Any information on Rodenstock Hemi-Anastigmat?

[Peter Yeti]

Out of curiosity, I snatched up a cheap Rodenstock Hemi-Anastigmat f=7.2 with unknown focal length. Comparing it with my other lenses, it seems to be between 210 and 240mm, quite nice for my taste. Unfortunately, I couldn'd find much information on this lens except that it must be a somewhat strange design with three lenses in two groups, having a single meniscus lens as the rear element. On the ground glass it looks quite sharp wide open, which came a bit as a surprise. My first test films are still drying, so I can't tell much more right now.

Does anyone here know a bit more about this kind of lens? My search in the internet was not very helpful, yet. I'd be happy about any information you might have.

Peter

[DrTang]

hey.. I have one too

it's my new favorite infact

here's a test shot at f8 and notice how crazy the background goes

88287



mine was in barrel..but it screwed right into the front of a Acme #3 shutter

[Jody_S]

The VM doesn't say much, but does refer to 2 other sources for more detail. But the diagram App057 plainly shows a 4 glass 2-group modified RR.


Hemi-Anastigmat f7.2 For up to 80° coverage, this is a 4-glass lens near Q5 in design (App057), ie
posibly a well made RR. But Frerk says it has a non-achromatised rear pair, so it will be less corrected than
an RR. See also Kerkmann p229. An example was noted at No3,30x on an Albini VP plate. A Rodenstock
Hemi Anastigmat was noted as f7.5 No3236 onan Alba VP size camera.

[Peter Yeti]

Now, that's cool, welcome in the club!:) That probably makes two who have no information about this little piece of glass and brass. The background reminds me of "Galli style" pictures I've seen here. My first two test films, one wide open the other at f22, don't show any funky stuff. But my setup wasn't suitable to see much of this. My impression is that this lens is pretty sharp with good contrast and resolution. Even wide open there's only a hint of softness. Is this your experience too?

I don't have mine in a shutter. I may use it on my Sinar with a Sinar Copal shutter, which would be the easiest. Or I just use slow film...

Btw, I think the single meniscus is in the front and not the rear of the lens.

Peter

[DrTang]

I don't have mine in a shutter. I may use it on my Sinar with a Sinar Copal shutter, which would be the easiest. Or I just use slow film...


just screw it into a #3 Acme shutter..even one of thse occillioscope ones will work - use the apeture on the lens itself

that pix was on 5x7..but now I have it in my 4x5 stuff.

it seems dang sharp though

[Peter Yeti]

The VM doesn't say much, but does refer to 2 other sources for more detail. But the diagram App057 plainly shows a 4 glass 2-group modified RR.

Yay, some info, thanks a lot! By now I found one more piece of information burried in this thread:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?58711-What-do-you-need-from-a-1910-European-Catalogue

There's a Swedish catalogue page showing this lens together with a "Heligonal" Anastigmat. There is no lens diagram for the Hemi-Anastigmat but it's a lot cheaper than the Heligonal. Mine must be a no. 2 f=7.2/210mm, which covers 5x7 wide open and 8x10 stopped down according to that page. The opening angle is 75° and it says "for portrait, groups or landscape".

I tried with a flash light if I could see the construction of the elements but no. The construction looks similar to the symmetrical rapid rectiliear design (I assume that's meant by "RR"). But I simply can't see if one of the elements is a single lens or a 2-group, easily could be both. The serial number is 60xxx and I think that places it before 1910.

Peter

[Peter Yeti]

just screw it into a #3 Acme shutter..even one of thse occillioscope ones will work - use the apeture on the lens itself

that pix was on 5x7..but now I have it in my 4x5 stuff.

it seems dang sharp though

Thanks for the shutter info. Is yours a no.2 with 210mm, too? My only problem with this solution would be to find one overhere. Those are Made in U.S.A. and I've never seen one here. Well, with or without shutter, I'm going to play a bit with this lens to learn what can be done with it.

Peter

[Ole Tjugen]

The VM is wrong in this case, it really IS a 3-in-2. I have one too, and my books all agree with my lens. Cemented pair in front, single meniscus behind.

It's surprisingly good at small stops, and unsurprisingly not-so-good wide open.

[Marko Trebusak]

It's surprisingly good at small stops, and unsurprisingly not-so-good wide open.

Ole, can you explain a bit this "not so good"? Chromatic aberration, speric aberration, astigmatism or just plain mush?

Marko

[DrTang]

Thanks for the shutter info. Is yours a no.2 with 210mm, too?
Peter

it isn't marked..but it seems to be a longer than 210... maybe a 240??

[Peter Yeti]

Between 210 and 240mm was my impression, too. But according to this catalogue page, the next longer one would be 300mm and that's definitely much longer than mine. One can also measure the diameter of the front/rear lens, which should be around 33mm for a no.2 (210mm) vs. 43mm for a no.3 (300mm).

Peter

[Jody_S]

The VM is wrong in this case, it really IS a 3-in-2. I have one too, and my books all agree with my lens. Cemented pair in front, single meniscus behind.

It's surprisingly good at small stops, and unsurprisingly not-so-good wide open.

Interesting. Now I want one. ;)

[DrTang]

Between 210 and 240mm was my impression, too. But according to this catalogue page, the next longer one would be 300mm and that's definitely much longer than mine. One can also measure the diameter of the front/rear lens, which should be around 33mm for a no.2 (210mm) vs. 43mm for a no.3 (300mm).

Peter


Mine does say #2 on it - I just remembered

but I swear it's a bit longer than 210.....infact..I remember having to rack the rail out a bit more when I switched from my 210 to my Hemi (at infinity).. and add to the fact the lens is front mounted ...it has to be longer than 210

maybe I'll do a reasonable test this weekend to see for sure...

[DrTang]

Okay..super wrong

I finally got around to making a semi reasonable comparison to a 210 lens and yup..it's about a 170 or 180 or so


Rodenstock Hemi-Anastigmat #2 is shorter than a 210!


now

I've heard -tell of a 300mm version

THIS I want

[DrTang]

Whelp


my #4 (400mm) just showed up from Poland and it's pretty sweet

with a little electrical tape - I jammed it onto a sinar board although the thread size would fit inside my #4 compound or my #5 betax...if I get an adapter made