Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 73

Thread: First year Heliar's

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hamilton, Canada
    Posts
    1,879

    Re: First year Heliar's

    I am no expert on this but Mr. Harrison's site
    http://www.antiquecameras.net/heliarlenses.html
    Has an excellant summary.
    Briefly, the first iteration f4.5 was in 1900.
    A slightly improved version was patented in 1902
    In 1903 and new version was introduced as the Dynar f6.
    This version was tweaked in 1925 to be a f3.5 Heliar.
    Later f4.5 variations were the Dynar design as well.
    A variable softness version was the Universal Heliar.
    A colour Heliar was created for smaller formats (1949)
    Depending on size, a Heliar f4.5 (for the first 20 years at least) could be any of the 1900 design, the 1902 design or the 1903 Dynar design.
    As to the Hirohito thing; I would like to read the original reference, There are plenty of news photos unlikely to be Heliars.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Scarsdale, NY
    Posts
    334

    Re: First year Heliar's

    Quote Originally Posted by cowanw View Post
    As to the Hirohito thing; I would like to read the original reference, There are plenty of news photos unlikely to be Heliars.
    Bill:

    Me, too. When getting ready to sell that lens, I Googled Hirohito & Heliar, and slogged through page after page mentioning the connection, but never found a reference to an original source.

    Charley

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Tonopah, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    6,334

    Re: First year Heliar's

    Quote Originally Posted by c.d.ewen View Post
    Bill:

    Me, too. When getting ready to sell that lens, I Googled Hirohito & Heliar, and slogged through page after page mentioning the connection, but never found a reference to an original source.

    Charley
    Now don't go spoiling a great legend by insisting on a source!

  4. #14
    Mark Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Stuck inside of Tucson with the Neverland Blues again...
    Posts
    6,266

    Re: First year Heliar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Galli View Post
    I'll be the first to discount any magic. The magic is behind the camera ~ in front of the lens. As somebody has well quoted, "it's the picture, stupid".

    But for the pictures that we would choose a smoooooth-sharp lens for, a Heliar is awfully hard to beat. Even so, hold a gun to my head and tell me to choose between a Heliar, any vintage, and a Cooke Series II Portrellic, and it's the Cooke I'll keep.

    Better / worse / more value / less value / I'll say, nope. The most valuable and scarce of the Heliar's seems to be the last ~ coated ones. I just like the early ones because I have the 'weird' gene.
    Funny how the last can be the "most desireable", when so much of the reputation was built an a completely different earlier generation. But all are fine lenses, I'm sure...

    And yes, it's what you do with a lens more than the lens itself. The Heliar has always been a vague want more than a desparate need; I know I have Cooke's, various Tessars, old Dagors, and the like that are as nice. Really, the only lenses that are an absolute necessity to life are the Cooke's, Verito's and Velostigmats, and I already have nice sets of each! (Although my doctor says I may need a 12-inch Velostigmat transplant if a clean donor comes along...)
    "I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    2,165

    Re: First year Heliar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Sawyer View Post
    ... The Heliar has always been a vague want more than a desparate need..


    And I am opposite - I have a "craving" for the Heliars.. (and I have cooke's, Verito's and Velo's also)

    Too bad the rollei didn't make cameras with a heliar...
    (Thank God Voigtlander did it them selves..)

  6. #16
    renes
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Poland, Warsaw
    Posts
    334

    Re: First year Heliar's

    My 360mm Heliar has no. 107699, so was made in 1910 and it's fourth Heliar f/4.5 incarantion (1904) - with the largest rear glass element?

    http://www.dioptrique.info/base/obj_1914/avant-1914.HTM

    Look at the lens formula drawing, it looks strange: front element seems to be an old formula but rear looks like a Dynar?
    Do I omit something?

    EDIT:

    I have looked at glasses and they are certainly 1902 build.

  7. #17
    the Docter is in Arne Croell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1997
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    1,210

    Re: First year Heliar's

    Quote Originally Posted by renes View Post
    My 360mm Heliar has no. 107699, so was made in 1910 and it's fourth Heliar f/4.5 incarantion (1904) - with the largest rear glass element?

    http://www.dioptrique.info/base/obj_1914/avant-1914.HTM

    Look at the lens formula drawing, it looks strange: front element seems to be an old formula but rear looks like a Dynar?
    Do I omit something?

    EDIT:

    I have looked at glasses and they are certainly 1902 build.
    You mean this one: http://www.dioptrique.info/OBJECTIFS3/00114/00114.HTM ? That Dynar/Heliar hybrid was named "Oxyn" by Voigtländer, it is not common. You can buy a modern incarnation for 35mm under a totally different name: http://www.zeiss.de/C12567A8003B8B6F...ar4_85ZM_d.pdf, btw.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    4,431

    Re: First year Heliar's

    Quote Originally Posted by cowanw View Post
    As to the Hirohito thing; I would like to read the original reference, There are plenty of news photos unlikely to be Heliars.
    I don't know about Hirohito insisting on Herliars, but didn't George W. Bush insist his portraits be made with Busch lenses?

  9. #19
    Mark Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Stuck inside of Tucson with the Neverland Blues again...
    Posts
    6,266

    Re: First year Heliar's

    Quote Originally Posted by gandolfi View Post
    And I am opposite - I have a "craving" for the Heliars.. (and I have cooke's, Verito's and Velo's also)
    Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks! Really, there are no bad lenses, just bad photographers that can't keep up with them...

    Quote Originally Posted by gandolfi View Post
    [Too bad the rollei didn't make cameras with a heliar...
    (Thank God Voigtlander did it them selves..)
    Roll film???!!! Oh, now that's just wrong...
    "I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    88

    Re: First year Heliar's

    My favorite Heliar for film use is still the 1902 first version Heliar, and mine are from Braunschweig and inscribed with the German patent marking of "DRP 124934". They have a smoothness that surpass that of the 1904 versions across the entire image. Do they resolve less or are more blurry or offer smoother transition? Probably all of the above. They do seem to have a more Gaussian out of focus bokehrendition. I had a 36cm Universal that was more like a 1904 than a 1902, although theoretically, that should not be the case.

    The coated Heliars I came across did not do much for me - none of them could be used wide open and I've had them from 210 to 420. In general, they seem downright "abrupt" and "angular" in their presentation compared to the character in the 100-yr old Heliars.

    Like Jim, I also reach more often for the Cookes for portraits - IIa or IIe - they are sharper wide open and more controllable via the softness control, whether they are the early ones without knucklers and offer only a very small range of softness variation or the later ones with kuncklers and a massive softness range. The extra sharpness is noticeable even when contact printed. It gives a refined, detailed yet vintage look that it is very reassuring to me and my subjects.

    carver

Similar Threads

  1. Heliars
    By Jan_6568 in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 1-Dec-2006, 20:15
  2. Shooting days per year?
    By Kirk Gittings in forum On Photography
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 4-Feb-2005, 18:54

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
  •