundantly more Apo Sironar N and S lenses as well as Grandagon lenses and fewer and fewer Geronar and Geronar WA lenses. So the Geronar costs began to compete with the higher end lenses.

Perhaps Geronars found the used lens market was a too strong competitor, sure that most APO Sironar buyers sold a very good used lens. At the end a Geronar saves 2 elemets and two cementing operations, but a shutter has to be also included, so if sales were not high then the fixed costs alone of having a product in the catalog could be decisive, beyond production economy of scale.

What I say is that while Geronar could be a sound market segmentation initiative, perhaps it could not reach success because obsolescence in the high end product segment provocated offerings of a lot of very good used gear to the low end market... just a guess.

Still I find a Geronar is an absolutely capable lens, if we need what it does, and this is a lot.

Dan Fromm
19-Dec-2017, 05:44
Papi, the OP asked about the 90/8 Wide Angle Geronar, not the longer triplets. Stick to the subject.

xkaes
19-Dec-2017, 07:48
While these lenses have been out of production for several years the Rodenstock printed literature from when they were current defiantly show them to be MC coated lenses. Just go looking for one of their lens brochures from the mid 80s.

For some odd reason, no one seems to be able to produce any "Rodenstock printed literature" to prove multi-coating. I've got the 1984, over-sized, color, 24-page Rodenstock large format camera lens catalog which includes the four Geronars. No where does it mention multi-coating for these lenses, but it does say that "savings had to be made somewhere".

And the notion that it, somehow, would not cost more money to give the same coating to all lenses doesn't fly too well. Minolta, for example, decided not to put their Achromatic (multi) coating on any of their numerous Celtic lenses -- which optically and mechanically were exactly the same as their Rokkor-X brothers. They obviously did it to save money -- even though the lens elements were all made on the same production line.

Perhaps Rodenstock multicoated -- whatever that means -- all of their Geronars. But an "MC" mark can mean a lot of different things. "Marginal Coating"? "Minimal Coating"? I would think that Rodenstock, if they went to the trouble of multi-coating their budget lenses, would want potential buyers to know that, and shout it from the rafters. So where is the evidence? It's not in my Rodenstock material.

Bob Salomon
19-Dec-2017, 07:50
For some odd reason, no one seems to be able to produce any "Rodenstock printed literature" to prove multi-coating. I've got the over-sized, color, 24-page Rodenstock large format camera lens catalog which includes the four Geronars. No where does it mention multi-coating for these lenses, but it does say that "savings had to be made somewhere".

And the notion that it, somehow, would not cost more money to give the same coating to all lenses doesn't fly too well. Minolta, for example, decided not to put their Achromatic (multi) coating" on any of their numerous Celtic lenses -- which optically and mechanically were exactly the same as their Rokko-X brothers. They obviously did it to save money.

Perhaps Rodenstock multicoated -- whatever that means -- all of their Geronars. But an "MC" mark can mean a lot of different things. I would think that Rodenstock, if they went to the trouble of multi-coating their budget lenses, would want potential buyers to know that, and shout it from the rafters. So where is the evidence? It's not in my Rodenstock material.

MC on any Rodenstock lens signifies multi coating.

xkaes
19-Dec-2017, 07:52
Show proof.

Bob Salomon
19-Dec-2017, 07:54
Show proof.

I was the Rodenstock Product and Sales Manager in the USA from 1986 till 2015. You find someone who can disprove me!

xkaes
19-Dec-2017, 07:59
Great. So it should be very easy for you to produce genuine Rodenstock literature that states it.

Luis-F-S
19-Dec-2017, 08:05
Great. So it should be very easy for you to produce genuine Rodenstock literature that states it.

Why bother you'd still disagree

Louis Pacilla
19-Dec-2017, 08:27
Great. So it should be very easy for you to produce genuine Rodenstock literature that states it.


Here's a 1982 Rodenstock catalog w/ the Geronar WA lens included.https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00817/00817.pdf

Bob Salomon
19-Dec-2017, 08:27
Great. So it should be very easy for you to produce genuine Rodenstock literature that states it.

No, when we stopped representing them we gave all of the printed information to the new and current distributor.

Why don’t you just call the factory outside Munich and ask for Chrissi or Deitrich and ask them?

xkaes
19-Dec-2017, 08:34
Here's a 1982 Rodenstock catalog w/ the Geronar WA lens included.https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00817/00817.pdf

Thanks. That's the same catalog I have, except mine is 1984. It does not state that Geronars are multi-coated.

Dan, I guess this saves me the trouble of sending you my copy. I'll still get the 1984 enlarging lens catalog set up.

Pere Casals
19-Dec-2017, 08:44
mc...

Just pointing that Nikon introduced multi-coating in 50mm consumer lenses for 35mm consumer cameras in... 1974 !!! (MC was used in the 1960s for some Nikon pro gear)

It is very easy to see by eye if a lens is multicoated, even sometimes it is seen in the Ebay posted images, by looking to the multiple reflexions of different colors... an ebay seller may show the refexions to the prospective buyers.

172970

(Both are the same lens, branded different, and with different coating, left is single)

At one point basic MC was so easy and cheap that it was the basic standard.

It is true that there are very different qualities of MC, depending on the number of layers (EBC was 11), layer uniformity and nature of the layers.

Even today this is well seen in the different product ranges of Hoya filters.

Enlarging and Process lenses may need much less the MC, but for pictorial usage it is a basic feature since long time ago... (40 years ago...)

xkaes
19-Dec-2017, 08:59
Just pointing that Nikon introduced multi-coating in 50mm consumer lenses for 35mm consumer cameras in... 1974 !!! (MC was used in the 1960s for some Nikon pro gear.

A minor historical tidbit from the George Eastman Museum is that Minolta introduced the first "multi-coating" in 1958. It's not what most now-a-days shutterbugs would call "multi-coating", but it was two layers of magnesium fluoride deposited in different thicknesses. It is unclear which camera it was first used on, but my guess is that it was the Autowide of the same year -- which happened to be the first Japanese camera with a fully-integrated, internal, coupled, meter (selenium).

Dan Fromm
19-Dec-2017, 09:21
Lou, thanks for the link. I've added it, also a link to an earlier catalog on Pacific Rim that has info on jes' plain Sironars with no suffixes to the list. And I've archived both catalogs.

Joe, thanks for trying.

Pere Casals
19-Dec-2017, 09:31
A minor historical tidbit from the George Eastman Museum is that Minolta introduced the first "multi-coating" in 1958. It's not what most now-a-days shutterbugs would call "multi-coating", but it was two layers of magnesium fluoride deposited in different thicknesses. It is unclear which camera it was first used on, but my guess is that it was the Autowide of the same year -- which happened to be the first Japanese camera with a fully-integrated, internal, coupled, meter (selenium).

Well, we speak about "Multi-layer interference" anti-reflective optical coating... I don't know if your example falls is that category, I would say not...

This interesting text explains how MC was born as six layer HEA for the military, made with Zirconium oxide and Magnesium fluoride layers, stacking consecutively one of each:

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Multicoating/00_pag.htm

xkaes
19-Dec-2017, 09:38
The George Eastman Museum is only talking about public, civilian, consumer, photographic gear.

Bernice Loui
19-Dec-2017, 11:14
Some one explain what is the obsession and waste of life-time on if this Rodenstock lens is multi coated or not?

Why does it matter, what is the relevance to LF images.?


Consider how this total and utter non-sense comes across to anyone who is not obsess with this pointless effort?

When an individual has decided what they want to believe, no force on earth can alter this unless that individual decides to alter their believe. Better to let them figure it out and believe what ever they want even if it is totally wrong, much like the Flat Earth.


Bernice

Bob Salomon
19-Dec-2017, 11:46
Some one explain what is the obsession and waste of life-time on if this Rodenstock lens is multi coated or not?

Why does it matter, what is the relevance to LF images.?


Consider how this total and utter non-sense comes across to anyone who is not obsess with this pointless effort?

When an individual has decided what they want to believe, no force on earth can alter this unless that individual decides to alter their believe. Better to let them figure it out and believe what ever they want even if it is totally wrong, much like the Flat Earth.


Bernice
Back in the 60s I had my photo studio in lower CT and had a very close friend who was a well known software engineer for IBM. He was instrumental in computerizing the routes of the Southern Railroad by using “trees”.
In any case he was obsessed with Nikon and their lenses.he didn’t shoot, he just was obsessed with the lenses. He even went so far as to have some beautiful multi drawer chests built for his den. The drawers were sized for different specific lenses and were carefully felt lined. He had several of the chests and virtually every lens Nikon made at that time. Any time a new lens was introduced he would enter it into a data base and check with other IBM employees at their headquarters. If anyone wanted a lens it was added to the data base. Then when anyone from IBM headquarters was going to Japan he would give that person a copy of the data base and whatever the lenses would cost in Japan. He would give him the address of a specific store and salesperson in the store and have him contact that person. Then telex the required lenses to the store.
He had a fantastic collection of Nikon lenses. He would sit for hours holding them and feeling the aperture and focusing rings. But he virtually never shot with them!
This guy so obsessed by this thread reminds me of him!

Pere Casals
19-Dec-2017, 12:19
He would sit for hours holding them and feeling the aperture and focusing rings. But he virtually never shot with them!

hmmm, not the single case, I know two lens collectors that are like this...

The collector's rush is in the human nature, collecting things is part of techno-cultural evolution. One can collect insects, minerals, vynils, coins or chemical elements in a periodic table. Or paints in a museum. Yes, it looks crazy collecting coins that one is not to spend, but this is part of the human nature and that behaviour may end (or not) in a social benefit for the community. How many collections of things are out there ?

IMHO that drive exists in humans because at one time it was instrumental in cultural evolution.

Richard Wasserman
19-Dec-2017, 12:30
Back in the 60s I had my photo studio in lower CT and had a very close friend who was a well known software engineer for IBM. He was instrumental in computerizing the routes of the Southern Railroad by using “trees”.
In any case he was obsessed with Nikon and their lenses.he didn’t shoot, he just was obsessed with the lenses. He even went so far as to have some beautiful multi drawer chests built for his den. The drawers were sized for different specific lenses and were carefully felt lined. He had several of the chests and virtually every lens Nikon made at that time. Any time a new lens was introduced he would enter it into a data base and check with other IBM employees at their headquarters. If anyone wanted a lens it was added to the data base. Then when anyone from IBM headquarters was going to Japan he would give that person a copy of the data base and whatever the lenses would cost in Japan. He would give him the address of a specific store and salesperson in the store and have him contact that person. Then telex the required lenses to the store.
He had a fantastic collection of Nikon lenses. He would sit for hours holding them and feeling the aperture and focusing rings. But he virtually never shot with them!
This guy so obsessed by this thread reminds me of him!

Reminds me of some Leica collectors I've known. You haven't lived until you've sat through a talk on the history of lens caps complete with fascinating photos. Don't get me started...

Roger Thoms
19-Dec-2017, 15:25
MC = Mono Coated :D

Roger

Jac@stafford.net
19-Dec-2017, 15:27
hmmm, not the single case, I know two lens collectors that are like this...

The collector's rush is in the human nature,[... snip excellent post ..]
Thanks for that!

There are collectors and hoarders, and in my case an accumulator, when I found a camera or lens I liked I bought two if I could afford them and put one away forever.

A couple of that lot remain: A pristine black button rewind M2, and a never used black enamel M4.

I am too old to keep these relics. Up for auction after 2/2018.

Bob Salomon
19-Dec-2017, 16:36
Thanks for that!

There are collectors and hoarders, and in my case an accumulator, when I found a camera or lens I liked I bought two if I could afford them and put one away forever.

A couple of that lot remain: A pristine black button rewind M2, and a never used black enamel M4.

I am too old to keep these relics. Up for auction after 2/2018.
Sammy Davis, Jr was quite a good photographer but he was also a collector and when we were the Rollei distributor he would always order any special edition or commemorative versions. But he always wanted special serial numbers. So, whenever the factory told us that the special models were coming, we would have to contact Sammy to find out how many he wanted and which serial numbers. Then tell the factory so they could plan the production!
But then we had another guy that collected special Linhof and Rollei cameras. He always bought two of each but they had to have consecutive serial numbers!

dentkimterry
19-Dec-2017, 16:55
MC = Mono Coated :D

Roger

Wasn't there some hubbub in the 70's and 80's about slr lenses labeled MC? People thought it meant multi coated when it really meant meter coupled?
Terry

xkaes
19-Dec-2017, 18:39
Wasn't there some hubbub in the 70's and 80's about slr lenses labeled MC? People thought it meant multi coated when it really meant meter coupled?
Terry

For Minolta's lenses, "MC" means "meter-coupled", not "multi-coated", but all of their MC lenses were also multi-coated -- depending on how you want to define that term. This actually created confusion (and still does) because independent lens manufacturers wanted potential buyers of their Minolta-compatible lenses to know that their lenses were both multi-coated and meter-coupled. So when they put "MC" on the lenses, buyers would not know which they meant -- even though most were "MC" and "MC". They should have called them "MC squared".

I've seen "MC" appear on many lenses and even filters, many of which do not appear to be multi-coated. I suspect in many cases "MC" means "Made in China".

Jac@stafford.net
20-Dec-2017, 11:02
I've seen "MC" appear on many lenses and even filters, many of which do not appear to be multi-coated. I suspect in many cases "MC" means "Made in China".

Just a reminder for later equipment (http://www.digoliardi.net/fake-CE-marking.jpg).

asf
20-Dec-2017, 12:54
These people are fascinating, would be an honor to see a collection such as this


Back in the 60s I had my photo studio in lower CT and had a very close friend who was a well known software engineer for IBM. He was instrumental in computerizing the routes of the Southern Railroad by using “trees”.
In any case he was obsessed with Nikon and their lenses.he didn’t shoot, he just was obsessed with the lenses. He even went so far as to have some beautiful multi drawer chests built for his den. The drawers were sized for different specific lenses and were carefully felt lined. He had several of the chests and virtually every lens Nikon made at that time. Any time a new lens was introduced he would enter it into a data base and check with other IBM employees at their headquarters. If anyone wanted a lens it was added to the data base. Then when anyone from IBM headquarters was going to Japan he would give that person a copy of the data base and whatever the lenses would cost in Japan. He would give him the address of a specific store and salesperson in the store and have him contact that person. Then telex the required lenses to the store.
He had a fantastic collection of Nikon lenses. He would sit for hours holding them and feeling the aperture and focusing rings. But he virtually never shot with them!
This guy so obsessed by this thread reminds me of him!

Bob Salomon
20-Dec-2017, 13:16
These people are fascinating, would be an honor to see a collection such as this

I wish you and I could. But he had a massive heart attack at his desk and died a long time ago.

asf
20-Dec-2017, 14:01
I’m glad just to know his story, thanks Bob

Randy Moe
20-Dec-2017, 16:13
I got that lesson from Don at Central Camera. A 2 hour, after closing, Leica education.


Reminds me of some Leica collectors I've known. You haven't lived until you've sat through a talk on the history of lens caps complete with fascinating photos. Don't get me started...

Jac@stafford.net
20-Dec-2017, 17:57
I got that lesson from Don at Central Camera. A 2 hour, after closing, Leica education.

Did he show you this one? Original black M2 button rewind. (mine)

172988

Randy Moe
20-Dec-2017, 18:35
He did not show and tell, he gave me an oral history of Leica and his family business. They run together. I was very impressed Don spent that much time after hours. He knew I wasn't buying a Leica.

Another time, after lunch Don helped with my 4X5 Speed and flashbulb handles. Soon, half the staff and customers were in on it. Perhaps an hour. I bought 2 used flash handles.

Whenever I went to the Art Institute which was often. I always made a stop at Central Camera. Then there's that violin expert close by to visit. Now I am 400 miles away and miss that experience. Maybe Nashville has an old camera store...

Jac, I am more an early Pentax fan. My lost Pentax H3 and current MX never needed tune-ups. The tiny MX is really good. I have shot Leica, but I have a focus problem with RF cameras in general.


Did he show you this one? Original black M2 button rewind. (mine)

172988

Chuck Pere
21-Dec-2017, 10:37
I hope this is readable.

Jac@stafford.net
21-Dec-2017, 10:46
Whenever I went to the Art Institute which was often. I always made a stop at Central Camera. Then there's that violin expert close by to visit.

Was a storefront near the Gold Coast part of town? It had a neon sign, "Old Violins". Somewhere I have a night picture of two elderly gentlemen playing in the window.

Dan Fromm
21-Dec-2017, 11:18
I hope this is readable.

Don't struggle to read the fine print. Large print here: https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00817/00817.pdf

p.s., the link is in the list too.

xkaes
21-Dec-2017, 11:21
I hope this is readable.

Thanks so much for supplying this. It resolves some things, but not others. The main point is that some, and perhaps most, Geronars are multi-coated.

However, I can't make out the date on the bottom. Here is my Rodenstock lit from 1984.

173002

Interestingly, the Geronars in your lit are four elements, and in mine (left) they are three elements. Plus, the WA Geronar in your lit is three elements, and in mine (right) it is four. Plus, my lit does not mention multi-coating, while yours does.

I bet Dan would like a copy of your lit.

So what we know at this point is that some Geronars are three element and some are four and some are multi-coated -- and there are some variations over some time.

That settles that.

Randy Moe
21-Dec-2017, 11:21
Maybe, I don't recall. The Gold Coast was too too for my sorts. I prefer Uptown where Essanay studios made Charlie Chaplin until he split for the West Coast. Uptown was once high end Chicago. The apartments are still grand with ballrooms, horse and buggy garages off Broadway. A buggy garage is made with 2 angled alley doors so a buggy can be driven in and out without backing up. I worked on vintage cars in one for a few years. No heat. Many dead Rolls Royce in old garages.


Was a storefront near the Gold Coast part of town? It had a neon sign, "Old Violins". Somewhere I have a night picture of two elderly gentlemen playing in the window.

Bob Salomon
21-Dec-2017, 11:31
Thanks so much for supplying this. It resolves some things, but not others. The main point is that some, and perhaps most, Geronars are multi-coated.

However, I can't make out the date on the bottom. Here is my Rodenstock lit from 1984.

173002

Interestingly, the Geronars in your lit are four elements, and in mine (left) they are three elements. Plus, the WA Geronar in your lit is three elements, and in mine (right) it is four. Plus, my lit does not mention multi-coating, while yours does.

I bet Dan would like a copy of your lit.

So what we know at this point is that some Geronars are three element and some are some and some are multi-coated -- and there are variations.

No, what you know is that Berkey Photo Marketing, the Rodenstock distributor immediately before us, printed their own brochures in Long Island rather then buying them from the factory in Germany.

Misprints and errors were not uncommon with Berkey. They were not exactly meticulous.

xkaes
21-Dec-2017, 11:36
Don't struggle to read the fine print. Large print here: https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00817/00817.pdf

p.s., the link is in the list too.

What Chuck provided is completely different from the Pacific Rim lit, 1982, and mine, 1984.

xkaes
21-Dec-2017, 11:43
No, what you know is that Berkey Photo Marketing, the Rodenstock distributor immediately before us, printed their own brochures in Long Island rather then buying them from the factory in Germany.

Misprints and errors were not uncommon with Berkey. They were not exactly meticulous.

You expect us to believe that Berkey actually took the time to redraw lens designs and change all the specs?

Then maybe it was Berkey that created Geronars as being multi-coated, as well. After all, Berkey says it, but Rodenstock doesn't.

Bob Salomon
21-Dec-2017, 11:49
You expect to believe that Berkey actually took the time to redraw lens designs and change all the specs?

Then maybe it was Berkey that created Geronars as being multi-coated, as well. After all, Berkey says it, but Rodenstock doesn't.
Just believe what you want. It make no matter to most of the rest of us,

xkaes
21-Dec-2017, 12:04
Misprints and errors were not uncommon with Berkey. They were not exactly meticulous.

I'll go with your advise. Berkey made a lot of errors. Berkey lit says Geronars are multi-coated. Rodenstock lit does not. I'll go with Rodenstock lit, per your advise.

Bernice Loui
21-Dec-2017, 12:07
Real world example of Cognitive Bias:

https://betterhumans.coach.me/cognitive-bias-cheat-sheet-55a472476b18


And yes, no force on Earth can or will alter what one WANTS to believe..


Bernice




I'll go with your advise. Berkey made a lot of errors. Berkey lit says Geronars are multi-coated. Rodenstock lit does not. I'll go with Rodenstock lit, per your advise.

Bob Salomon
21-Dec-2017, 12:09
Real world example of Cognitive Bias:

https://betterhumans.coach.me/cognitive-bias-cheat-sheet-55a472476b18


And yes, no force on Earth can or will alter what one WANTS to believe..


Bernice

Amen!

Dan Fromm
21-Dec-2017, 13:07
Thanks so much for supplying this. It resolves some things, but not others. The main point is that some, and perhaps most, Geronars are multi-coated.

However, I can't make out the date on the bottom. Here is my Rodenstock lit from 1984.

173002

Interestingly, the Geronars in your lit are four elements, and in mine (left) they are three elements. Plus, the WA Geronar in your lit is three elements, and in mine (right) it is four. Plus, my lit does not mention multi-coating, while yours does.

I bet Dan would like a copy of your lit.

So what we know at this point is that some Geronars are three element and some are four and some are multi-coated -- and there are some variations over some time.

That settles that.

Joe, learn to read. I found the catalog yesterday and added a link to it to the list. Yesterday. Today I posted the link by itself in post # 62 in this discussion.

The catalog shows three triplet Geronars, 150/6.3, 210/6.8 and 300/0 and one 4/4 double Gauss type Geronar WA, 90/8.

Bob, Berkey seems to have got it right. You need to read more carefully too.

Bob Salomon
21-Dec-2017, 13:12
Joe, learn to read. I found the catalog yesterday and added a link to it to the list. Yesterday. Today I posted the link by itself in post # 62 in this discussion.

The catalog shows three triplet Geronars, 150/6.3, 210/6.8 and 300/0 and one 4/4 double Gauss type Geronar WA, 90/8.

Bob, Berkey seems to have got it right. You need to read more carefully too.

Dan,

I never stated that they got it wrong. Only that Joe doesn’t seem to want to accept anything that he personally doubts. Sorry if it came out as otherwise.
But Berkey’s accuracy was not always perfect.

Jac@stafford.net
21-Dec-2017, 13:55
Would be enough to buy a Geronar 90mm/ƒ8, disassemble it to find it to be MC or not?
.

xkaes
21-Dec-2017, 14:12
Joe, learn to read. I found the catalog yesterday and added a link to it to the list. Yesterday. Today I posted the link by itself in post # 62 in this discussion.

The catalog shows three triplet Geronars, 150/6.3, 210/6.8 and 300/0 and one 4/4 double Gauss type Geronar WA, 90/8.

Bob, Berkey seems to have got it right. You need to read more carefully too.

Dan,

I can read, thank you, and the material I have (1984) -- which I posted -- agrees exactly with the material -- you have -- from Pacific Rim (1982). The only "discrepancy" is with the new Berkey material posted by Chuck with a date I can't read. The Berkey material and the Rodenstock material don't match up. I'm not saying which is correct -- maybe they both are.

Steve Goldstein
21-Dec-2017, 14:30
I recently sold a 90mm to another list member and it was clearly marked MC on the barrel.

Jac@stafford.net
21-Dec-2017, 14:52
What we have here is one a dissident promoting his opinion with no personal experience with the lens in question. Evidence counter to his posits would be a distraction for him. IGNORE.

xkaes
21-Dec-2017, 15:03
I have no opinion. I don't have any "belief". I am not dissenting from anything. I'm simply asking a question -- and getting attacked for doing so. Seems contrary to the purpose of a "forum".

The evidence from Rodenstock and Berkey are clearly completely different.

Attempted insults do not answer any question.

P.S. I'm very happy with my Rodenstock lenses.

Jac@stafford.net
21-Dec-2017, 15:25
I have no opinion. I am not dissenting from anything. I'm simply asking a question -- and getting attacked for doing so. Seems contrary to the purpose of a "forum".

You are enjoying attention through a contrived issue. There is no issue. Get over it.