I was wondering what is the best way to test the transmission of a lens.
I will receive in a few days an old lens and I want to know how to expose correctly with it.
Can you share with me what you think would be the best method?
Thanks
I was wondering what is the best way to test the transmission of a lens.
I will receive in a few days an old lens and I want to know how to expose correctly with it.
Can you share with me what you think would be the best method?
Thanks
Assuming the glass is clean..
The best method is relative measurement on a spectrophotometer, but I'm guessing you don't have access to one.
The next best is to calculate based on number of air-glass interfaces using the formula 0.96^x, where X is the number of air-glass interfaces. That calculation is for uncoated optics. For coated, use 0.99^x. So an uncoated singlet with two air-glass interfaces has a transmission of 0.96^2 = 92%. An old uncoated Rapid Rectilinear or something like a Dagor has 2 cemented groups, or 4 air-glass interfaces, so 0.96^4 is ~85% Transmission. An uncoated Cooke triplet has 0.96^6 = 78.3%. Incidentally you can see why older designs minimized the number of air-glass interfaces as much as possible and also why coatings are so important. Any scientific calculator will do this calculation.
The next best method is use a 35mm camera's exposure meter to read the change in readings with a known lens vs. with the unknown lens in front of it. This is trickier to set up, since you'll need to minimize differences between the two measurements: block stray light with a fabricated tube, maintain a similar FOV, and also factor out the f/#. Once all is said and done, the results should be close to the calculated values above. If not, something went wrong with your setup.
As a lens designer, my recommendation is to calculate the transmission using the formula above. Assuming you count the number of surfaces correctly, the result will be very close to truth.
Keep in mind that if your lens has aperture markings, this transmission loss may very well have been factored in when the markings were scribed on the lens barrel.
Newly made large format dry plates available! Look:
https://www.pictoriographica.com
And if you are online, just type .96^2 in the search window. Very handy! The iPhone will do the same without its browser in the search window. (And U*X wizards know how to do it at the command line.)Any scientific calculator will do this calculation.
The most practicle is a FP meter. I use the Horseman focal plane meter.
Tin Can
Randy Moe posted the words "too rare" ...this guy collects and uses the rarest of rare equipment like a madman...
Ha, you found my old nickname from my early motorbike years.
'Madman Moe' LOL AKA '10 Grand' as I always shifted at 10K revs. New Hondas were something.
I dislike old electronics. They alway fail. I collected tube radios since the 50's when I was a kid. I have plenty of non-working old electric gear. I made my own pirate radio station in 1966.
I'll trade a you Wire Recorder, which precedes Tape recorder.
As for collecting. I have less than 5% of my former collections.
Now will you answer my question?
Do you see significant, more than 20% variation, in lens transmission from lens to lens? As measured by the old Horse?
Tin Can
My brother still has his Atwater Kent collection he put together in the 1970s.
You may not know this but the Horseman exposure computer has no aperture markings. It indicates only the appropriate shutter speed for the light that would fall on the film. Utility of the device is realized best with bellows extension, unmarked lenses, improper or missing aperture scale and sloppy aperture mechanisms.
BTW that Horseman meter is a great tool, especially if you ever need io expose sheetfilm under an enlarger.
Bookmarks