C. Zeiss Tessar 105/3.5

[Havoc]

I found on my shelf a "Carl Zeiss Tessar 1:3.5 f=105mm" in a Linhof branded Synchro Compur. I guess I bought it more for the shutter then the lens. But I'm a bit wondering what this is for kind of lens.

A 105mm would be rather wide for 4x5 but it is marked a Tessar which aren't really wide lenses. But then again I might be very wrong. Is this a 6x9 lens? I'm not really capable of testing it right now.

[Offhand35]

Linhof had offered at one time a Super Technika 23. (2.25x3.25", 6x9). I wonder if it was originally for that model as a normal lens.

[paulbarden]

I found on my shelf a "Carl Zeiss Tessar 1:3.5 f=105mm" in a Linhof branded Synchro Compur. I guess I bought it more for the shutter then the lens. But I'm a bit wondering what this is for kind of lens.

A 105mm would be rather wide for 4x5 but it is marked a Tessar which aren't really wide lenses. But then again I might be very wrong. Is this a 6x9 lens? I'm not really capable of testing it right now.

That is likely a 6x9 lens from/for something like a Super Ikonta.

[David Lindquist]

My 1957 Linhof catalog shows the 105 mm f/3.5 Tessar for the 2 1/4 x3 1/4 Super Technika. There was also a 150 mm f/4.5 Tessar for the 4 x 5 Super Technika.

David

[Embdude]

Here is a 23 Technika III (1951-1956) with a 105mm Tessar.

245451

[Dan Fromm]

It is a normal lens for 2x3 (6x9 in metric). Absolutely not a w/a lens for 4x5.

[Embdude]

Arne Cröll wrote a very good article
Large format lenses from Carl Zeiss Oberkochen 1950-1972

it can be found on his website: https://www.arnecroell.com/zeissoberkochen.pdf

Arne used to be active here on the forum, but i have not heard from him in some time...

The details of the 105mm Tessar are mostly on page 7... Here are the highlights:
"The Tessars were intended to be the economical alternative to the more expensive Planars with
similar focal lengths. In 1958, Linhof sold the 105 and 150mm Tessars in Germany for DM 211 and DM
420, respectively, whereas the 100mm and 135mm Planars cost DM 528 and DM 597 [12]. Even then, the
Zeiss Tessars were more expensive than the more versatile, but slower f/5.6 Schneider Symmar, or the
Voigtländer f/4.5 Apo-Lanthar. The 105mm Symmar and Apo-Lanthar were DM 203 and DM 204, re-
spectively, and the 150mm versions were DM 314 (Symmar) and DM 318 (Apo-Lanthar) [12]. For compar-
ison, the average gross income in Germany in 1958 was DM 5330 per year [13]; a 9x12cm/4x5” Super-
Technika IV cost DM 1485, and a 6.5x9cm Super Technika DM 1180 [12]."

[Embdude]

Some Zeiss info about the Tessar for Linhof cameras...

245453

[Embdude]

Laflex has 2 brochures with info about the 105mm Tessar for Linhof Cameras:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-SAyd9jsCOQ8Z-tyAfgTE0oihRO_-Le8/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1luVvHl5eKlhhJPXyUFMSFWhpzWvK7XrT/view

[Per Madsen]

My 1957 Linhof catalog shows the 105 mm f/3.5 Tessar for the 2 1/4 x3 1/4 Super Technika. There was also a 150 mm f/4.5 Tessar for the 4 x 5 Super Technika.

David

I have the 150 mm 4.5 Tessar. Good, but not the large amount of movements.

I have seen four examples through the years. Check for separation of the cemented rear element.
I have seen it on two of the four i have checked, but not on mine.

[Havoc]

Thanks. This confirms my doubt that it would be a 6x9. It's just another "normal" then.

[Dan Fromm]

Thanks. This confirms my doubt that it would be a 6x9. It's just another "normal" then.

Huh? For which format is 105 mm the normal focal length? And 150 mm?

[Mark J]

Is this a trick question ?

[domaz]

Huh? For which format is 105 mm the normal focal length? And 150 mm?

Isn't the normal focal length typically the diagonal of the format? Therefore for a 105mm lens the exact normal format is about 6cm x 8.75cm. As an aside if you measure the film gates of any "6x9" cameras or holders you will notice almost none of them are actually 9cm - they are almost all a bit short of that. The Adapt-A-Roll 620 seems to have the largest film gate of any "6x9" format camera/holder I ever encountered at 8.4cm!

[Dan Fromm]

Is this a trick question ?

Absolutely not. In post #14 above, the poster wrote "This confirms my doubt that it would be a 6x9." I think "it" is the 105/3.5 Tessar that's the subject of this discussion.

The normal focal length for 2.25"x3.25", called 2x3 in vernacular English and 6x9 in metric (same damn format, poor approximation), is 100 mm. With few exceptions, the focal length of lenses fitted to fixed lens 2x3 cameras ranges from 100 mm - 105 mm. Normal for the format, as you'd expect. Post #14 above seems nuts. To be fair, the poster may know something that I don't and should.

[Mark J]

It's post #11 Dan, now it makes sense. I hadn't read that one properly. Yes.

[Dan Fromm]

It's post #11 Dan, now it makes sense. I hadn't read that one properly. Yes.

Thanks for the correction.

[Drew Wiley]

I have a later tiny multicoated 105/3.5 Nikon M tessar. It's wonderful for 6x9 roll film backs, but won't cover 4x5 either.