Printable View
Hallo,
I have the opportunity to buy these enlarging lenses: Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 6.3/21cm and E-Hanza 4.5/135mm for about 50$ each. I just don't know if they are good enough to make prints up to 50x70cm from 4x5 and 13x18cm b&w negatives. Note that 50x70cm is just about 4x magnification from 13x18 negative so sharpness should not be a problem IMHO. I'll be using condensor enlarger. I searched the web and didn't find any information about these lenses.
Thank you,
www.janez-pelko.com
Well, Janez, I do not know what a Hanza is, but a Zeiss Tessar is.. a Zeiss Tessar i.e., to say the least about a legendary lens formula, a good 4-element lens. Check that the rear doublet element is OK and not separated and check that the lens is not hazy (fungus, dust, etc..) If the lens looks OK, for $50 (=euro 40 those days ;-);-) I would go for it if I needed to enlarge 13x18cm films without spending a fortune. If you have the serial number, probably somebody on this list will help you find the age of this lens. The fact that the focal length is labeled in cm instead of mm might indicate something quite old, though (Mr Arne Croell, please help !!)
No idea either about the "Hanza"... Wrt the Tessar, Emmanuel is right, the centimeter designation means it was made before or during World War II (but after 1909 or so) . So it is probably not coated. After the war Zeiss switched to mm, except for some Apo-Tessars that kept the cm designation for a while. If you have the serial no. I can look up the approximate manufacturing date.
Thank you both for your answers. Lens coating is hard to define, it is probably single coated. But this coating is not blue or green, it is like light yellow-brown. It is definitely not multicoated. Lens is not that old, design and materials look like some 30 years old. Note that Zeiss Jena was Easte German factory. I was also suprised that it is designated in cm. Tomorrow I'll know the serial number and I'll aslo try to get a photo of this lens.
You might want to check Ebay . For $50 plus or minus $25 you'll see quite a few 150mm modern enlarger lenses sold. Some even including boards in the price. I wouldn't buy an unknown or old enlarger lens today.
Ebay is also a good option. In fact, I've been thinking about this option. But when I calculate all the costs and even duty fees (which my goverment takes for everything over 20$), I have to add at least 30 $. On the other hand, I once rented pretty scratched uncoated 210mm lens and prints were fine. Maybe because of small magnification (4x). But I could not compare prints made with better lenses. I just don't know if the difference between top quality and average enlarging lenses is really that big.Especially at small magnification.
It's not just the quality of the lens. It's the hassle of mounting it to your enlarger. Both of mine have 39mm threaded mounts so any lens with that mount just screws in. Some older lenses use different mounts.
My enlager is a very simple design and with a small modification I can mount any lens. I uploaded some photos of Tessar here:
http://www.janez-pelko.com/tessar/tessar1.jpg
http://www.janez-pelko.com/tessar/tessar2.jpg
http://www.janez-pelko.com/tessar/tessar3.jpg
http://www.janez-pelko.com/tessar/tessar4.jpg
And serial number is: 2734096
I'm still not sure about the coating...
Janez,
that serial no. was in the war years I think. I'll look it up tonight. At that time, Zeiss Jena used coatings (invented by Smakula of Zeiss in 1936), but not yet universally.
Thank you, Arne. If this is really 60 years old lens, it looks suprisingly 'fresh'. Just look at the pictures.
http://home.sprynet.com/~stspring/Zeiss%20Ikon.html
1941?
Janez, are you sure the Tessar, which is lovely, isn't a taking lens? I ask because according to the Vade Mecum 210/6.3 Tessar taking lenses were made in the early forties. The lens you showed was probably made then.
If it is a taking lens, it ought to be quite desireable. Should cover 70 degrees stopped down and be sharper generally than the equivalent f/4.5 or f/3.5 Tessar.
Cheers,
Dan
I really don't know. Lens has the same screw mount as enlarging lenses for smaller format and also design is very similair. It can not be mounted on shutter, at least the one which is mounted between front and rear elements.
Taking lenses in barrel where quite common, and after the war Zeiss Jena continued to make many more barrel LF lenses than shuttered ones. They were used with behind the lens shutters, like the ones in the GDR "Mentor" camera lines. I am sure that your lens is a taking one. However, Zeiss sold the same Tessars for enlarging (that is at least true for the f/4.5 versions), so it really doesn't mean you can't use it.
Janez, the Tessar with the serial no. 2734096 was part of a batch of 2300 21cm/6.3 lenses in standard barrel mount ("N 42") finished in 1943 (serial nos. 2732901-2735200). The design by Ernst Wandersleb dates from August 1, 1911. A redesign was introduced in 1947.
Thank you all fot your effort and replies. I really appreciate your knowledge and nice attitude. Best wishes, Janez
Janez, did you ever get the Tessar and use it for enlarging? If so, how well did it work for you?
I ask because I've recently acquired two 150/6.3 Tessars, both supposedly enlarging lenses. The newer one (1936), engraved Vergroesserung at one end, is for sure made to Wandersleb's 1911 design mentioned by Arne; the other isn't, per Arne, in Thiele's list so we can't be sure exactly what it is. Their front elements have very similar curves, but I haven't had them measured yet. The older one, probably made in 1912, shoots better than well enough at ~ 5 m.
Cheers,
Dan
For what it is worth: you can get some pretty good deal out there on some very modern lenses. I got a 135mm schneider componon-S for $65 from a guy on APUG. the glass is mint, all I had to do is come up with a retaining ring.
The Hansa was a lens made for the producer of the Hansa enlarger in the years following WW II. I have no idea who the manufacturer was, but I had one of the enlargers for a short time and almost immediately replaced the lens as too soft to make any prints larger than about 4x.
Jim