Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 62

Thread: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    7,425

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    Previous discussion on LFF from 2008:
    https://www.largeformatphotography.i...a%EFl-Rusinov)


    Bernice
    Post-WW II lenses, irrelevant to this discussion. And yes, I enjoy thread drift as much as the next person.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,418

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    4/4 double Gauss would be Wide Field Ektar and related?
    Never heard of Perigraphe VIa, if curious enough, might give it a try. Then agin, there is not that much motivation to do so.

    Performance at large apertures would be exampled by the 75mm f4.5 Biogon and related. Trade off being size-weight of the lens. Speaking of better performance at age apertures, it is claimed by Rodenstock the 35mm, 45mm, 55mm APO grandagon has good performance at f8 or so ?


    Bernice

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    Bernice, its time for you to buy and try a Perigraphe VIa. I suggest a number II, 90/14, they're relatively inexpensive and easy to find. And you should learn more about 4/4 double Gauss type wide angle lenses.

    If you read this discussion from the beginning you'll find several posts in which I directed the OP to sources of information about ancient w/a lenses. W/a lenses have been made since the 1860s. The big advances have been in maximum aperture and performance near wide open, not in coverage.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    4,138

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    Um...the Protar V, from about 1891 I believe.


  4. #24
    Jac@stafford.net's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Winona, Minnesota
    Posts
    5,385

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    [...] Speaking of better performance at age apertures, it is claimed by Rodenstock the 35mm, 45mm, 55mm APO grandagon has good performance at f8 or so?
    In my experience the 35mm Grandagon settles in at 16 which is a good compromise with their center filter.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,959

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    The second is not an improved version of the first, it is entirely different.
    Well, it depends on if you look at the front or at the rear section.

    Of course I'm an amateur and Kingslake wasn't it at all, but if the 1951 kept the same name it had to be because the rear sections had the same concept.

    Both designs have a lot in common in the rear section, the 1951 design adds a cemented element, but the concept it's very close:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	compared.jpg 
Views:	5 
Size:	24.4 KB 
ID:	194496



    Possibly (guessing) the added cemented element was to balance the pupil tilting introduced in the front section. So beyond comparisson with Sonnar/Aviotar to me both designs (34-51) have the rear section concept in common.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    7,425

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    Well, it depends on if you look at the front or at the rear section.

    Of course I'm an amateur and Kingslake wasn't it at all, but if the 1951 kept the same name it had to be because the rear sections had the same concept.

    Both designs have a lot in common in the rear section, the 1951 design adds a cemented element, but the concept it's very close:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	compared.jpg 
Views:	5 
Size:	24.4 KB 
ID:	194496



    Possibly (guessing) the added cemented element was to balance the pupil tilting introduced in the front section. So beyond comparisson with Sonnar/Aviotar to me both designs (34-51) have the rear section concept in common.
    Weasel words, Papi, weasel words. They don't make you any less mistaken.

    We're not comparing single cells, we're comparing complete lenses.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,959

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    Weasel words, Papi, weasel words. They don't make you any less mistaken.

    We're not comparing single cells, we're comparing complete lenses.


    If you compare complete lenses then later Biogons are also completely different to the 1951 one:



    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1920px-Bertele-Zeiss_Biogon_(1951,_f4.5).svg.jpg 
Views:	6 
Size:	18.6 KB 
ID:	194502


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	220px-Biogon21.JPG 
Views:	8 
Size:	5.2 KB 
ID:	194503


    Then add all derivatives around...

    See the Super Angulons...


    The question is: what makes a design be a biogon derivative ?

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Bellingham, WA (displaced Canadian)
    Posts
    369

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    Quote Originally Posted by John Kasaian View Post
    In 1910, $40 would get you a B&L Extra Wide Angle Series V F/18, 4-7/16" in a Volute that covered 5x7
    That'd be ~$1100 if we adjust for inflation.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Bellingham, WA (displaced Canadian)
    Posts
    369

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    If you can tolerate Google Translate from Italian (or you know Italian), Marco Cavina's article on the history of Zeiss symmetrical wide angle design is a good read:

    http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_...gon/00_pag.htm
    https://translate.google.com/transla...n%2F00_pag.htm

  10. #30
    Mark Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Stuck inside of Tucson with the Eastern Seaboard Blues again...
    Posts
    5,599

    Re: When did decent wide angles show up? [lens history question]

    The Petzval Orthoscop was designed as a wider-angle "View Lens" along side Petzval's "Portrait Lens" in 1839, but wasn't manufactured until 1856-'58. (Early photographers were mostly interested in portraiture.) It was manufactured by Dietzler (under Petzval himself), Voigtlander, Ross, CC Harrison, and probably a few others.

    The Harrison & Schnitzer Globe Lens was even wider angle, and came out in 1862-'63.

    Busch's Pantoscope followed that in 1865, then came Dallmeyer's Wide Angle Rectilinears in 1866. The WAR's were copied and improved by many manufacturers, and were quite popular through the rest of the century. They're still fairly common, fairly cheap, and perform rather well.

    I'd say the last noteworthy "vintage" wide angles were the Zeiss Protar Series V and the Goerz Dopple Anastigmat (Dagor), which occupy the space between vintage and modern wide angles.

    And then there are the exotics like the Hypergon...
    "I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."

Similar Threads

  1. Reccomendation for 4x5 wide angles lens
    By kevs-2323668 in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 2-Feb-2012, 08:37
  2. Wide Angles Both Old and New
    By william linne in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 16-Aug-2006, 21:36
  3. Wide angles on 5x12
    By Diane Maher in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-May-2005, 05:01
  4. Why no retrofocus wide angles?...
    By Bob Fowler in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 28-Jun-2004, 09:43
  5. Coverage of wide-angles at wide apertures
    By Matthew Runde in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2-Mar-2002, 13:05

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •