Interest in a new Hypergon?

[Nodda Duma]

Hey folks, I was approached by a fellow large format enthusiast about bringing a new Hypergon lens to market in 4x5 and 8x10 format. If you don't know what a Hypergon is, you really should. It is one of the widest if not *the* widest Field of View large format lens ever made, with no distortion due to the symmetric design.

I've done quite a bit of homework already, and have the prescription and lens drawings done and my mechanical engineering partner has a conceptual design.

The 8x10 format replicates the original lens design exactly. Interestingly, there is really only one design solution for "as wide a FOV as physically possible in a two-lens anastigmat" and the Hypergon is it. 4x5 was not originally offered, as the lens was marketed to landscape and architectural photographers who used 5x7 and up so there wasn't really the demand at the time. However, I designed a prescription for 4x5 format and that would be made available as well.

There have been recent attempts to bring the Hypergon to market. However, the real challenge is finding a shop to fabricate the lenses at any reasonable price point, and I believe this is what prevented those attempts from being successful. You really have to know the industry well to find the shops who can make them. I was successful in finding a shop who could fabricate the lenses at reasonable cost, and they are currently shipping 8x10 "alpha prototype lenses " lenses to me. I will mount them in a 3D printed test barrel to evaluate.

The mechanical barrel would be similar to original, an iris that can be set to f/22 for focusing and f/32 - f/45 for exposure. I'll ditch the whirlygig filter used in the original to compensate for illumination roll-off. If Goerz were making the Hypergon today, they would have used an apodizing filter. A custom apodizing filter corrects for illlumination roll-off in a single exposure, vs. the original needing two exposures to create a negative. Additionally, the apodizing filter will be much less expensive than the delicate mechanical components necessary for the whirly-gig.

So my question is whether there's interest in a 4x5 and 8x10 Hypergon. I think there is, as it is a really interesting lens with beautiful results, but there are so few that prices for originals in good condition are astronomical. Speaking of pricing, my gut tells me the 4x5 would be somewhere in the $1000-$1250 price range, and the 8x10 would be in the $1500-$1750 price range. We'd try to push that down further, but the components are not cheap to manufacture in the numbers I'd expect us to produce.

Here are some modeling graphics out of Zemax and Solidworks.

234679

234680

[LabRat]

I was gonna mess with a Metrogon (that seems to be a "kissing cousin" of a Hypergon, but a future project... Is this valid or just nutz???

Steve K

[Corran]

Very interesting! So, what would the focal lengths be, and what other possible iterations could there be? 11x14, 12x20, etc.?

[Nodda Duma]

I was gonna mess with a Metrogon (that seems to be a "kissing cousin" of a Hypergon, but a future project... Is this valid or just nutz???

Steve K

The Metrogon and Topogon (both the same design) maxxed out at 100 degree Field of View. This didn't come close to the 135 / 140 degree field of view of the Hypergon. They traded FOV for speed. The outer lenses of the Metrogon are as challenging to make as the Hypergon optics, but the inner lenses are significantly more difficult. The costs to fabricate those inner elements would be stupid high, if anybody could make them at all.

[LabRat]

The Metrogon and Topogon (both the same design) maxxed out at 100 degree Field of View. This didn't come close to the 135 / 140 degree field of view of the Hypergon. They traded FOV for speed. The outer lenses of the Metrogon are as challenging to make as the Hypergon optics, but the inner lenses are significantly more difficult. The costs to fabricate those inner elements would be stupid high, if anybody could make them at all.

Interesting, thanks!!!! :)

Steve K

[Nodda Duma]

Very interesting! So, what would the focal lengths be, and what other possible iterations could there be? 11x14, 12x20, etc.?

The focal lengths are..

4x5: 38mm
8x10: 75mm

Dig out the recessed lens boards and drop that front rail. :D

As for larger formats.. they are possible, albeit not as a concurrent offering. The lenses get easier to fabricate the larger they are. Keep in mind each iteration is a separate design effort with associated design cost. In addition, demand for other formats would be very low, so the market price would be much higher for other formats. However, if folks were willing to pay then it could be done. These would be something to explore after the two most popular large formats are served up.

Smaller formats would not be possible. The lenses become too physically thin to polish out. Imagine polishing saran wrap and you'll get the idea.

[Hugo Zhang]

Lens is made to screw into a Copal shutter or lens cap/ Sinar auto shutter?

[Corran]

Very cool. I struggle to shoot 8x10 personally (middle ground format, too big to enlarge but too small to bother with contact prints) but even so I would be curious...

I only recently purchased a 210mm XL for the 12x20 (have 3 sheets I need to develop from that lens) so just the thought of a 150mm on that format makes my head spin!

[Kiwi7475]

This would be very interesting and at <2k for the 8x10 I’d be all over it, but I am wondering if there are a lot of cameras that can actually use these. Like my Chamonix for example can focus down to maybe 105-110mm but it’s tight — using a Nikki’s SW 120mm, for example, it doable but I can’t think of going down to 75mm…. Could recessed boards of 30mm or so and with that FOV see the edges of the front standard of the camera? I don’t know but it’s a consideration.

[Corran]

Honestly a custom-built UW camera (3D printed perhaps) would be best.

I definitely think my Wehman would not work. A 90mm XL barely works in a recessed board.

[Hugo Zhang]

Chamonix Alpinist 810X has a minimum bellows draw of 60mm.

[ic-racer]

Might be interested. I almost bought an original about ten years ago. I'll have to check my camera as the don't give a minimum focus spec. (Shen-Hao FCL810 with bag bellows).

As mentioned above, what about shutter? I presume whoever buys the lens will have to source a shutter to fit.

[Kiwi7475]

We’ll I guess I was wrong then and the Chamonix can handle it.

I’m just also starting to think that that’s I think like 10mm full frame equivalent and that’s… yeah, incredibly wide!

[Kiwi7475]

Might be interested. I almost bought an original about ten years ago. I'll have to check my camera as the don't give a minimum focus spec. (Shen-Hao FCL810 with bag bellows).

As mentioned above, what about shutter? I presume whoever buys the lens will have to source a shutter to fit.

Yeah I was thinking the same…. I don’t think Jason will sell it with the shutter, but it would be nice if this could fit in a Copal shutter. However doesn’t that require factory shimming due to tolerances?

[Corran]

But would the front of the camera be in frame?

Could be kind of simulated with a 72XL. Or protractor :).

[Hugo Zhang]

We’ll I guess I was wrong then and the Chamonix can handle it.

I’m just also starting to think that that’s I think like 10mm full frame equivalent and that’s… yeah, incredibly wide!

Not Chamonix 810V which has a min bellows of 95mm. A bag bellows or a recess board is needed for a 75mm lens with Chamonix 810V camera.

[Nodda Duma]

Corran, I wouldn’t be making a complete camera, just the lens. As a lens designer, I have no interest in producing complete cameras. I would, however, put a bug in Steve Lloyd’s ear, since I’ve worked with him on a couple projects now. He’s not involved in this project tho.

Hugo, it would be a barrel lens like the original. The optics cannot fit into any shutter without vignetting severely, as you can see in the diagram. For scale, there’s less than 1mm separation between the lenses.. just enough to clear an iris (not iris+shutter). The 8x10 lens is, iirc, 19mm diameter. Shutters just aren’t thin enough to clear the Field of View.


This would be very interesting and at <2k for the 8x10 I’d be all over it, but I am wondering if there are a lot of cameras that can actually use these. Like my Chamonix for example can focus down to maybe 105-110mm but it’s tight — using a Nikki’s SW 120mm, for example, it doable but I can’t think of going down to 75mm…. Could recessed boards of 30mm or so and with that FOV see the edges of the front standard of the camera? I don’t know but it’s a consideration.

You raise a good point in that a recessed lens board could be offered as an option. But it wouldn’t recess very far at all. Best to drop the front rail or run the whole camera to the front of the rail like you can on a field camera or 2D (for example).

[Corran]

Sorry, I meant the user/buyer might be best to build a camera, I didn't mean you. I might have to email Zach from Mercury Camera and see what he's able to do.

[Oren Grad]

Not Chamonix 810V which has a min bellows of 95mm. A bag bellows or a recess board is needed for a 75mm lens with Chamonix 810V camera.

But could you mount a 75 on any of the Chamonix 8x10 or WP cameras without the bed and/or the ends of the "feet" ending up inside the field of view?

[Hugo Zhang]

Corran, I wouldn’t be making a complete camera, just the lens. As a lens designer, I have no interest in producing complete cameras. I would, however, put a bug in Steve Lloyd’s ear, since I’ve worked with him on a couple projects now. He’s not involved in this project tho.

Hugo, it would be a barrel lens like the original. The optics cannot fit into any shutter without vignetting severely, as you can see in the diagram. For scale, there’s less than 1mm separation between the lenses.. just enough to clear an iris (not iris+shutter). The 8x10 lens is, iirc, 19mm diameter. Shutters justcaren’t thin enough to clear the Field of View.



You raise a good point in that a recessed lens board could be offered as an option. But it wouldn’t recess very far at all. Best to drop the front rail or run the whole camera to the front of the rail like you can on a field camera or 2D (for example).

If a lens cap can't be used, a Sinar auto shutter may work.

[ic-racer]

Just checked my Shen-Hao and it goes down to 70mm.
I think it will get even closer with the bag bellows as the front standard has both base tilt and axial tilt to bring it in closer.
234689

[Hugo Zhang]

But could you mount a 75 on any of the Chamonix 8x10 or WP cameras without the bed and/or the ends of the "feet" ending up inside the field of view?

That's a valid concern, the widest lens I have tried on Chamonix 810 without its bed showing is 110mm. I don't have a wider lens that covers 810.

[Nodda Duma]

Sorry, I meant the user/buyer might be best to build a camera, I didn't mean you. I might have to email Zach from Mercury Camera and see what he's able to do.

Ah gotcha. :)

[Kiwi7475]

Just checked my Shen-Hao and it goes down to 70mm.
I think it will get even closer with the bag bellows as the front standard has both base tilt and axial tilt to bring it in closer.
234689

Yeah a lens with a 130–40deg field of view will likely see this camera’s front railing ..

[Kiwi7475]

But would the front of the camera be in frame?

Could be kind of simulated with a 72XL. Or protractor :).

I’m starting to think this will likely only work with a monorail camera where you can push the front standard to the front of the rail…. Or a camera specifically designed for this like a 3D printed one like you said… but that’s committing yourself to just one focal length for that outing… I’m not caring 2 8x10 cameras :-)

[ic-racer]

Yeah a lens with a 130–40deg field of view will likely see this camera’s front railing ..

Good point, I might need some more experimentation before committing to the lens. But this might work:


234690

[ic-racer]

LCD shutter for this?

Looks like they will give you a pi Cell for free if you ask.

234691
http://www.liquidcrystaltechnologies.com/products/lcdshutters.htm

[Hugo Zhang]

Jason,

According Goerz's 1913 catalog, they made two types of Hypergon: one with star diaphragm which had a coverage of 135 degrees and the other one was a Hypergon without star diaphragm which had a coverage of 110 degrees.

Are you making your Hypergon with 130 degree coverage without a star diaphragm?

https://www.cameraeccentric.com/static/img/pdfs/goerz_2.pdf

[jnantz]

what a fun project ! if I did UWA work I'd be all over it like white on rice!
so it looks like my interest is living vicariously through others :). my 2cents, I'd include the fans as an "add on" (if possible)
some people love to keep things authentic looking even if it was a modern replica of said object of desire made 100 years later
(and serves no need other than being bling, who doesn't like bling?)

[Tin Can]

Glennview 90 degree Hypergon read his page on it

http://www.glennview.com/note1.htm

[Nodda Duma]

Jason,

According Goerz's 1913 catalog, they made two types of Hypergon: one with star diaphragm which had a coverage of 135 degrees and the other one was a Hypergon without star diaphragm which had a coverage of 110 degrees.

Are you making your Hypergon with 130 degree coverage without a star diaphragm?

https://www.cameraeccentric.com/static/img/pdfs/goerz_2.pdf

You can calculate from the focal lengths that we're producing the 135 degree variant. Narrower than that is not interesting. Re: the star diaphragm: Read second paragraph of OP.


what a fun project ! if I did UWA work I'd be all over it like white on rice!
so it looks like my interest is living vicariously through others :). my 2cents, I'd include the fans as an "add on" (if possible)
some people love to keep things authentic looking even if it was a modern replica of said object of desire made 100 years later
(and serves no need other than being bling, who doesn't like bling?)

We've poked at this and as far as we can tell, the parts to add the whirly-gig would increase the cost by 50% - 100%. IMO that would kill the project. I plan to take a closer look during detailed design, but a much more elegant and satisfying solution is an apodizing filter to better correct the light fall off. It gets closer to what Goerz originally intended vs what they were able to achieve at the time due to limitations of technology. Think of it as my professional nod to what their lens designer wanted.

[Mark Sawyer]

The Hypergon's spinner/propellor/whirly-gig came before the neutral density center-filters were invented. Goerz recommended an exposure with the rotating thing-a-ma-jig eight times the overall exposure. But at f/45, that gets well into reciprocity failure times, so it depends on what film you're using. Exposing everything together with a center filter would simplify things greatly, as it all becomes one exposure, and while there's still reciprocity failure, it's all happening evenly in one exposure. Example: with the pinwheel, you may have an overall exposure of 2 seconds, which turns into 5 seconds with RF, and a 16 second exposure with the fan, which turns into 90 seconds with RF. With the Center Filter, it's just one exposure with one RF factor.

It might be nice to make a few extra filters for owners of the original Hypergon, especially those who have one that lacks a working windmill.

Question, will it be AR coated?

Best wishes on the project's success!

[jnantz]

We've poked at this and as far as we can tell, the parts to add the whirly-gig would increase the cost by 50% - 100%. IMO that would kill the project. I plan to take a closer look during detailed design, but a much more elegant and satisfying solution is an apodizing filter to better correct the light fall off. It gets closer to what Goerz originally intended vs what they were able to achieve at the time due to limitations of technology. Think of it as my professional nod to what their lens designer wanted.

ouch ..
good luck finding an elegant modern cost effective solution to that age old issue of the dreaded fall off
from what I remember a smoke ringed center clear gelatin faux center filter sometimes does the trick
but you will end up with black lung by the end of production!

[Bernice Loui]

There will be camera issues with supporting/using this uber wide angle lens.

Majority of flat bed folder cameras cannot be compressed enough to bring a lens of this short focal length to focus at infinity.

~38mm for 4x5
~75mm for 8x10

This would demand/require the front of the flat bed camera to drop out of the len's angle of view on top of being able to compress enough to focus these lenses to infinity.

Then there is the shutter issue. If this lens is in barrel only, even fewer flat bed field folders will be able to use this lens. Granted the exposure aperture will be small allowing the possibility of using the lens cap as the shutter.

Know the majority of view camera users today are light weight flat bed field folder centric.. The scenario of a customer/user of this lens discovering there is no possible way the revised Hypergon can be used on their favorite field folder is a very real problem and could rapidly tarnish the reputation and market acceptance of the revised Hypergon..


In the case of Sinar Norma, no issues at all..

The 5x7 Norma easily compresses to less than 38mm from lens board to ground glass including the Sinar shutter. Flipping the rail clamp around puts the front of the camera completely out of the uber wide angle of view for the Hypergon. Difficulty will be current majority is resistant to monorail cameras for various reasons.
234704

234705


Alternatively, a specialized wide angle camera is made specifically for this Hypergon. The speciality camera could be not a lot more than a box with a Packard shutter or similar, ground glass/film holder rear and the focus could be essentially fixed due to the uber wide angle of the Hypergon.

Curious, how are optical Apodizing filters made? Could a variant of Apodizing filter be made as an alternative to the common ND center filters used to correct for light fall off of Biogon style wide angle lenses?


Bernice

[Hugo Zhang]

There will be camera issues with supporting/using this uber wide angle lens.

Majority of flat bed folder cameras cannot be compressed enough to bring a lens of this short focal length to focus at infinity.

~38mm for 4x5
~75mm for 8x10

This would demand/require the front of the flat bed camera to drop out of the len's angle of view on top of being able to compress enough to focus these lenses to infinity.

Then there is the shutter issue. If this lens is in barrel only, even fewer flat bed field folders will be able to use this lens. Granted the exposure aperture will be small allowing the possibility of using the lens cap as the shutter.

Know the majority of view camera users today are light weight flat bed field folder centric.. The scenario of a customer/user of this lens discovering there is no possible way the revised Hypergon can be used on their favorite field folder is a very real problem and could rapidly tarnish the reputation and market acceptance of the revised Hypergon..


In the case of Sinar Norma, no issues at all..

The 5x7 Norma easily compresses to less than 38mm from lens board to ground glass including the Sinar shutter. Flipping the rail clamp around puts the front of the camera completely out of the uber wide angle of view for the Hypergon. Difficulty will be current majority is resistant to monorail cameras for various reasons.
234704

234705


Alternatively, a specialized wide angle camera is made specifically for this Hypergon. The speciality camera could be not a lot more than a box with a Packard shutter or similar, ground glass/film holder rear and the focus could be essentially fixed due to the uber wide angle of the Hypergon.

Curious, how are optical Apodizing filters made? Could a variant of Apodizing be made as an alternative to the common ND center filters used to correct for light fall off of Biogon style wide angle lenses?


Bernice

True. We made two box style 16x20 wide angle cameras many years ago for two owners of 150mm Hypergon lens.

[Bernice Loui]

Another example of how lens choice drives camera choice and how any given camera must have the ability to properly support the lens to be used.

Bernice



True. We made two box style 16x20 wide angle cameras many years ago for two owners of 150mm Hypergon lens.

[Dugan]

Should work with a portrait camera and a recessed lensboard...

[Nodda Duma]

Bernice that’s a good point. I’ll suggest to the customer an option would include a custom superwide body for those who need it. Hugo, it’d be interesting to know whether Chamonix could do a run of them at a reasonable price point.

That said, I can run a Hypergon on both my Tachihara and pretty sure I can use it on my 2D since the rear standard can run all the way out. Those are fairly common camera types.

[Bernice Loui]

Think sheet film version of the Zeiss Hologon camera...

like this:
https://coelncameras.com/products/carl-zeiss-hologon-8-15mm-olc-1197

234709

234710

234711

Bernice

[Corran]

I have a Sinar Handy that could be made into a dedicated 4x5 Hypergon camera fairly easily with just a new front plate. The 3D-printed Mercury Camera I have that fits the 38mm XL and 47mm XL also would likely work, though I'm not 100% sure on the minimum body extension on that as it was made with those lenses in mind (38mm XL has ~52mm FFD). I'm certain he could produce one with a short enough body if needed.

Related, I just found this today:

https://www.japanexposures.com/shop/camera-lens/ms-optics-hipolion-19mm-f-8-m-mount.html

I had no idea MS-Optical had come out with this. Honestly 19mm isn't that exciting on 35mm/FF digital these days. But as a pancake lens, I see the appeal (I do really like my MS-Optical 35mm Perar).

[Oren Grad]

Bernice that’s a good point. I’ll suggest to the customer an option would include a custom superwide body for those who need it. Hugo, it’d be interesting to know whether Chamonix could do a run of them at a reasonable price point.

I have an 8x10 Hobo with a 120 SA in helical. A 75mm hyper-version would be fabulous. If it can't be done economically in wood, maybe something 3D-printed.

Alas, I'm not going to be much help for now as it's unlikely that I'll have budget for one any time soon. But I hope this comes to fruition and I'll be watching with interest,

[Mark Sawyer]

Regarding the appropriate camera, there was a Folmer Schwing "Skyscraper Camera" that allows a very short extension and nothing protruding in front of the front standard, plus a lot of front rise/fall independent of the bellows, reportedly just for the Hypergon:

"An extreme wide-angle, such as the Goerz Hypergon, is a lens for which there is but little use unless one makes a specialty of photographing large buildings in congested districts. However, a lens of this type or a Series V Protar necessarily must be used in connection with a skyscraper camera, for the reason that the lens is often above or below the center of the plate and therefore has to cut more than the size of the plate."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwio4o24ns38AhUBHEQIHSqiAdsQFnoECBEQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forgottenbooks.com%2Fen%2Fdownload%2FTheCommercialPhotographer_10257636.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2Z7hvDaTg2sm_G4rc3Hlvp

I have a 75mm Hypergon mounted back-in-the-day on a modified 8x10 Improved Seneca View with a bag bellows and very short extension rail. I added a recessed lens board to allow a bit of movement. The squeeze-bulb spins the star, and the cable release releases the star to swing out of the way:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52632165035_840180b671_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2obVAZi)Hypergon 1 (https://flic.kr/p/2obVAZi)

[Oren Grad]

For a while, Tachihara offered a non-folding SW version of its 8x10 camera, with a very short bed. Bellows extension was specified as minimum 75 mm and maximum 230 mm. I imagine not many were sold - they turn up once in a very great while on eBay.

There's also the current Walker Titan XL 8x10, with minimum extension specified as 72 mm. The bed seems a bit deeper than that of the Tachihara, so I don't know whether you'd run into trouble with it ending up in the picture.

Of course Ebony offered SW versions of its non-folding 8x10 as well, but minimum bellows extension was 105 mm.

[Oren Grad]

Another interesting classic camera in this vein - Kodak wide angle box camera, exposing WP format with an 8.5 cm f/18 Protar:

https://www.antiq-photo.com/en/collections/museum/cameras/wide-angle-kodak-view-camera-bill-brandt/

[Dan Fromm]

Hmm. According to http://web.archive.org/web/20161204154713/http://www.cameraquest.com/hyper.htm, in 1914 six Hypergon focal lengths were cataloged. I have no idea whether they were all produced.

Apropos of center filters, please see http://www.galerie-photo.com/center-filters-for-large-format-lenses.html, p. 7. Pre-WWI Goerz may not have known how to make them but Schneider did.

[Corran]

Hmm. According to http://web.archive.org/web/20161204154713/http://www.cameraquest.com/hyper.htm, in 1914 six Hypergon focal lengths were cataloged. I have no idea whether they were all produced.

Original cost for 75mm 000a Hypergon was $49. I just find it interesting that an inflation calculator for 2022 money indicates that being valued about $1450. Bravo on the price target!

[Hugo Zhang]

Bernice that’s a good point. I’ll suggest to the customer an option would include a custom superwide body for those who need it. Hugo, it’d be interesting to know whether Chamonix could do a run of them at a reasonable price point.

That said, I can run a Hypergon on both my Tachihara and pretty sure I can use it on my 2D since the rear standard can run all the way out. Those are fairly common camera types.

Our next 810 camera model, Chamonix 810H, will be a non folding one based upon our popular 45H1. It will have a min bellows draw of 60mm and will handle a 75mm lens with ease. It is NOT a dedicated camera just for one lens as its max bellows draw will be 585mm. We expect that the camera will come out in about 24 months.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Coming late to the party, but I would be interested in the 8x10/75mm version.

[Peter De Smidt]

What a great project! I wish you success!

How hard is the focusing with such a wide lens? My only kinda similar experience was with a Protar, and that was pretty hard to see what was happening on the edges even with a Fresnel.

[Nodda Duma]

What a great project! I wish you success!

How hard is the focusing with such a wide lens? My only kinda similar experience was with a Protar, and that was pretty hard to see what was happening on the edges even with a Fresnel.

I will be able to report when the alpha prototype is assembled in a couple weeks.

Originals are focused at f/22 and shot at f/32-f/45. That will be the case for these.

[Mark Sampson]

Jason, thank you for giving this a try. It's a grand experiment and I hope you can find some buyers. I have trouble imagining any photographs I might take with such a lens, so I won't be purchasing one, but bravo!

[Bernice Loui]

Uber wide angle lenses can be a serious challenge to use effectively. IMO, uber wide angle lenses and their related cameras are s highly speciality image making device..
Back in the day there were a number of specialized "sky cameras" with uber wide angle lenses. Seems the most common images made today with uber wide angle lenses are interior pictures for real estate listings and such.


Bernice






Jason, thank you for giving this a try. It's a grand experiment and I hope you can find some buyers. I have trouble imagining any photographs I might take with such a lens, so I won't be purchasing one, but bravo!

[Chuck Pere]

For a quick look you could try a 75mm pinhole on the 8x10. This is from my 3" FL 8x10 Leonardo camera with slight vertical crop.

[Tin Can]

Excellent Chuck!

You show and tell the very reason I am going your way


For a quick look you could try a 75mm pinhole on the 8x10. This is from my 3" FL 8x10 Leonardo camera with slight vertical crop.

[Nodda Duma]

Just received proof of concept lenses from the shop (8x10 format), so I mounted them in a 3D printed test barrel.

The fellow who approached me with the project backed out, but I’m considering running with it. Steve Lloyd at Chroma Camera is interested in making an ultra wide to accommodate it. He’s been chewing on that thought for the past day. We’d have to Kickstarter it to cover parts cost for a production run.

Next step is to mount it on a lensboard for my 2D and shoot some film.

234947

234948

[Hugo Zhang]

Jason,

Do you have a picture of the apodizing filter for this lens?

[Nodda Duma]

Not yet. I wanted to get the lenses squared away before tackling the custom apodizing filter, since I'll need to invest a bit more $$ to get it designed and prototyped. I'm currently talking to vendors and telling them how they can make a custom-profile filter at low cost.

[Corran]

Looking good, can't wait to see the results! Chuck's image above illustrates what I love about ultrawides and also what I don't love about some pinholes. I dig the perspective though, interested to see the difference in sharpness with a "real" lens.

I have seen a couple of images from a 90mm Hypergon on 11x14 and they weren't great, in terms of contrast and sharpness. I'm curious about a modern lens and how it can be improved in those aspects.

[Tin Can]

Your sharp and my SHARP are very different

I have real bad incurable vision

Everybody's 'vision' is different

mine was never 'good' since child

so it goes

I do what I can

cheerfully...

[Bernice Loui]

Niche market lens.. Suspect the majority market for the Hypergon will be for sheet film formats of 8x10 to 20x24 as there fewer wide angle lenses for 8x10 then far fewer to none for sheet film formats 11x14 and larger..

What the ULF lens market needs is not just the Hypergon, it needs a wide angle double Gauss formula lens like a longer focal length(300mm and longer) Wide Field Ektar in shutter that does not need to be stopped down to ala f64 and smaller (yes, actual lens, not diffraction limited or pin hole effect all f128 and etc).

There was a time back in the day whey Golden De Busch was among the very few that did ULF.. offered ULF stuff too:
https://degoldenbusch.com

Not just Apodizing filter, the re-issue Hypergon needs to accept modern metric sized thread on filters as B&W contrast filters are often used and was not an option, idea, need for the orginal Goerz Hypergon. Shutter needs becomes lesser of an issues as the effective exposure aperture goes smaller and smaller, simple lens cap does good and easy for exposures approaching one second.. Figure exposure aperture of f45, add Apodizing filter of _?_ f-stops add B&W contrast filter add slow ISO film or plate puts the exposure easily into the second(s) range.. no shutter needed, just lens cap..


Bernice

[jnantz]

There was a time back in the day whey Golden De Busch was among the very few that did ULF.. offered ULF stuff too:
https://degoldenbusch.com



Bernice

hi bernice
there were ULF users they just didn't do "fine art landscapes" but they did portraits and banquet photographs. Tom Yanule was one of these guys ... he was located in Chicago .. there were clusters of them in big cities that had .. banquets like Washington DC, NYC Boston, LA these people were busy from the 1930s until recently.. maybe even before the 1930s I only say that because they were busy photographing troops in ww2... tom y was an inventor and besides inventing and using pan cameras he built giant enlargers for his ULF negatives... he wasn't one of the azo amidol crowd..

[Bernice Loui]

Cirkut cameras and Banquet cameras also comes to mind.. Contact prints were a "thing"..

There was a time when...
Bernice



hi bernice
there were ULF users they just didn't do "fine art landscapes" but they did portraits and banquet photographs. Tom Yanule was one of these guys ... he was located in Chicago .. there were clusters of them in big cities that had .. banquets like Washington DC, NYC Boston, LA these people were busy from the 1930s until recently.. maybe even before the 1930s I only say that because they were busy photographing troops in ww2... tom y was an inventor and besides inventing and using pan cameras he built giant enlargers for his ULF negatives... he wasn't one of the azo amidol crowd..

[Mark Sawyer]

Just incidentally, Ron Wisner planned a new 84mm Hypergon around 20-some years ago. Does anyone know if it ever came to be?

[Oren Grad]

Just incidentally, Ron Wisner planned a new 84mm Hypergon around 20-some years ago. Does anyone know if it ever came to be?

Actually got to the point of putting it in his catalog and pricing it. But I've never seen one, either in the flesh or online.

234979

[Greg]

Actually got to the point of putting it in his catalog and pricing it. But I've never seen one, either in the flesh or online.

234979

A friend of mine once told me that he was "at the top of the list" to acquire one... he never saw one.

[jnantz]

must have been a long long time ago around when he came out with the Wisner SLR ... I stopped by his shop in Marion about 12 years ago<?> and he'd already gotten on the boat and sailed away ...

[LabRat]

Cirkut cameras and Banquet cameras also comes to mind.. Contact prints were a "thing"..

There was a time when...
Bernice

But let's remember that early century photography didn't have many practical enlargers yet... They were a super hi-tek item for the top studios that often required it's own generator, or elaborate moving reflectors outside directed in to light the neg... Most studios had many different formats to shoot as these were the contact print sizes a customer might order, so that format was chosen...

Steve K

[John Layton]

...another ULF/banquet guy from Chicago suddenly came to me - Art Sinsabaugh? Worked and taught back in the 1940's through '60's? Anyone here remember him?

[Steven Tribe]

I do understand the excitment about the possibility of the resurrection of the iconic Hyperion - BUT!

There are some facts that, perhaps, should be mentioned before enthusiasm overcomes reasoning!

- The Goerz Hypergon was not an expensive lens. In a catalogue from 1918 the Hypergon and the Heliar compare as follows (coverage vs price).

Hypergon. Price Heliar. Price Coverage (approximately)

000 120SK no.6 24cm. 260SK 13x18cm

000a. 135SK no.8 36cm. 480SK. 18x24cm

00. 145SK. No.9 42cm 620SK. 24x30/21x27cm

0. 170SK. - 30x40cm

1. 200SK. - 40x50cm
In the same catalogue, an 18cm DAGOR cost 145 SK (Swedish Kronar).

So the Hypergon was not an expensive lens - in fact, it was particularly cheap especially in the larger sizes.

- So the reason there so few Hypergon around to-day must be due to something other than the price.
Focusing at F.22 might have been a challenge when people have used to F15/16 for alternative extreme wide angle lenses. I have only seen a couple of period and recent prints from the Hypergon, but, for some reason, my brain cannot cope with the image (perspective?). I feel like some kind of viewer is necessary.

Sorry to be a wet blanket - I am usually very keen on resurrection projects!

[ic-racer]

Box camera fixed at infinity, Packard shutter, and (not shown) optical viewfinder & bubble level.

Maybe consider designing an optical viewfinder with bubble level that can be sold as a set witih this lens.


235148
235149

[Mark Sampson]

I'll suggest that tne reason that there were few Hypergons made or sold is the most obvious one; it is a special-purpose, extremely wide-angle lens.
Not many photographers needed what it did. I've looked at many photographs from the late 19th and early 20th century, more than I could count, and have seen very few that looked like they would have been made with a Hypergon.
And 90 years of 35mm has taught us all to have a number of different lenses in our kit; I suspect that in those days photographers generally "got by" with one lens, a convertible if they were lucky.
That's just speculation, I could be wrong. I do hope that this lens gets made!

[amansjeanphilippe]

Hello
normally, my 75mm is on the way...
is it possible to have 75mm step file in order to design a mount for Copal-Sinar shutter?
It will be hot but maybe not impossible...
here you can see a cut of SINAR S2 with Copal-Sinar shutter and 135° blue light path
244109
Thanks
J.Ph.

[John Layton]

Not to step on any toes here...but I find it very exciting that there are two separate Hypergon threads!

...and as I'd mentioned on the other thread - I think that something like a Will-Travel 8x10 (or other format?) 3-D printed camera would be an ideal match for such a lens!

[Corran]

John, I'll have to look into that 3D printed 8x10 camera...I don't think my Wehman will squeeze that tight.

I ordered one of these. Price was too good to pass up and I've always wanted a Hypergon.

Looking forward to trying it. Need to think back to some of the places I've been that would work well with this insane focal length.

I used my 90mm XL on 4x10 on Friday night, haven't dev'd the film yet...

[John Layton]

Bryan...good for you! Cannot wait to learn of your experiences with this new lens...and see some results!

[Greg]

Looking forward to trying it. Need to think back to some of the places I've been that would work well with this insane focal length.

When first hearing about the reincarnation of this optic, figured to acquire the optic once it was offered FS. Then I thought about the times that I have used my 90mm Super-Angulon XL on my whole plate camera... Most of the time I find it to be too wide. Yes there are some scenes that the XL just absolutely works for me, but to be honest those times are not the majority of times that I set up that camera and lens combo. So then I tried to list the places where I would use the 75mm Hypergon. Came up with only one... a huge heating boiler in a local factory building that there's not enough space to backup to shoot the whole furnace. Guess it is just not the lens for me. So now I am wondering how people who plan on acquiring this unique optic hope to use it.

[Corran]

Greg - some years ago I made this photo with a 47mm XL on 4x5 at a nearby waterfall. I waded waist-deep into a frigid pool of water to get the vantage point I wanted, with the light coming in through the crevice above. I think a wider view might afford additional interest in the foreground from the water cascading into the pool, maybe with the camera closer as well. I've also wanted to climb into that crevice...

I've always thought tools themselves can be sources of inspiration, so perhaps I'll find some new perspectives while searching for a good use of the lens.

244247

[amansjeanphilippe]

Hello
130° what for?
field of view is not the problem, how lens and camera take picture and quality of picture is the real ad-equation between subject and picture.
I already have this field of view with 9mm Laowa for Leica-M. It is hard to find good point of view, but in narrow volume, it works quite good.
I have 12mm (120°) and 15mm (110°) for Leica-M too, and sometime 15mm is too close
Here, some pictures taken at Mont St Michel or Paris:
outside
244249
inside, maybe a little bit too wide
244250
but you can crop
244251
here the camera is placed between columns, quite sure 8x10 will not pass
244252

It works as a toy too...
244253
but you can crop too
244254

So 130° is definitively not the problem, quality is.

J.Ph.

[Corran]

Also a thought - putting the camera flat to the horizon and cropping to only the top half will give an undistorted 4x10 image as if using a significant amount of front rise. I've done this before with my 90mm.

[amansjeanphilippe]

Hello
mine is arrived!
very happy
J.Ph.