Jena Tessar f/4.5 300mm - Any Good?

[argos33]

Hi all,
I recently acquired two big barrel lenses, each labeled "Carl Zeiss Jena DDR Tessar 4.5/300".

The serial numbers are:
2071
9401425

Does anyone have information on these lenses? What were they used for? I looked around but couldn't find much except for a few mixed reviews. They have a ton of iris blades - very smooth circles, so I expect they would have some nice bokeh if nothing else. Anyone know how much coverage they have and how sharp they are? I briefly taped it to the front of the 8x10 so I know it covers that at least. I am wondering how useful they will be as taking lenses and/or enlarging lenses for 8x10. Thanks

Evan

[IanG]

There seem to be quite a few of these lenses around at reasonable prices.

Tessar's give their best performance stopped down, Docter Optics recommended using f22 as the optimal aperture. They were probably sold as process lenses and used mainly for graphics etc, the coverage is around 50-55 degrees.

Ian

[Dan Fromm]

Ian, there are better process lenses than f/4.5 Tessars.

Evan's monsters are fairly late, may have been made as taking lenses for Mentor cameras, which have, depending on the model, behind the lens or focal plane shutters. They should be very good within their limitations (circle covered not much larger than focal length) from f/11 down.

[Sevo]

These aren't dedicated process lenses, but were pretty much omni-purpose, the bulk of large format lenses built in/for the Comecon countries were these GDR Tessars or OEM versions of the same.

A classic design, and capable of quite good results. They take some stopping down (though 22 seems exaggerated, at least mine are good from 11 on), but they were also used fully open as press and portrait lenses.

[Ken Lee]

I have one of these in the 250mm length. I used it to make this portrait (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/lenses/index.php) and this botanical (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/lenses/index.php#Vintage) image on 4x5 and 5x7 - and others like them, such as this landscape (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/lenses/index.php) image. It has become one of my favorite lenses.

As you probably know, there are modern designs with wider coverage, but many have a more "sterile" look. For my taste, they are among the lenses with the nicest blur, and overall rendering.

[Steve Hamley]

...
For my taste, they are among the lenses with the nicest blur, and overall rendering.

Ken, that's my experience also.

Cheers,

Steve

[Ken Lee]

Evan should send one of those lenses to Steve immediately - and the other one to me.

[erie patsellis]

Naw, you guys already have one each.

I, on the other hand, have none....

[Arne Croell]

The serial numbers are:
2071
9401425

They were made in 1974 (9401425) and 1983 (2071; Zeiss Jena changed the way they did serial numbers in between those years). The design is from 1928 in both cases, but still good. As mentioned above they were used as general taking and portrait lenses, also for enlarging.

[Armin Seeholzer]

I have also one of those and it has the No. 3344 how old would thad be Arne!
Mine is even full open quite sharp in the center and at f 8 sharp to the corner of 4x5 and at f 16 sharp to the corner of my 8x10!

Cheers Armin

[Arne Croell]

I have also one of those and it has the No. 3344 how old would thad be Arne!
Mine is even full open quite sharp in the center and at f 8 sharp to the corner of 4x5 and at f 16 sharp to the corner of my 8x10!

Cheers Armin
Armin, 1986.

Arne

[argos33]

So it looks like the consensus is that they cover 8x10 but not much more, and that they are fairly sharp if stopped down to f/16 or more. How about as an enlarging lens? I suppose as long as I stop it down it would be acceptable. Thanks for the replies everyone.

Evan

[g.lancia]

Tessar is a classic design existing for every format, I am sure you all know that.

Being quite a simple scheme, by today standards, it should be sharp, contrasty, saturated and with nice out of focus, although not well corrected for aberrations.

[Bernard Kaye]

Interesting, after all the criticism of Tessars; Ken Lee is for my taste, superb; there are reasons that Tessars are highly regarded though they can not resolve a million pairs of lines per mm: they are effective at rendering a scene, the way it was, the way we want to remember it.. Bernie Kaye

[cyberjunkie]

Sorry for reviving this old thread, but i thought that it was better to follow an old thread than start a new one.:)

I just purchased one of these lenses, i haven't even got it already.
But i discovered that there is another version of the same lens, that is a T*.
I know 35mm lenses from Western Germany with the same denomination, but i didn't knew that there were LF lenses from the East that were called T* as well.
I suppose it's all a matter of multicoating, but i would be grateful if somebody could report something more about it.
Not having my lens at hand, i can't say anything, but i guess that non-T* lenses are uncoated. That's what it looks like, judging from the picture. That's strange, because the lens looks as new, but we all know that "Warsaw Pact" lenses are very often "new stock", even if the actual production was done quite some time ago.
I suppose that the need for a good coating treatment was not so great, if these lenses were mainly used for reproduction. So it wouldn't be a big suprise if these lenses were actually uncoated. Just guessing... until a knowledgeable member provides some more infos.

have fun

CJ

[Dan Fromm]

"T" aus Jena, single coated. After a while CZJ stopped engraving it on lenses 'cos all of their lenses were coated and coating was no longer a big thing.

Tessars don't benefit that much from coating, they have only six air-glass interfaces.

If the lens you bought is an f/4.5 CZJ Tessar it was made to be used as a taking lens. f/4.5 Tessars aren't good enough over a usefully large angle to be used as repro lenses.

[cyberjunkie]

I still don't have the lens at hand, but i hope i will get it soon.
I asked the guy who sold me the 300mm Tessar about the feasibility of shutter mounting.
He replied that the front element can be easily unscrewed from the barrel/diaphragm, but that the back lenses are held in place by rings, so it shouldn't be so easy to fit them in a standard shutter.
Is it true?
I suppose that having a custom made tube that holds the two lenses at the back of the iris, keeping the appropriate placement of the elements, would be too expensive.
So the only choice would be to find a big working shutter, even a very old non-standard one, and front mount the lens using an adapter ring.
Somewhere i have an old pneumatic shutter. It has 3 retaining screws, so it could be fitted on lenses with different fron sizes. If i remember it should have a fixed speed, plus B (and maybe T). I have never used it because i don't have the pear-shaped pneumatic pump that must be used to operate the shutter.
I would be very grateful if somebody points me to the right source for such accessory. Better if in EU, shipment from USA is always too expensive for a cheap items!
I am open to any advice

have fun

CJ

[IanG]

Tessars don't benefit that much from coating, they have only six air-glass interfaces.


My experience is quite the opposite and my T - coated early 1950's 150mm Tessar is quite heavily coated and is a vast improvement over all my other uncoated Tessars, both in terms of overall contrast as well as control of flare. However the coating gives a noticeable blue cast to colour images so would need a warm up filter to correct this.

Ian

[Robert Hughes]

My experience is quite the opposite...
I vote for the middle path. In "the Camera", St. Ansel convincingly demonstrates that both coated and uncoated lenses have their uses. I've got a few uncoated tessar lenses that look very nice; they do flare easily, though, so you have to shoot with the intention of using that flare.
Here's an example I found on the Inter Tubes:
http://comps.fotosearch.com/comp/JCE/JCE108/family-standing-jetty_~6100.jpg

[Sevo]

[QUOTE=cyberjunkie;587277
Somewhere i have an old pneumatic shutter. It has 3 retaining screws, so it could be fitted on lenses with different fron sizes. If i remember it should have a fixed speed, plus B (and maybe T). I have never used it because i don't have the pear-shaped pneumatic pump that must be used to operate the shutter.
I would be very grateful if somebody points me to the right source for such accessory. Better if in EU, shipment from USA is always too expensive for a cheap items!
[/QUOTE]

These are still being made. Not in the EU, though: http://www.packardshutter.com/

In Europe, used sinar/Copal shutters tend to be reasonably affordable. But beware, they are useless without the matching cable release, and the latter tend to sell for more than a bare, cable-less shutter - buying shutter and release cable separately on ebay tends to be considerably more expensive than buying a complete one. Thornton Pickard rollerblind shutters are cheap too, but are a century old by now and tend to be useless until restored...

Sevo

[polyglot]

Zombie thread returns again!

Has anyone mounted one of these to a modern (e.g. Copal) shutter? I want a fast inexpensive portrait lens for 4x5" and have seen a bunch of these for sale, figured it'd be the ticket. I have a lathe and could in principle machine up an adapter for one but want to know if I will encounter vignetting or other issues etc if I put a shutter on the rear.

Or if someone has one for sale with shutter...

[E. von Hoegh]

Zombie thread returns again!

Has anyone mounted one of these to a modern (e.g. Copal) shutter? I want a fast inexpensive portrait lens for 4x5" and have seen a bunch of these for sale, figured it'd be the ticket. I have a lathe and could in principle machine up an adapter for one but want to know if I will encounter vignetting or other issues etc if I put a shutter on the rear.

Or if someone has one for sale with shutter... I don't think they'll fit in a Copal 3. All the shuttered ones I've seen were in a big Compound.
Maybe a Packard?

[jp]

I have a fuji tessar (fujinar) that is a 210/4.5 in a copal 3s. So a 300 is a little too big for a copal 3. Tessars are great for portraits. An Ilex5 would be a bigger shutter, but I don't know if it's big enough. The tessars are usually 4.5 or 6.3 and the plasmats 5.6.

[goamules]

Zombie thread returns again!

Has anyone mounted one of these to a modern (e.g. Copal) shutter? I want a fast inexpensive portrait lens for 4x5" and have seen a bunch of these for sale, figured it'd be the ticket. ....

You mean a 4x5 size Tessar in a shutter? There are probably millions of them. Here is one 300613047332.

[E. von Hoegh]

You mean a 4x5 size Tessar in a shutter? There are probably millions of them.
Or 300mm Schneider Xenars, same thing.

[cyberjunkie]

Front mounting is a totally different thing!
I am the OP, the 300mm f/4.5 CZJ Tessar (black, late coated example) i own is very big, and has a very large flange thread. A Compound No.5 shutter would be more than enough, IF you had to fit it between the optic cells. Unfortunately these Tessars are made in a different way: the front cell can be unscrewed, while the back group is kept in place by rings. No removable back cell, so no way to mount the lens in a conventional way, with the shutter between the lenses. I mean, no way to do it in a simple, affordable way. The only way out would be to butcher the original barrel!
Front-mounting the entire lens to a big shutter would be a better option, and a lot cheaper.
The shutter with the biggest aperture, and with the largest flange diameters, is the Compound No.5. The Ilex No.5 and the Wolly Alphax No.5 are the second best.
I never did a test myself, but i guess it's a no way.
Still too small...

My choice has been different: i can use the lens on my studio camera, fitted to a diaphragm lens holder, and with a pneumatic Grundner shutter behind it.
I've also adapted a Sinar shutter to my DeVere 8x10" monorail, which is using standard Sinar lensboards... but i still miss the correct distancer ring for the lensboard, to bring the back of the lens barrel almost flush with the shutter leaves. Sinar advises to place the back of the lens within 1mm of the shutter plane.
I had in mind to have those distancers machined from a solid teflon bar.
I have a friend with an old lathe... which has (just) died, with a fried control board. :(
I think i'll try to make the part myself, if i can find some wood with the right depth. I hope it's not another project that gets postponed until the end of time...

A small suggestion:
it's common knowledge that those late East Germany Tessars are very good value, price vs performance. Why don't use a simple pneumatic or mechanical shutter?
I just bought a large Zettor in_front_of_the_lens shutter, with standard cable release fitting, for 55 euros plus shipment.

have fun


CJ

[Armin Seeholzer]

The modern way is to use them in front of my Sinar or in front of my Burke & James also with a Sinar behind the lens shutter!
You have this way also flash sync. and there are still many shutters around!

Cheers Armin

[polyglot]

cyberjunkie: what is the diameter of the rear element? And the outer diameter of the flange?

thanks..

Something already in a shutter would be easiest of course. Are there any recommended f/3.5 tessars? Searching on ebay returns 99% stuff for 35mm. I probably would have bid on that B&L except it's already finished.

[cyberjunkie]

cyberjunkie: what is the diameter of the rear element? And the outer diameter of the flange?
Are there any recommended f/3.5 tessars?
Searching on ebay returns 99% stuff for 35mm.
I probably would have bid on that B&L ...

My lens is a recent (MC - NO red "T") 4.5/300mm made in East Germany.
If you do a search with the right words you'll find plenty of pictures on the Web, so i don't need to post one.
The diameter of the rear element is about 60mm.
The thread that is used to attach the lens to its flange is about 95mm diameter.
These are quick and dirty measures taken with a simple paper meter.
If you need something very precise, you have to wait a little, i can't find my caliper right now.
The back lens diameter should be precise enough, while the internal flange diameter could be a couple mm. less, but i don't thing so...
Anyway, you won't find a shutter with variable speeds, with so big a front flange diameter. A tapered adapter ring could be made, maybe without any visible vignetting, but it's not as cheap as a straight adapter tube with a simple thread at each end.

When it comes to economic feasibility, i agree with the advice that a working Sinar shutter should be the best choice.
If you don't own a 4x5" camera with small lensboard (as Technika IV/Wista), the Sinar shutter could be adapted to a compatible lensboard, then you could use Sinar/Horseman standard lensboard on top of it, or have another adapter fitted to the front of the Sinar shutter, once and for all. One work, many lenses. Once the work is done, and some money spent for it, you would have no problems adapting other barrel lenses, in the future. Only some exotic lenses (extremely heavy and/or extremely large) could pose a problem, but i don't think that those lenses would be a wise choice for 4x5" format.
If your camera has small lensboards, check before. Some lenses with big flanges can't be fitted to a Technika board. Others would need a distancer ring. Others could be used with a complex adapter (again, possible vignetting problem!).
Of course, with a 4x5" camera, a minor vignetting could be completely invisible.

If you use small lensboards, be patient and wait for a front mounted shutter.
You could find one on Ebay or even on this forum.
The Zettor shutter i just found (payed less than 65 euros including shipment) has an internal diameter of 95mm ca. Just 3mm less than the front diameter of the CZJ Tessar :( Doesn't mind, i will use it with some slightly smaller lens...


Be warned that f/3.5 Tessars for large format can be BIG.
My 190mm f/3.5 Tessar (Germany, not B&L, IIRC) is fitted in a No.5 Ilex shutter, which is second largest ever made.
I guess that longer focals (> 210mm) were made only in barrel (or in one-speed studio shutter).


have fun

CJ

[polyglot]

thanks; those numbers are what I needed. I've seen plenty of pictures of the lenses, just couldn't tell the scale.

I have a couple of 4x5 Toyo cameras and would probably use this with the monorail so I don't think space will be the problem. I'll have to look into a Sinar shutter (dammit, I just sold the Sinar P!) or a pre-mounted lens.

A 190-210/3.5 would be good, though a little short. I've seen a few for sale but without shutter.