I have a Carl Zeiss Tessar 13.5cm in an old Compur shutter. The shutter has speeds up to 200 and f 4.5.
1. What size is the hole in the lensboard?
2. If the shutter is bad, can I put the lens in a new Copal shutter?
I want to use it on my Tachihara. I know there will be little movements, but I am curios how this lens will work.
Thanks for all your advice.
No idea- measure the threaded area. It probably won't fit a Copal, but you can have the Compur serviced. I used to have this same lens, borrowed from a folder and transplanted to my old Calumet. It's quite sharp and has a very natural look, but it won't compete with a modern lens in terms of contrast or edge sharpness. It probably isn't coated. And no, you won't have any useful movements- watch out for dark corners!
I have an old Heliar (Tessar design) in a similar old Compur shutter -- mine fits perfectly in a #1 board but I have no idea if your Zeiss Tessar is the same.
I should have clarified, Heliar 135 f4.5 to 22 in a Compur T, B, 1 ~ 200 shutter. It fits in a #1 Copal board just fine.
Is that a dial-set or a rim-set Compur? If it's rim-set, it's likely to be a "standard" #1 and the elements might fit in any #1 shutter. If it's dial-set, all bets are off.
Jack Flesher - the Heliar is NOT a Tessar type lens. Voigtländer vere among the first to adopt standardised shutter sizes.
I've got two Tessars of that specification in dial-set Compur shutters that run to 200 -- they fit a #1 Copal opening. However, the retaining rings are a different thread pitch from the common rings that fit more modern shutters (same diameter; the ring from my Polaroid Prontor-Press will screw on, but jams after about 1.5 turns, about what I'd expect if one thread were fractional inch pitch and the other the closest standard metric). Also, the glass uses a different thread from the standardized one in newer shutters, and I'm told it can even differ from lens to lens in the same shutter; the later rim-set Compur with 200 or 250 top speed at least had modern-standard threads for both lens cells and retaining ring.
By contrast, my 15 cm f/4.5 Tessar of the same era, in similar appearing shutter, appears to be a #2; both lens and shutter are significantly larger than the 13.5 cm version, but not as large as a #3 shutter. Disappointing, as that one is on an Ica Ideal bayonet mount, and won't interchange with the 13.5 cm Tessars on the same mount (but smaller diameter).
If a contact print at arm's length is too small to see, you need a bigger camera. :D
Jack Flesher - the Heliar is NOT a Tessar type lens. Voigtländer vere among the first to adopt standardised shutter sizes.
My appologies -- I stand corrected. Can you tell me the specific design of this Braunschweig Heliar 135 for my future reference?
Jack, a "heliar" (there's more than one type, just ask Ole) is essentially a tessar with the front singlet replaced by a cemented doublet.
Note that Heliar is a Voigtlaender trade name and that the current Cosina-made lenses engraved something or other-Heliar for 35 mm cameras have nothing in common with the original but the word Heliar.
Jack, a "heliar" (there's more than one type, just ask Ole) is essentially a tessar
I'm confused. Ole was the one who told me it isn't a Tessar and now you are telling me it is 'essentially' a Tessar which is what I thought originally, but to ask Ole...
If I have it right, it sounds like it is a 5-element, 3-group lens in Tessar configuration but with a doublet front -- but we can't call it a Tessar...
Heliar, 5 elements in four groups.
Tessar, 4 elements in three groups.
Not at all the same thing. But related. The heliar is in the tessar lineage. Or, depending on whose views you believe, both are in the Cooke triplet linage. Kingslake regards the tessar as a triplet derivative. Cox is with him. Rudolph, who invented the tessar, saw it as derived from the Protar, which he also invented. Choose your authority .
All names. What matters is that heliars typically have a bit less coverage than tessars BUT often (lotsa versions of the tessar, not so many of the heliars) better sharpness to the limit of coverage. Compare 101/4.5 Ektar (tessar type) with 100/3.5 Ektar (heliar type) as used on Medalists or 105/3.7 Ektar (ditto) as used on 2x3 Graphics.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks