Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,204   Posts: 1,531,654   Online: 1151
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Düsseldorf, Germany
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,021
    Images
    1
    This lens is advertised in Wisner's site as covering up to 11x14. If they did sale any, can anyone comment on how this lens performs? Thanks.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Düsseldorf, Germany
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,021
    Images
    1
    Does this lens exist at all?
    Francesco

  3. #3
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,207
    Images
    20
    I've never heard of anyone actually owning one, nor have I seen a photograph of the lens. As I recall, he just has a drawing on the website, no?
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  4. #4
    lee
    lee is offline
    lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth TX
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,913
    Images
    8
    If this lens is that casket set he sells, I have never seen on either but I think there is a guy in NJ that has one. His name is JD Beyer. He posts on rec.photo.largeformat sometimes.

    lee\c

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,043
    not sure about the lens that wisner is selling, but clive russ has a 150mm
    for sale on his website

    http://cliveruss.com/classiclns/hype.../hypergon.html

    he has used his on a 11x14, and claims it can cover a 16x20 negative.
    i know it isn't the same lens, but it might give you an idea since it is kind of similar ...

    -john

  6. #6
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,207
    Images
    20
    Wisner's alleged Hypergon is not the casket set and not a Goerz Hypergon. There are Wisner plasmat sets floating around and that one's been reviewed in print.

    On the website, Wisner advertises a modern copy of a Hypergon, that as far as I can tell has never actually been manufactured.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  7. #7
    lee
    lee is offline
    lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth TX
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,913
    Images
    8
    I stand corrected.

    lee\c

  8. #8
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Now the Goertz Hypergon is an interesting lens...

    Looking back in my old literature (Hans Schmidt: "Photographisches Hilfsbuch für ernste Arbeit", 1. Teil, Zweite Auflage, Berlin 1910), they were made in 60, 75, 90, 120, 150, and 200mm focal lengths. Herr Schmidt "only" reports the coverage as 135°, but that is still an image circle of about 5 times the focal length. So the 200mm would cover 1000mm - 40 inches!
    If the "propeller" is missing it will only cover 110° before light falloff gets too extreme - about the same as a Zeiss Protar f:18 of the same vintage.

    Now compare the price of those two classic lenses: A Hypergon 120mm with missing propeller will easily get $2000 on eBay, a Protar 110mm can be had for around $100. So what was the price in Berlin, 1910?

    Hypergon 120 with propeller: 170 Mark
    Hypergon 120 without " : 150 Mark
    Zeiss Protar 110mm : 64 Mark.

    The Hypergon is f:22, the Protar f:18, so that makes no big difference. It's obvious what would have been the best investment, but not what makes the huge price difference today? A Protar is probably a better lens than the Hypergon, at least if you can't use the full image circle!
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  9. #9
    cjarvis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    183
    Images
    26
    Availability would account for the huge price difference today. Hypergons are rarer than hen's teeth.

    I don't think a Protar outperforms a Hypergon. The Hypergon's real claim to fame, besides BIG coverage, is flatness of field.

  10. #10
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    There are lots of lenses even rarer than the Hypergon, so it can't be that.

    The extreme coverage is probably the thing, but that coverage is only realistic from a complete Hypergon with working star aperture.

    Flatness of field is probably better in the Protar, and I believe the resolution is significantly better - especially at full aperture. At f:90 it doesn't really matter, as diffraction will limit the resolutoin of just about any lens.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin