Mystery portrait lens

[Andrew L]

So I've just taken delivery of a 5x4 lens that I bought on eBay. The vendor doesn't know too much about it and he's definitely legit. It was given to him by the family of a friend of his who had died.

This is all that it says on the lens which is in a Compur 1 shutter:

Portrait Anastigmat 1:6,3 f=270 1243381

The glass is absolutely pristine and the lens is quite light which suggests to me that it doesn't have many elements. I'm guessing that it's from the '60s or '70s.

I don't think it's a Schneider as the filter size dos not match with any of my regular Schneider lenses. Schneider also told the vendor that they always put their name on their products. Maybe it's a Rodenstock?

Anyway help in identifying this would be much appreciated.

Andrew

[Ole Tjugen]

If it were a Schneider lens, it would have to have been made in 1938. Sinc you're guessing 1960's or 70's, I assume that it is coated? Or could it be a "bloom" on an uncoated lens? One of my 1930's Schneider lenses looks like it's coated, and the "bloom" works as a coating too...

Does it say "Portrait" or "Porträt"? If the latter, at least that narrows it down to Germany (or Switzerland, or Austria).

I'll guess wildly here - I think it might be a triplet. That's the most common undercorrected Anastigmat type, which is exactly what's needed for a portrait lens. The Heliars (and other Dynar-type lenses) are not "quite light".

Incidentally a 270mm f:6.3 lens shouldn't fit in a #1 shutter, but might be in a #2. If the threads on both cells are the same, it's definitely not a #1 and might be a #2. If it's a Compur shutter of that age, it's not a #3 either, as those weren't made until the Compounds were phased out in the 1970's.

[Andrew L]

Ole

It definitely says Portrait.

Interesting what you say about the shutter, which is a subject I am profoundly ignorant about. It simply says Compur 1 on it. It says around the barrel of the shutter Lens Made In West Germany. There is also the number 4 079 356.

The lens is almost certainly single coated and the glass does seem to be particularly bright and clear.

By the way, it's mounted on a Linhof Technika (West Germany written on the back of it) panel which helped persuade me to buy it.

i'm really puzzled by it all.

[Andrew L]

Here's a link to the lens as it appeared in the auction.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=006&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=160046058250&rd=1&rd=1

[Jim Galli]

Mystery is a good word for it. Did Prinz make up "house brand generic's" similar to some of the stuff Burke and James sold here in the States? My "guess" fwiw is that it is a tele-photo similar to the Scheider Tele-Arton or Rodenstock "Rotelar" of the period around 1972 which is where I'd guess the shutter. Most of those were kind of "underwhelming" as sharp picture takers but might satisfy someone for portraiture.

[Bob Salomon]

No mystery it is a Rodenstock 270 tele that was discontinued by Rodenstock and Linhof purchased all that were left and labeled them "Portrait" We sold the last ones in 1981 or 82.

[Jim Galli]

I just love it when the man who knows the answer steps up! Thanks Bob.

[Ole Tjugen]

Just as I had turned off the PC, the thought struck me that it must be a telephoto lens. Light weight, shutter too small for a symmetric lens, and "Portrait"... Shat should have been clues enough. :)

I believe you got a good deal there.

[Andrew L]

Many thanks, Bob. As I said in my first post, I guessed/hoped it was a Rodenstock. Curiously, Paula, at Linhof & Studio in the UK, failed to identify it. Was the deal done solely for you guys in the States? Cannot emphasise how good the glass looks!

[Jay DeFehr]

I have one of those. Mine came with a large Graflex XL kit I traded some work for. For what it's worth, I don't think it's much of a portrait lens; too slow and too sharp. It will cover 4x5 (barely), but movements are not practical. It will fit on a Graphic lensboard, and will work with a 4x5 Graphic camera. Good luck.

Jay

[Andrew L]

Jay,

The lens came in a Linhof mount and I have a Linhof Technika. Not surprisingly, I'm not so interested in using it with a Graflex or Graphic :)

I'm not bothered about whether the lens is 'too sharp'. I can deal with that. It's the actual focal length that appeals. I just have a gut feeling that this lens will do very nicely for me. Your mileage may vary, of course!

Andrew

[Jay DeFehr]

Hi Andrew.

Your Technika has a lot in common with a Graphic, such as a small lensboard and short bellows, which make a telephoto design useful, but the lack of coverage and movements translate equally to your Linhof, as well. You might love it for portraits, and you might not miss the movements, but I haven't found any use for mine that wasn't better performed by a different lens. I hope you enjoy your lens for years to come.

Jay

[Andrew L]

Jay,

I get what you're saying. I'm not expecting miracles like miraculous bokeh, sharp but soft, etc but I don't have a lens in this focal range that's why I was interested in it. I'm hoping that it will complement the 210mm f6.3 Xenar (end of production job) that I've got.

[Arne Croell]

No mystery it is a Rodenstock 270 tele that was discontinued by Rodenstock and Linhof purchased all that were left and labeled them "Portrait" We sold the last ones in 1981 or 82.

Bob, so was it a Rotelar? The max. opening doesn't exactly fit to the Rotelars I know about (f/5.5 and f/6.6) but I am not aware of other Rodenstock telephotos.

[Andrew L]

Jay,

I've checked in the Vade Mecum and the Rodenstock for the XL was a f5.6. I haven't any trace of mine in their lists which, of course, aren't totally comprehensive.

[Jay DeFehr]

Andrew,

sometime max aperture is a function of the specific shutter the lens is fitted to. All that really matters is that you like your lens. I wish you the very best of luck with it, and hope you two make beautiful music together.

Jay

[Andrew L]

"hope you two make beautiful music together"

I'm not sure about that. I do a lap of honour is the picture is in focus.

[Jay DeFehr]

I know what you mean. I'm sitting in as my own portrait subject right now, trying to get my lighting/exposure/development worked out for my actual subject. I'm shooting 8x10 APHS ortho, with 4 second exposures and a 16" f7.5 lens wide open. I don't expect critical sharpness, but I'm hoping for some indication of what I can expect with a real sitter. If I get anything like proper focus, I'll do a handstand! Good luck with your new lens.

Jay

[Andrew L]

Jay,

I'll state outright that I am very envious of your 10x8 and 16'' lens. That has to be a lot of fun.

10x8 is simply too big for me to lug around around, I think. I've changed from a monorail to a Technika in the hope that I can carry it around with me more on jobs. A 10x8 would stay at home, I'm afraid.

I wish you the very best of good luck with your endeavours.

[Jay DeFehr]

My trusty 'dorff is a few steps away, in my den,at the moment. I don't do landscapes, and so I don't have much occasion to pack my equip. far from my car. I do a lot of location portraiture, but that's nothing like backpacking. My 8x10 kit fits into a case with filmholders and accessories, another for my lenses, and my big Majestic tripod makes for two trips from car to location, and two trips back, unless I can talk my subject into carrying a case. If I was more industrious, I could probably fashion a cart for the whole lot, and save a trip. Another day, perhaps. I do have some really nice old lenses, and enjoy them very much. The diffusion effect of an old portrait lens is really amplified by the use of a high contrast film like APHS, and the results are quite unique, I think. It's a lot of fun, in any case.

Jay

[Andrew L]

Jay, do you do your own processing? One of the things that scares me off dabbling in 10x8 is the sheer expense of it all.

I must confess that the affectionate way you describe your lenses and combined with your use of a particular film type is most intriguing. Do you have a website where I can see something?

By the way, I'll test the Portrait lens out over the weekend and should be able to use it in earnest next Tuesday. Fingers crossed.

[Jay DeFehr]

Hi Andrew.

I do my own processing and enjoy it very much. I formulated some staining developers that work very well for me, and I enjoy putting them through their paces. I don't have a website, but I hope to have one up soon. I've tried to learn how to get a good scan of a print with a flatbed scanner, with very little success. I get much better results scanning 35mm film with my Plustek film scanner, but those scans are not relevant to this forum, and one of the moderators here gets particularly offended when I post them. I'll post one of my very first 8x10 images. It's a self portrait I made while investigating a bellows problem. It's HP5+/ ABC Pyro/ DBI, taken with a 12" combined Turner-Reich Triple Convertible lens. It was printed on Ilford MG Warmtone FB paper, and selenium toned. Best of luck with your lens testing!

Jay

[Andrew L]

Jay,

Thanks for taking the trouble to post that self-portrait. I now feel suitably motivated to make sure I do some proper shots with my new lens as soon as I can.

[Jay DeFehr]

Good luck, Andrew, and I hope you find a more photogenic subject than I did.

Jay

[C. D. Keth]

If I was more industrious, I could probably fashion a cart for the whole lot, and save a trip. Another day, perhaps.
Jay

Do a search for one of the heavy rubbermaid carts. With the wheels changed from hard rubber wheels to 8-inch pneumatic wheels, they will traverse about anything fairly easily. They're pretty standard for film camera assistants to own for lugging things to and from the camera truck.

[Jay DeFehr]

Thanks for the tip, Christopher. Might be just the ticket.

Jay