PDA

View Full Version : Interest in 'new' classic lenses



wideopeniris
31-May-2007, 08:07
Alot of people are interested in the image properties of older lenses on large format cameras, and I was wondering if there would be a demand for new lenses manufactured to high qulity but using old lens formulas for their unique image forming qualities.

Because these would be low volume products, they would not be cheap compared to the cost of a used lens for the more common lenses, but it would be possible to buy in new condition the lenses that are very rare or impossible to find, so in some cases it might be an economic purchase as well.

In addition to reproduceing the 'old masters' of optical designs, it would also be possible to bring modern coating technology to these old designs to improve contrast and flare resistance without destroying the intrinsic qualities of the optical formula. Also mounting options could be improved with lens mountings tailored for modern shutters.

So how many of you would want to buy such a lens and what old lens designs would be most desirable?

Kevin.

Toyon
31-May-2007, 08:32
To some extent, this is already being done. Cooke has reissued their version of the Pinkham and Smith Visual Quality lens, they have also reissued their classic Cooke convertible lens. Reportedly, Schneider-Kreuznach's new ULF lenses follow the classic Dagor formula. Wisner developed his own convertible vade mecum set based on historic designs. Modern lenses have the benefit of building upon the experience of earlier designs and computer aided manufacture. So it would probably make sense to reissue lenses that had unique characteristics or that never achieved their potential due to manafacturing limitations at the time. It certainly would be fun to see a new improved Hypergon and graf variable anastigmat made with modern materials. Perhaps just as useful, I would like to see someone manufacture an improved shutter capable of handling larger lenses and operating under severe environments as well as an adjustable adapter to fix them to the front or rear of barrel lenses.

Dave_B
31-May-2007, 09:42
We had an interesting fight about this very topic roughly six months ago. After we insulted one another for a while, we all crawled off into our corners to sulk and nurse our grudges. You might want to search the forum and read that discussion. As you might imagine, half of us thought this was nuts and half thought it was a wonderful idea. Anybody who participated in that discussion will probably take a pass on this round, myself included. The bruises have just healed.....
Cheers,
Dave B.

Jack Flesher
31-May-2007, 09:53
The problem is, what we all want is the look from the classics, but with modern multicoatings and in modern shutters -- at the same price or less than we have to pay for the classics in crap shutters or barrels....

:D,

wideopeniris
31-May-2007, 09:53
Any clues for search terms, Dave?

I'm sure the gentlemen on this forum can express their opions in a polite fashion :-)

One mans abberation is another mans expressive tool, and there are plenty of 'perfect' lenses for those who seek precision.

An example of the sort of thing I have in mind :- I quite like the idea of the Aero Ektar 178mm F2.5 - fast aperature for shallow depth of field - interesting for portraits and the like - see David Burnett's pages (he uses one and a Dallmeyer pentac to great effect). But they are radioactive, very difficult to mount, and generally discoloured and with spots and other defects. A nicely recomputed non radioactive suitable for shutter lens would be more attractive. That sort of thing isnt available, and great - Cooke have made a couple of designs available, but at a very high price point and that doesnt really cover the possibilities that are available.

Kevin.

Ole Tjugen
31-May-2007, 09:54
Lots of "classic" lens designs are still in use - or at least were in use until recently. As mentioned the Schneider 500mm XL is a Dagor-derivative, Tessars and Dialytes are still being made, Plasmats aplenty...

The only "interesting" ones which are definitely gone are Aplanats and Hypergon. Neither is likely to be resurrected due to the incredibly high price of production - they can't be made economically on modern machinery.

Dan Fromm
31-May-2007, 09:59
Ole, not to be a complete idiot, but who's making dialytes these days? Apo Ronars, if they're still in production, excepted.

And are you sure that we can still get new, not new old stock, dagor types in many focal lengths?

Cheers, please pardon my limited knowledge,

Dan

Ole Tjugen
31-May-2007, 10:11
Let's see...

there are the WA Congo (really double Gauss), and Apo-Ronars as mentioned, and - I was sure there were more!

And no, the Schneider 550mm XXL is AFAIK the only Dagor-type in production. Note that I didn't mention any great selection of dagors, only that there is one...

If I could "resurrect" the lens of my choise, it would be the Amatar. :D

Jan Pedersen
31-May-2007, 10:34
How about the Fuji C models, aren't they Dialytes?

Neil Purling
31-May-2007, 11:32
How about a multi-coated Petzval, or J.H. Dallmeyer's variant? Thing is what sort of focal length could mount into a Copal #3 shutter.

r.e.
31-May-2007, 11:42
I think that there is a market for this sort of thing.

For example, Cosina Voigtlander is producing a Nokton 40mm f1.4 lens in both single and multicoated versions, and there is apparently demand for the former.

See, for example, this thread, which has some photos taken with the single coated version: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27375

Both Zeiss and Voigtlander are making "classic" lenses for 35mm rangefinders.

Ole Tjugen
31-May-2007, 12:26
Ah - the Schneider 1100mm XXL is a dialyte!

A Copal #3 has an opening of 45mm, so if f:3.5 is what is wanted (for a Petzval) that would limit the focal length to about 160mm. I guess you could make an acceptable 210mm, which wouldn't be too bad as a portrait lens for 4x5"?

Yes, Cosina/Voigtländer has "reissued" some classic lens types. But I fear that this would be more difficult in LF - mostly because all the "originals" of these classic lenses are still in use (or at least in circulation). Why reissue the 240mm f:4.5 Heliar, when people are still using the ones that were made in 1930? Tessars have been in continuous production since the first prototype, so have Plasmats and Dialytes, and double-gausses - and I've already mentioned the Aplanats and the Hypergon. Dagors might have had the longest production run of all (except of course Tessar and Dialytes), so the competition is there from all the old ones. It's hard to compete with ebay's "photographica" section...

Just in case the right person reads this: I would buy a "re-release" of the Zeiss Amatar. :D

Scott Davis
31-May-2007, 12:28
How about a multi-coated Petzval, or J.H. Dallmeyer's variant? Thing is what sort of focal length could mount into a Copal #3 shutter.

Probably the only Petzval-type lens that could mount in a #3 shutter would be something to cover 4x5 at a maximum- maybe a 6x9cm. If someone would make a #5 sized shutter again, there would be more possibilities for such beasts.

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
31-May-2007, 12:49
I have purchased a number of both Dallmeyer Petzval and other "classic" lenses made useless by balsam failure and had them repolished, recemented, and multicoated by Arax in the Ukraine. In most cases the cost was less than $250. Who is going to make a multicoated anything for that cheap? My Dallmeyer 3B cost $170 in the 1870s when it was manufactured. Today, that would be about $2800 based on the consumer price index (see: http://www.measuringworth.com), a bit cheaper than the price of the Cooke PS945.

Dave_B
31-May-2007, 14:03
Kevin:
Here is the thread. Boy, it was fun......
Dave B.



http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=11449

Toyon
31-May-2007, 14:52
A reissued aplanat? Man, I wonder what kind of interest that would generate? Does anyone know who the last manufacturer of Aplanat/RR design lenses for large format was? Did B&J make one?

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
31-May-2007, 15:29
Does anyone know who the last manufacturer of Aplanat/RR design lenses for large format was?

The Cooke PS945 is essentially a RR with a wide aperture and purposeful spherical aberration.

Gene McCluney
31-May-2007, 15:55
A reissued aplanat? Man, I wonder what kind of interest that would generate? Does anyone know who the last manufacturer of Aplanat/RR design lenses for large format was? Did B&J make one?

I've got a coated Wollensak 16" rapid rectilinear that I got from the B&J lens bank in the 1970's. It is in black painted barrel with iris diaphram. Of course B&J could have coated it.

Gene McCluney
31-May-2007, 16:05
I have purchased a number of both Dallmeyer Petzval and other "classic" lenses made useless by balsam failure and had them repolished, recemented, and multicoated by Arax in the Ukraine. In most cases the cost was less than $250. Who is going to make a multicoated anything for that cheap? My Dallmeyer 3B cost $170 in the 1870s when it was manufactured. Today, that would be about $2800 based on the consumer price index (see: http://www.measuringworth.com), a bit cheaper than the price of the Cooke PS945.

While I have had Arax do polishing and coating of single lens elements...can he remove the lens elements from the burnished mounts? Will he do this? did you have to send him just glass?

Paul Metcalf
31-May-2007, 18:44
Arax in the Ukraine Jason, do you have contact info for them? Any issues with shipping between ?? and Ukraine? Thanks. Paul

Never mind, google search turned up www.araxfoto.com

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
31-May-2007, 19:12
While I have had Arax do polishing and coating of single lens elements...can he remove the lens elements from the burnished mounts? Will he do this? did you have to send him just glass?

No, you need to remove the elements yourself. For some lenses which have burnished elements (notably Dallmeyer Petzvals) this can be a real PITA, while for others with threaded retaining rings (Artars, for instance) it is quite simple. I try to bend the burnished edge as best I can, and often I have done a good job. In a worst case scenario when nothing else works I have cut through the entire burnished edge with a jeweler's saw and used DOP wax to "glue" the elements back in.


Jason, do you have contact info for them? Any issues with shipping between ?? and Ukraine?...

I have never had a problem with mail. Gevorg Vartanyan, the owner, is usually very good with communication. The work can sometimes take months, but it gets done and seems to be done well.

I should say, if you don't know, that polishing, recementing, and especially coating is an unpredictable business at best. Elements can crack or craze, although this has never happened to me.

I can highly recommend John at http://www.focalpointlens.com. If I had a really valuable lens I would probably send it to him. However, his prices are easily three times those of Arax.

wideopeniris
1-Jun-2007, 01:17
OK so yes you can restore old lenses and get them back to working etc. But isn't this too much hassle for most photographers. Its like the difference between owning a classic car like an MG BGT and buying a Morgan. Those who like to tinker go for the BGT but those that like to drive go for the Morgan (the bgt owner likes to drive too probably, but he like sto tinker as well).

Shutters are a clear issue for fast and large lenses. Is there really nothing bigger out there than a #3? (apart from sinar's behind the lens mechanical shutters).

Another example is the wide angle lenses. The angulons have not been made for a long time. Schneiders answer is to use a super-symmar. Now the optical performance of an angulon and the super-symmar are almost comparable for practical purposes (I can raise a web page if you want) but the symmar is huge and heavy whereas the angulon is tiny and light. OK - go out and buy an angulon second hand - but you will find a great deal of variation in performance. The good ones are very good but there are alot of poor ones (see:http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html where they testsed several). And then theres sticky shutters and remounting and dented lens rings and no caps etc etc.

Kevin.

wideopeniris
1-Jun-2007, 04:05
Dave - thanks for looking it up. Interesting. I understand fully your concerns (I work in the electronics industry and am painfully aware of the larger problems facing any technological product) I suspect the key to success is to keep things simple, especially with optics, and to have a firm idea of what you are aiming for.

The discussions on the previous thread seem to be driven by the ULF'ers - what do 5x4 folks have to say? Surely there are more users of 5x4 out there than 10x8?

Does anyone know how Mr Kadillak got on?

Cheers,

Kevin.

Nick_3536
1-Jun-2007, 04:26
The discussions on the previous thread seem to be driven by the ULF'ers - what do 5x4 folks have to say? Surely there are more users of 5x4 out there than 10x8?


A lot more modern lenses for very reasonable prices that cover the smaller formats including 8x10 then for ULF. I bet $3K could put together a fairly nice 4x5 lens kit brand new. OTOH a single custom lens that costs that much is going to be a hard sell for 4x5.

Chuck Pere
1-Jun-2007, 04:41
Another option would be for Copal to come out with a shutter that has more aperature blades producing a round hole. Some people believe this results in better looking out of focus areas. Nikon even plays this up with their new small format lenses. Probably would be a good market causing people to replace their shutters before they are really worn out.

Dan Fromm
1-Jun-2007, 06:00
Kevin wrote "OK so yes you can restore old lenses and get them back to working etc. But isn't this too much hassle for most photographers. Its like the difference between owning a classic car like an MG BGT and buying a Morgan. Those who like to tinker go for the BGT but those that like to drive go for the Morgan (the bgt owner likes to drive too probably, but he like sto tinker as well)."

Kevin, I think this is a bad analogy. Old UK-made cars, be they mass-produced (MG) or partly hand-made (Morgan) are less reliable than modern cars and don't drive as well as new ones either. Modern sedans are quicker, faster, handle better, give better fuel economy, break down less, ... If you're thinking of a brand new Aero 8, well, they're absurdly expensive.

Old lenses, on the other hand, can shoot as well as new ones. And very often old shutters can be made to work very well.

I think that you overestimate the cost/difficulty of shutter maintenance and overrate older designs' need for anti-reflection coatings. There is a reason why most of the "classic" pre-WWII designs have few air-glass interfaces.

Nick, at today's prices for good used lenses in good order, why buy new? Isn't that why Nikon stopped making LF lenses?

Cheers,

Dan

Nick_3536
1-Jun-2007, 06:11
Nick, at today's prices for good used lenses in good order, why buy new? Isn't that why Nikon stopped making LF lenses?


I agree but even if somebody wanted to buy new a 4x5/5x7 person could easily get a lens kit for the likely price of one new custom lens. That one lens is going to be very special to get a big market. OTOH for those people shooting ULF the choices for new lenses are smaller.

Now some of the newer more interesting lens seem to be going up in price. With Nikon out it seems the wide Nikons are now climbing. I know used 120mm SW are more expensive then what I paid new for mine. The used price for something like the 75mm is pretty close to what B&H wants for a new one. I figure when B&H runs out prices on that will climb. Then you've got the price of the 150 SW which I guess is more of an 8x10 lens.

Robb_Scharetg
1-Jun-2007, 21:01
Hello Kevin, et al.

You're correct about David Burnett using an Aero to great effect. We've chatted via email about other glass, I know for a fact he's not using a Pentac, too long and not quite 'his look'.

RE your comment on the Aero being difficult to mount, actually not at all. Bil Moretz at ProCamera in Charlottesville, VA (www.procamerava.com) does an amazing AND affordable job of mounting them into boards to use on Speed Graphics with some regularity. He's mounted two for me, one for David and at least five others for photographers who've needed it done, plus he does outstanding custom machine work if you need something 'unique' done.

As for their 'radioactivity', it's minor. The discoloration? If you don't care for it it's very easy to bleach the glass via exposure to UV light for a few days. Although in actuality the 'tone' is about equal to a 81 EF filter so it's a nice built in warming gel on the lens. And if you're shooting negative you can just dial the warmth out in the darkroom, or on the monitor via 'curves'. If you're looking for one let me know, I have a few, I also have a few Pentacs.

Now getting an Aero in a shutter, that IS a bit of a trick. I actually have the only Aero I've ever seen in a shutter, it's a large Alphax I think. Speeds from 1 sec. to 1/75, which I suppose is a good range. Only thing is that the thing is SO big in the shutter that I've had it mounted into a Sinar board to use on my Kodak KMV 8x10 (converted by Bill Moretz) so that I can shoot with a flash sync. Interesting (and perhaps little known fact) about the Aero is that it covers 8x10, sharp into the corners. Plus you can shoot it at 2.5, so IF you want you've got an extremely fast W/A on 8x10, a fast wide/normal on 5x7 and a fast long/normal on 4x5. All in a shutter with a sync. OR you can just mount it on a Graflex board and use it on a Speed Graphic with a cammed rangefinder and shoot handheld. Check out http://ingado.com/other.shtml , ALL the portraits were shot with an Aero/Speed combo, quite often handheld and rangefinder focused.

Other good bets for lenses in shutter- the Xenotar 150/2.8, the Xenotar 135/3.5, Xenotar 80/2.8 (does not cover 4x5), Schneider Xenon 120/f2 (you'd front mount that on a shutter) and for lenses not in shutter-the Aero, the 200/2.9 Pentac, the Dallmeyer Super Six 152/1.9, the Reitzschel 135/1.9, the Plaubel Anitcomar 150/2.9 (you CAN shutter mount this one).

At the end of the day though it will be difficult to find what you're describing. The lens companies began slowing production of really 'fast' glass for large format with the advent of the Leica around the end of the 1930's, except for lenses developed specifically for night reconnaissance and aerial mapping during WWII - Aero, Pentac, Xenotar, etc. The height of the Cold War saw some great fast glass with large coverage, however as that wound down coupled with ever increasing film capabilities and lens resolutions via MF I think there was less and less demand for these types of lenses. As a result we're all left looking at glass that's considered 'interesting' made in the late 1950's/early 60s. And then, it was gone.

Robb Scharetg
www.scharetgpictures.com





Any clues for search terms, Dave?

I'm sure the gentlemen on this forum can express their opions in a polite fashion :-)

One mans abberation is another mans expressive tool, and there are plenty of 'perfect' lenses for those who seek precision.

An example of the sort of thing I have in mind :- I quite like the idea of the Aero Ektar 178mm F2.5 - fast aperature for shallow depth of field - interesting for portraits and the like - see David Burnett's pages (he uses one and a Dallmeyer pentac to great effect). But they are radioactive, very difficult to mount, and generally discoloured and with spots and other defects. A nicely recomputed non radioactive suitable for shutter lens would be more attractive. That sort of thing isnt available, and great - Cooke have made a couple of designs available, but at a very high price point and that doesnt really cover the possibilities that are available.

Kevin.