David, you're right, they're much pricier than the much-maligned (for price, not quality of work) SKGrimes. FWIW, SKG's price for a shutter overhaul is typically < $US 100 and they recently charged me not too much to dismantle a 38/4.5 Biogon and remove crud from the inside of the rear element. But AFAIK SKG doesn't repolish or coat ...
Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington
On another topic, I've been wondering for a while why Serracs command such relatively old prices. Can you explain it? To me they seem like just garden variety f/4.5 tessar types.
A Serrac IS a Tessar-type lens, of course. The reason I bought mine and am spending money on it is just because it is an f4.5, with which I hope to obtain interesting modeling and pronounced out-of-focus backgrounds at full aperture. I really have not seen too many f4.5s of this length in a shutter, there seem to be quite a lot of Russian 300 mm barrel lenses, of course f5.6 Symmars of various ages and plenty of process-type lenses of f9 to 11. Aside from anything else, an f4.5 does give a nice bright focusing image!
Originally Posted by Dan Fromm
Originally Posted by avandesande
never thought of going and looking there. Never spend time on the Google groups since IME they are less polite than here, even taken into account the smallish skirmishes we tend to have now and then.
Will ook through this long list once there is time. But how does one go about it filtering out the non-European threads? That's a question I'll need to solve, since I sure ain't sending stuff to Virginia if I can help it.
What's a "relatively old price"? Is that something like the Lancaster Patent Rectigraphic 12x10" which cost me the princely sum of £24 - the same as it cost new in 1904?
I had a Xenar 300/f:4.5 in Compound #5 shutter, which was the biggest of the compounds. As you say nice and bright, and with that DOF there is no doubt at all about whether it's in focus or not...
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Stupid typo, Ole. Had low in mind, my fingers wanted old. I seem to be losing control of myself. Arrrgh!
Originally Posted by Ole
Thinking of silly old lenses, last week I received a 4.75"/7.7 Aldis Uno. I have no idea when it was made, and the Vade Mecum was little help in putting a date on it. Not earlier than 1902. Tiny lens. Seems to cover 2x3, put what seems like a nice image on the ground glass wide open, not hard to focus. Am waiting for that roll of EPP to come back from the lab. Tried a pair of B&L f/6.3 Tessar IIbs on that roll too, one from 1914 or so, the other from the '20s. Got some serious macro shots too, our prickly pear is blooming.
The overexposed neg of the cleaned Zodelar were salvageable enough to get a good impression of it's performance - yippie! It's a real nice lens. Would you say this image is taken with a 80 yo lens?
BTW what you see is part of a post-war modernist church(window) from the resurrection church in Arnhem. Looking through the lens, the funny mosaic window suddenly revealed its figurative side. Never noticed that before, always thought it was some meaningless abstracty mosaic type decoration. See what a good lens can do.
PS Forgot to mention: there was another shot taken at f45 which we liked better, but the neg was too bad to get any decent results