Turner Reich Triple Convertible variations

[Jay DeFehr]

Dear learned lens gurus,

I have a Turner Reich Triple Convertible lens (that I absolutely love) in the following configuration: 12" f/6.8, 25" (?), and 28" (?). I forget the max apertures of the converted configurations, and I'm too lazy to calculate them. My question relates to the many other configurations I've seen, such as 12/21/28, 12/19/28, 12/19/25,12/19.7/26, etc. How many configurations are there?

[Louis Pacilla]

Hey Jay

Here ya go Have at it.Gundlach Catalogs Dating from 1891-1935. You should find a few of the combinations at least up to 1935. I think they made this into the 1960's so you'll miss a few changes.

http://www.piercevaubel.com/cam/catalogsgundman.htm

Keep in mind that the 1891 will not contain the TR as it was not yet invented.

It's a cool catalog mostly because the temperamental Mr Gundlach was still in the mix at that point. In fact he's the center of the 1891 catalog with his recently patented Rectigraphics/Perigraphic lenses. They are rapid rectilinear with additional thin element added for better corrections. So he claimed .

BTW I'm kind of a fan of Gundlach lenses on whole. Particularly the Hyperions.
I have a smoking little #4 TR that is a 10 1/2" 24"/18" and a #6 TR that's a 15" 36"/24". I love em'

[Jay DeFehr]

Thanks, Louis,

I don't see my combination in there, but I might have missed it. I'll never part with mine. I have a #5 and a #6, and love them both. Any ideas for lens shades for these?

[Vaughn]

I have a 12-19(or 21 I forget)-28. I tried it on my Zone VI 8x10. I managed to focus on infinity with the lens set up for 28" by cranking both standards to the very last tooth of the beds. I had no fore nor middle ground, so fortunately I did not need any more extension! My 2D has a couple more inches of play, so the lens stays with it.

[Jay DeFehr]

I tried my 25" cell once, on my Deardorff. My bellows was racked way out. Made me nervous. The rig didn't seem very stable all stretched out like that. The negative was sharp enough, and that surprised me. I don't foresee doing that again.

[Jay DeFehr]

By the way, Vaughn, what do you use for a lens shade?

[Vaughn]

Usually some sort of arrangement with the darkcloth.

I tried photographing the moon coming out of an eclipse using just the 28" element in the back (multiple exposures 10 minutes apart on the same piece of film -- 5x7 back on the 2D). After the fifth exposure, the shutter did not close -- probably due to dampness and cold of the evening. Should have put a yellow filter or UV filter over the front to protect the shutter!

Vaughn

[Corran]

I recently bought a Gundlach triple, the 12/21/28 model. I hunted around for an extension for my old Gundlach 8x10 and after a while found one, but had to modify it. Finally, got to test it out a few days ago. What a joy to use such a small lens with such functionality, and pretty good looking results to boot! I have a cheap monopod I attach to the front of my camera for use with a massive 300mm f/4.5 Radar; I'll have to drill out the end of the rear extension to do the same on the other side. Even the 28" and requisite extension didn't really phase the camera too much (it's got just about 750mm of extension now).

Here's a shot from the 21" cell, shot at f/32:


Not bad for one half of a 100-year-old lens! And I didn't even use a filter to help. I did find the front could kind of take a 49mm filter so I ordered a 49-67mm step-up ring for filters.

[Jay DeFehr]

That looks pretty great, Bryan. Very smooth. I'll probably end up fabricating some kind of shade from black foamcore and book binder's tape. I thought (hoped) there might be a ready-made solution.

[Corran]

Thanks. If the step-up ring works I'll let you know. Would be simple to buy a shade at a standard size from ebay and stick it on there.