Holy Crow, is a Heliar 15cm f4.5 worth $627?

[Vick Ko]

Holy Crow, is a Heliar 15cm f4.5 worth $627?

Is this another case of "previously inexpensive lens" elevated into the stratosphere of prices due to collector frenzy?

Recent 'bay auction ended at $627: item 130071824841

For those who have used this lens, what are it's better qualities?

TIA
Vick

[rob]

the 240 one ended at $1000+. I'm so happy I got my late heliar 36cm for a mere $166.

[Ole Tjugen]

Even uncoated ones go for $200+...

I'm glad I got mine a lot cheaper than that, attached to a Voigtländer Begheil 9x12cm plate camera!

The Heliar has a little uncorrected spherical aberration, which gives it a particularly pleasing transition from sharp to unsharp. That's what the sales literature said in the 103+'s, and I find I do agree with that. But not to the price of $627!

[Christopher Perez]

Geez. That's silly money! I couldn't give my 15cm in recently CLA'd shutter away for $225. Maybe it's time to relist it and it's 21cm sister?

[Jim Galli]

That $$ used to buy you a Lanthar with change. Mercy. I just sold a great 36cm for about half that! Guess I better hoarde the rest.

[rob]

The Heliar has a little uncorrected spherical aberration, which gives it a particularly pleasing transition from sharp to unsharp.

the difference between heliar and tessar is the doublet front element in heliar. I don't have a tessar, does tessar/xenar give similar "pleasing transition from sharp to unsharp"?

[Christopher Perez]

Yes.

But in my case, it's even more "pleasing" when coupled with a round shaped aperture.

the difference between heliar and tessar is the doublet front element in heliar. I don't have a tessar, does tessar/xenar give similar "pleasing transition from sharp to unsharp"?

[Gordon Moat]

the difference between heliar and tessar is the doublet front element in heliar. I don't have a tessar, does tessar/xenar give similar "pleasing transition from sharp to unsharp"?

Since I have recently mounted up a Zeiss Tessar 21cm f4.5 on my 4x5, I can at least comment on that. Looking at the ground glass it certainly seems that the in focus to out of focus drops off quickly. There is definitely a good separation of subject from background, even noticable at f8.0 and closer focusing distances. As for the round aperture shape, the 18 blade aperture helps quite a bit.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

[Ole Tjugen]

the difference between heliar and tessar is the doublet front element in heliar. I don't have a tessar, does tessar/xenar give similar "pleasing transition from sharp to unsharp"?

The difference is more than that, and so is the design philosophy. The Heliar (or Dynar, which is a more correct name for most Heliars) are more related to triplets than to Tessars. Since I happen to have all three types of lens (Tessar / Xenar /Skopar, Heliar / Apo-Lanthar, and Triotar, all in 150mm f:4.5) I shot a comparison a while ago. There is a definite difference in the "bokeh" with the Heliar/Apo-Lanthar coming out as the winner in my opinion. BTW all those lenses are in Compur #1 shutters, of differing vintage but similar number of aperture blades.

[Ole Tjugen]

Since I have recently mounted up a Zeiss Tessar 21cm f4.5 on my 4x5, I can at least comment on that. Looking at the ground glass it certainly seems that the in focus to out of focus drops off quickly. There is definitely a good separation of subject from background, even noticable at f8.0 and closer focusing distances.

Gordon, that's the main difference. The Heliar drops off less quickly - it's designed with a smooth transition.

Another difference is that the Heliars have better coverage. Lots of sources say that the Heliar has less coverage - which in a way is also correct: Voigtländer made two very similar designs, the Heliar and the Dynar. After a very short time, the Heliar design was dropped in favor of the Dynar design, but the Heliar name was retained. So most Heliar lenses, except "Universal-Heliars", are actually Dynars. And the Dynar has better coverage than a Tessar, whereas the original Heliar has less.