Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Medium Format Cameras and Accessories' started by SalveSlog, Mar 19, 2014.
I would like to hear opinions on this lens. Is it coated? (It's on a Welta Weltax Rheinmetall)
1955 camera. Probably coated.
Excellent lens , one of the best you can get with a folder. Its extremelly sharp and corrected , you can look its images at flickr. And dim light portraits are legendary. Use Portra with it and you will not be dissapointed.
Would you like to inform on that very lens or the Tessar in general?
The Tessar has been one of the most common lens designs for decades. It is a so-called modified triplet, as it consists of three groups but four lens elements, as one element of the triplet was subtituted by two cemented together.
It has good resolution, is quite fast and quite simple. There had been at least three design evolutions cranking up speed. It has been cloned countlessly under as many names.
One additional advantage is that instead of moving the whole lens quite a bit for focusing one can mount it that way that only the front element is moved, a tiny distance, still yielding good quality. This simplified camera designs very much as the lens does not lengthen and a between-the-lens shutter can remain static.
I am not talking about cheap clones from japan. I am talking about tessars on folders and zeiss branded. Its not a quite lens , its one of the best lens on folders. Mozart is more basic to play than bach but he is a genius. No , more lens elements does not make better lenses , may be faster but it is not better. I come from summicron 7 elements to 2 elements goerz in 20 years and it is about designing the lens , not element count.
My posting was directed at SalveSlog. Though I doubt there are significant differences between known manufacturers. Mustafa, keep in mind that the concept of front-lens focusing ítself does not gain the image quality of barrel focusing anyway.
What camera is that connected to? Is it a 6 x 9?
double format: 6x6 or 6x4,5
Coated lenses did not come into common usage until after WWII. These early lenses were single coated with multi-coating being a later invention. The tessar is described as having 4 elements in 3 groups. The name comes from the Greek word for four (4) which is tessera. This design begins to show good resolution when stopped down to an aperture of 3.5.
As Gerald said, the Tessar is a 4 element design, and a very, very good one. Tessars are known for sharpness. I had the same lens on a Welta many years ago and I wish I had never sold that camera. It took great photos. Sharp as a tack. Mine was single coated, as this one appears to be. I actually prefer uncoated for B&W though.
Don't discount old lens designs. The best lens I ever owned was on an ancient Voigtlander Brillant. It was an uncoated Heliar, made in the 1930's, and it would eat a Rolleiflex or Hasselblad for lunch. Really, it was an amazing lens. Very 3-D imaging, excellent tonality. The camera was sort of a PITA to use, but the lens was the real deal.
The lens serial number is from the mid- to late 1950s. I'm pretty sure Carl Zeiss Jena would have been coating everything by then.
No one knows what camera this is?
I wrote this in my original post: it's a Welta Weltax (Rheinmetall).
Thanks to all!
There is no colored letter on the lens, but a symbol just before "Tessar..". Anyone knows what this symbol means?
There are two symbols: the one in front of the lens name and the other, a 1 in a rounded triangle, on the shutter.
The latter is one of a range of symbols indicated the product quality within production of GDR goods. In this case indicating good quality on par with the average of world production.
Thank you! I missed that as I never heard of this brand name before.
The symbol before the Tessar is 1 in a Q, or the 1Q mark, meaning top-quality. It was definitely used in the Jena factory, but I'm not sure about Oberkochen.
I've got 1Q on some of my Pentacon 6 lenses, but only the Zebra (earlier) versions have it, my Red-MC versions don't use this mark (but I'm not sure when they switched to marking MC, maybe the 70s?)
Given that you have the 1Q mark, i'll presume that it's Not multicoated.
The point of the Tessar was actually that it had some of the best IQ possible with the least amount of elements.
As coatings got better you could get better IQ with more elements and they stopped making the Tessar in favour of the Biometar (P6, Jena) or Planar (Hassy, Oberkochen). There was never a Red MC Tessar for P6 as far as I've ever heard (although I could be wrong).
With no Red T symbol to indicate coating it's unlikely it's coated, their coatings around this period were heavy and decidedly blue so very easy to spot. The coating is also remarkable effective but would need a warm-up filter for colour work. I have a coated 150mm CZJ Tessar with slightly higher serial number.
Ian, if you consult Arne Croell's article on post-WW II CZJ (it is on arnecroell.com) I think you'll find that the red T symbol was used to indicate that a lens was coated until the early '50s. After that all lenses that CZJ made were coated. You can check whether my failing memory has got me again.
Yes , I agree but they were still using the T symbol around the time of serial number of the OP's lens and the CZJ coatings were quite heavy and noticeable.
I wasn't sure whether it denoted a certain quality of production, though that would make sense. I was familiar with the triangle-1 mark from looking at East German-produced firearms.
I have a Certo-6 with the same marking, and with a Tempor shutter. I don't know much about these shutters, other than that I understand they're Synchro Compur copies. Haven't used the camera enough to evaluate how good the shutter is, other than to note that the self-timer doesn't work.
I have a Rollei T with Tesser. Absolutly beautiful images come off that camera.
It's definitely coated. Made in 1955, very clear glass with slightly blueish reflections. I've never seen an uncoated Tessar in a Tempor shutter.
This is a front cell focusing lens and it's on a folder, so don't expect Rolleiflex sharpness. But it can be a very good performer if the focus is correct and lens standard is parallell to the film plane.