Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Rodenstock Imagonal lens

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Northern France Villers-la-Montagne
    Posts
    85

    Rodenstock Imagonal lens

    Hi everybody,

    Can enybody tell me what a Rodenstock Imagonal lens is?

    Anything to do with the Imagon? When was it made, what focal lenghts did it have and so on.

    Thank you in advance and best regards

    Thierry

  2. #2

    Re: Rodenstock Imagonal lens

    The Imagonal was actually several lenses. It was sold primarily as a casket set which came with both landscape (sharp?) and portrait (soft?) elements although I think one could also purchase individual elements.

    In design, it has almost nothing to do with the Imagon. The Imagon is an achromat, and--if I remember correctly--the Imagonal was a bizarre design, the front group was three cemented elements, while the rear was a singlet. I can't recall which was interchangeable.

    They are fairly scarce; I have only seen one. I am not sure how usable they will be today, as I do not think they were color corrected for pan-film.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Harbor City, California
    Posts
    1,748

    Re: Rodenstock Imagonal lens

    Kingslake lists the Imagonal the other way around, singlet front, triplet rear. The German patent of 1904 was number 177,266. I have heard that obtaining German patent copies is rather easy, but haven't tried it.

  4. #4

    Re: Rodenstock Imagonal lens

    Ernest,

    You may be correct, I was just running from memory. The Vademecum lists it the other way (triplet front, singlet rear) but I would be more inclined to believe Kingslake.

  5. #5
    All metric sizes to 24x30 Ole Tjugen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,376

    Re: Rodenstock Imagonal lens

    Singlet front, triplet rear makes sense for a replaceable-front casket set. Then all the corrections could be put in the "fixed" rear cell, which would need to be a triplet to work adequately across a range of focal lengths in the front.

    For a non-convertible lens the other way around makes more sense; putting the greatest focussing power behind the aperture makes the corrections easier.

    So maybe both statements are correct?

Similar Threads

  1. Trousse Parisienne Casket Lens Set
    By John Downie in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 14-Jun-2014, 18:32
  2. Rodenstock lens data on web
    By Paul Butzi in forum Announcements
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 27-Apr-2008, 17:54
  3. Can bellows "stretch" lens?
    By Ken Grooms in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 25-Oct-2006, 19:35
  4. Large format lens
    By Ho Pei Jiun in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 6-Jan-2005, 08:44
  5. Rodenstock Rodegon Enlarger Lens
    By Tim Kimbler in forum Darkroom: Equipment
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-Mar-1999, 16:44

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
  •