What's wrong with Protars?

[Bill_1856]

I've never owned or used a Protar. What are the drawbacks (other than most of them are elderly and uncoated)?

[Jim Galli]

Are you a cup half empty guy? Kind of a negative title. Protar is a zeiss name equivalent to Raptar that encompasses more than a single design. There were ultra wide angle, wide field, and convertibles, all very different in design and application. I've used them all, like them all, and will use them some more. Yes, you can expect less contrast than a modern Symmar.

[Toyon]

Protars are highly respected for their sharpness. I believe their lack of popularity (historically) was due to their necessarily small apertures.

[Ole Tjugen]

Looking at old books I believe the "lack of popularity" was more due to price than anything else.

[Bernard Kaye]

I am looking for more interchangeable lensboards for my Zeiss 5 x 7" (13 x 18cm) camera because I want to use longer length Zeiss Convertible Protars and Wollensak Raptar Series Ia "Protars" whose shutters are too wide for one lens board that I have.These lenses really are terrible, please do not buy them which would raise their market value and price that I would have to pay for them. Talk about shadow detail and feel in a picture of flowers and foliage where there is a large contrast range. Terrible, you have to see it to believe it..

[Vaughn]

What's wrong with protars? Well, for one thing, I don't have any...

Vaughn

[John Kasaian]

Ansel Adams thought pretty highly of Protars.

[Kevin Crisp]

I assume we are talking about the VII series lenses. I agree with Jim, though I think the contrast difference is slight in most conditions. With a double protar you have four air/glass surfaces. What's not perfect about them? They don't perform particularly well open more than f:16; below that any double protar is very sharp, edge to edge. The single elements are best used behind the aperture, which means they need more bellows than the marked focal length would indicate. If this is an issue you can use them in front, in which case they need less bellows than you would think. Some elements work much better than others as single cells. Some work better on the front than others.

The single lenses do show focus shift so you do need to check and adjust after stopping down to taking aperture. The single lenses are noticeably sharper in the middle than at the edges, stopping down to f:32 can help with this. Some of them do have separation problems, if you have this repaired professionally it is expensive. You can do this yourself if you are patient, meticulous, and patient and patient and can live with a long learning curve. A fair amount of separation makes no difference in the image at working apertures. They have very fine threads and can be cross-threaded (or have been cross-threaded) by previous owners. Due to manufacturing variances (mistakes) I have had "same size, same thread" cells that do not fit a shutter they should fit and have to be remachined.

With larger sets and f stop scales in mm's you have to consult a table, which slows you down. Switching lens elements consumes some time as well and you can drop a cell if you are not careful.

If not in the original shutter (very often the case) the quality of the transplant is variable. Aperture scales should be checked for accuracy.

If you do not buy a complete set, then building a set off eBay or wherever is a time consuming quest. Prices for cells are so variable it is hard to make sense of their market value at times. They come in a wide variety of diameters on the threads and you have to watch for what you need to put together a versatile set. Always ask a seller what the thread diameter is or you may end up with the right lens in the wrong mount for your shutter.

Many of the existing sets are so close in focal length you have to wonder about the versatility of the set. If you have a combination that is 158mm do you need one that is 165? Sometimes (on this theme) the focal lengths of the single cells is so long you can't use them on your bellows, which again makes the set look less versatile. This is generally more of a 4X5 issue.

Despite the above, I use them all the time and will continue to do so. If I need a long lens and I have a more modern lens with me (a 450 Fuji, a 355 Repro Claron, etc.) I will use the modern lens and avoid the single protar cell. Sometimes I use the single long cells since it is all I have with me and the results are usually quite satisfactory.

I do wonder why you want to know what is wrong with them. You think they are selling too inexpensively lately? By far the most commonly seen lens I have noticed is the 13/11" combination, which is a nice lens for 4X5 or 5X7. There are lots of 13/13 combinations around and in a light weight shutter like a compound either of those are very useful.