Lens question please_Gundlach, Turner-Reich series II No. 1
AAvK
Hello LF public
I recently bought a very old GTR triple convertable (5x5 glass), have been reading
about them in public forums by search in Google and learnt that they have bad
"chromatic aberation" (as it were), so it is necassary to use a yellow, orange or red
filter on the front or back for sharpness. I read one fellow uses green.
I would like to know which glass does what with which color of the spectrum so as
to klnow which color filter to use! This would be interesting. I would use the filter
on the front because I could also screw a lens shade into the filter. I wonder if I
could find such an adapter for the front, if the front cell were not in use.
But, this lens is a series II No. 1 patented in 1895, yet the rims do not state either
of the focal lengths, and they are in an old wollensak Regno shutter (working!),
which must have been a later adaptation, it has a proper triple aperture scale in
brass (fancy work!).
Would anyone know the focal lengths, and whether a cable or air hose can be
adapted? It does have push button type finger release(s).
Any help much appreciated,
--
Giant_Alex }<)))*>
not my site: http://www.e-sword.net/
cravdraa - at - yahoo - dot - com
Richard Knoppow
"AAvK" <notfo...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:PmRij.43603$1C4....@newsfe10.phx...
Turner-Reich lenses were made until the late 1940's.
The individual cells are not well color corrected so there
is a noticable color fringe when they are used. When both
cells are used the symmetry seems to cure this fringing so
its probably lateral color. The use of a green filter should
improve sharpness when a single cell is used. It seems to me
without firing up my T-R and looking at the image that the
worst fringing is red so a green filter would be better than
a yellow one.
If you use the single cells on the back of the shutter
you can use a push on type adaptor on the lens cell just as
you would in front. While the performance should, in
principle, be optimum with the lens behind the stop, in
practice it makes very little difference and the bellows
draw needed is significantly less.
I am surprized that your lens has no focal length
markings. What markings does it have? Perhaps I can identify
it. The patent notification may not mean much. I don't
believe there was ever a law preventing the notice of a
patent after the patent had expired. That would be 1912 for
an 1895 patent.
Basically, the T-R lens is a Zeiss convertible Protar
with one of the elements split and replaced by two cemented
elements. The lens was probably designed by Ernst Gundlach
who used this trick on other lenses to avoid infringing
patents. The extra element in the T-R has no benifit over
the Protar and, in fact, the Protar seems to be a better
lens. Turner and Reich were officers of the Gundlach company
and probably had nothing to do with the design of the lens.
A great many T-R lenses were made in the late 1930s
into the WW-2 period to meet a government spec probably
written around the Dagor. Most of these are in Ilex
shutters.
The Regno should have an air release nipple on the
lower left (facing the shutter) at about8 o'clock. The
setting lever is at about 4 o'clock and the releast lever at
about 11 o'clock. The shutter is regulated by an air brake
located under the cocking or setting lever. I don't know
over what period the Regno was made but I think it was
probably superceded by other shutters by the mid to late
1920's. Wollensak made good shutters. All the springs are
hair springs and can be made from spring wire so the
shutters can be maintained provided they don't need broken
parts replaced.
The T-R lens is capable of good results but was not one
of the better LF lenses despite some pretty strong claims
being made for it.
Rudolf Kingslake has some biographical information
about Ernst Gundlach. Evidently, he was a very difficult
person who started and left several companies, eventually
went back to Germany and disappeared into obscurity.
--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dick...@ix.netcom.com
AAvK
"Richard Knoppow" <dick...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:13oo43l...@corp.supernews.com...
What about for mono films? I think because of this problem I
would never use this lens for color films!
> If you use the single cells on the back of the shutter
> you can use a push on type adaptor on the lens cell just as
> you would in front. While the performance should, in
> principle, be optimum with the lens behind the stop, in
> practice it makes very little difference and the bellows
> draw needed is significantly less.
Interesting! Who sells these adapters? Is there a brand name?
> I am surprized that your lens has no focal length
> markings. What markings does it have? Perhaps I can identify
> it.
Front lens rim says:
" Gundlach Manhattan Opt. Co. Rochester, N.Y. Turner
Reich Anastigmat F: 6.8 Series II No. 1 Pat. May 14 - 95"
And then what looks to be a short five figure serial number
with one or two letters, B6568 or another B as the last figure,
I think. I can tell both cells have matching numbers. The rear
cell has that number and "Turner Reich", and that's it.
I suspect the "No. 1" is the key, if you have a production list?
It might be for 4x5, or maybe related to image circle size, or the
degrees of view angle.
> The patent notification may not mean much. I don't
> believe there was ever a law preventing the notice of a
> patent after the patent had expired. That would be 1912 for
> an 1895 patent.
> Basically, the T-R lens is a Zeiss convertible Protar
> with one of the elements split and replaced by two cemented
> elements. The lens was probably designed by Ernst Gundlach
> who used this trick on other lenses to avoid infringing
> patents. The extra element in the T-R has no benifit over
> the Protar and, in fact, the Protar seems to be a better
> lens.
Yes, I read (online) that Edward Weston had a hard time with one
and complained to Ansel Adams, who in return recommended a Zeiss
Protar.
> Turner and Reich were officers of the Gundlach company
> and probably had nothing to do with the design of the lens.
> A great many T-R lenses were made in the late 1930s
> into the WW-2 period to meet a government spec probably
> written around the Dagor. Most of these are in Ilex
> shutters.
> The Regno should have an air release nipple on the
> lower left (facing the shutter) at about8 o'clock. The
> setting lever is at about 4 o'clock and the releast lever at
> about 11 o'clock. The shutter is regulated by an air brake
> located under the cocking or setting lever.
This one seems different than your description. Let's say the aperture
scale is on the bottom, one the face, and the shutter speed sacale is on
top of the front face. There is a tall button of steel color at 10 o'clock
and just to it's left, about 1/8" is a steel rimmed hole which is where I
suspect there was installed that nipple for an air hose, not there now.
At 2 o'clock is another button that is identicle to the on on the left.
Both buttons are at the edge of the speed scale. The buttons and hole
are on the rim.
> I don't know
> over what period the Regno was made but I think it was
> probably superceded by other shutters by the mid to late
> 1920's. Wollensak made good shutters. All the springs are
> hair springs and can be made from spring wire so the
> shutters can be maintained provided they don't need broken
> parts replaced.
> The T-R lens is capable of good results but was not one
> of the better LF lenses despite some pretty strong claims
> being made for it.
> Rudolf Kingslake has some biographical information
> about Ernst Gundlach. Evidently, he was a very difficult
> person who started and left several companies, eventually
> went back to Germany and disappeared into obscurity.
>
>
> --
> ---
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dick...@ix.netcom.com
>
>
Richard Knoppow
I suspect this is a later version of the Regno than the
one I was looking at. The publication this is in is dated
1917. The Optimo was another shutter also made by Wollensak.
Older versions have a cocking lever at top right but later
ones have a push-button and a matching button for tripping.
This sounds similar.
The hole near the tripping button is probably for a
fitting for a cable release. The later version probably no
longer has the air cylinder for an air release.
You may want to open the shutter to see what's in it.
The front of the Regno is held in place by three screws on
the back.
There are some early Gundlach and Wollensak catalogues
on the Camera Eccentric site at:
http://www.cameraeccentric.com I think he may also have
the booklet on serviceing "Inter-Lens Shutters" on that
site, I know I've seen in on-line somewhere.
My Gundlach catalogue which is dated March 1926 shows
the No.1 T-R to be a 6-3/4 inch lens for 4x5 plates. The
individual cells are: Front, 14" Rear, 11" Does that sound
right for your lens?
AAvK
> some snipping of my stuff here...
>> --
>> Giant_Alex }<)))*>
>> not my site: http://www.e-sword.net/
>
> I suspect this is a later version of the Regno than the
> one I was looking at. The publication this is in is dated
> 1917. The Optimo was another shutter also made by Wollensak.
> Older versions have a cocking lever at top right but later
> ones have a push-button and a matching button for tripping.
> This sounds similar.
It exactly does.
> The hole near the tripping button is probably for a
> fitting for a cable release. The later version probably no
> longer has the air cylinder for an air release.
Okay, but there are no threads there.
> You may want to open the shutter to see what's in it.
> The front of the Regno is held in place by three screws on
> the back.
> There are some early Gundlach and Wollensak catalogues
> on the Camera Eccentric site at:
>
> http://www.cameraeccentric.com I think he may also have
> the booklet on serviceing "Inter-Lens Shutters" on that
> site, I know I've seen in on-line somewhere.
Yes I saw it, it seems there are two pages for each shutter, one is
text and the other shows the workings with the cover removed.
Doesn't make sense.
> My Gundlach catalogue which is dated March 1926 shows
> the No.1 T-R to be a 6-3/4 inch lens for 4x5 plates. The
> individual cells are: Front, 14" Rear, 11" Does that sound
> right for your lens?
Actually I havn't received the lens yet, it is in transport via UPS
and will be here tomorrow on the 18th. I have seen other images
of GTRs showing letter engravings on the outer side of the rims
which are not showing in pics I did see, which I saved to my hard
drive. I must have a pretty early one. But they they made them
for a long enough time and must have been kept as standards for
model numbers, I suspect it must be the same as your '26 catalogue.
Which is fine with me, I have "something" of a 4x5... lol.
Richard Knoppow
>
>> some snipping of my stuff here...
>>> --
>>> Giant_Alex }<)))*>
>>> not my site: http://www.e-sword.net/
>>
>> I suspect this is a later version of the Regno than
>> the one I was looking at. The publication this is in is
>> dated 1917. The Optimo was another shutter also made by
>> Wollensak. Older versions have a cocking lever at top
>> right but later ones have a push-button and a matching
>> button for tripping. This sounds similar.
>
> It exactly does.
>
>> The hole near the tripping button is probably for a
>> fitting for a cable release. The later version probably
>> no longer has the air cylinder for an air release.
>
> Okay, but there are no threads there.
>
release socket is a separate part held in with a nut or clip
or some other way. I've had to makeshift sockets for a
couple of Ilex shutters were they were missing.
AAvK
>> Okay, but there are no threads there.
>>
> The fitting may be missing. On most shutters the cable
> release socket is a separate part held in with a nut or clip
> or some other way. I've had to makeshift sockets for a
> couple of Ilex shutters were they were missing.
Ya know what? I just got the lens, and in that hole there ARE threads there!
They just didn't show it in the shots they took for ebay. But the threads are
different than the modern tapered standard, just no taper, straight walls with
threads. I attempted to use a tapered thread cable release, the threads at the
widest did catch at the top of the hole and it did trip the shutter but I know
now that I need a short throw / short pin type, with this older style of non
tapered thread. Do you know what I can do about that? Or, where the right
one can be found? Maybe a bushing adapter is out there?
The glass in this lens is beautiful to look at, though there is some crystalization
of the adhesive they used, around the edges of the front cell. A very little
around the rear cell's edge, it's workable (the seller dod not reveal this on their
page). No yellowing in the glass ttlg. A bit of a stop-down should cancel any
possible effect.
This is a very small lens and shutter! So it must be for 4x5 indeed. The front
cell is 14" and the rear is 11" just as you described! 6-3/4" together. So that's
171.45mm, 279.4mm, and 355.6 - all with an image circle that will cover 4x5"
only? Would you know what the image circles are, from your books?
The Regno works like a charm all around, but not tight like a newer one, or a
compound. Definitely light-tight though, I took a good close look using light.
The two patent dates are as follows: May 30 1911 and Aug 13 1912. So this
shutter is around 100 years old. Lovely device.
> --
> ---
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dick...@ix.netcom.com
>
--
Richard Knoppow
Beware of dating something by patent dates. I think some
products carried the patent dates or numbers long after the
patents expired. I don't know what the law was on this. A
patent date rather than a number indicates the object was
made before 1927. The patent law was changed then to require
the actual patent number although one could still mark the
date also. Patents in the US have a life of 17 years (some
exceptions now) so a patent issued in 1911 would have run
out in 1928. I suspect the lens and shutter are later rather
than earlier due to the shutter having a cable release
rather than an air release.
Since the T-R lens has four cemented surfaces in each
cell you are doing pretty well to have only slight cement
damage. I am not sure why some lenses seem more vulnerable
to this than others but some of the factors are, the quality
of the canada balsam used, the method of curing it, the
ability of the edge paint to seal the edge from the air. The
cleanliness of the glass surfaces before they were cemented
are also important.
The T-R has a coverage of perhaps 75 or 80 degrees when
the two cells are combined. This is at a fairly small stop,
perhaps f/45. The individual cells have much smaller
coverage, perhaps half of the combined lens, so they won't
cover much more than the "normal" format of the combined
lens.
Like other lenses of this general sort (Dagor,
Convertible Protar, etc.) the lens is somewhat of a wide
angle lens, that is, it covers a pretty wide angle, but the
stop used will depend on the angle. For "normal" the optimum
stop is probably around f/16 to f/22. When used at maximum
coverage its around f/45. The individual cells are much
slower than the combined lens and generally will be sharp at
around f/36 to f/45. Stops smaller than about f/45 can be
used, especially for depth of field, but the diffraction
blur is usually enough to be visible on the ground glass and
will be visible in prints.
Gundlach made some extreme claims for the lens
especially for its coverage, but they simply are not so.
However, its a perfectly usable lens. Note that while the
cells are intended to be used behind the stop they can also
be used in front. Theoretically the performance should be
better when behind the stop but in practice there is not
much difference. However the bellows draw is significantly
shorter when in front so its sometimes possible to use the
longest FL cell this way when the camera does not have
enough bellows draw to permit it to be used in its normal
position. Again theoretically the speed will be slightly
greater when in front but the difference is probably not
significant in practice.
As I mentioned Wollensak made good shutters although
some of their lenses were dogs (but not all). Probably the
most famous of the old Wollensak shutters was the Optimo.
This shutter was made with shutter blades which turned 180
degrees when the shutter was tripped (and went back the
other way the next time it was tripped). This allowed the
shutter to have higher speeds than standard shutters
although the highest speeds marked on some of them is purely
wishful thinking.
jjs
> What about for mono films? I think because of this problem I
> would never use this lens for color films!
I took it that Richard was addressing B&W. If aberation occurs in a
particular color for which the film is sensitive, a correcting filter will
help.
Black & White film is sensitive to color (obviously) and not equally
sensitive to all colors. Filters are important.
____
In my early day of LF photography
I once bought an ARTAR that was supposed to be a good lens and covered
8x10, it sucked royally for B&W all kinds of ghosting on b&w even when
pointed 180 degrees away from the sun on a cloudy day. The bastard I
bought from extracted a 50 dollar restock fee out the 350 dollar check I
bought with even after I had to pester him for about 3 months to refund
my money.
I can think of only one nice thing to say about him: Cocks---er, may he
rest in pieces.
--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
Richard Knoppow
"____" <interne...@deletedmail.com> wrote in message
news:internetphobic-4F6...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
eight glass-air surfaces. It does have some flare but should
not have bad ghost images. I have two, one a very old
uncoated lens from the 1920's. Its very sharp and has good
contrast. The other is from the 1960's and is coated so it
has little flare.
Note that while both flare and ghost images come from
internal reflections and are helped by coating they are not
quite the same. Most flare is in the form of an overall
diffuse field of light all over the image while ghost images
are fairly sharp, or at least recognizable, images in the
image field of bright objects either in the image or just
outside of it. Ghosting is usuallyu due to the design of the
lens rather than just having glass-air surfaces. Both flare
and ghosting can also be cause by reflections from the
inside of the lens barrel or cells or from the inside of the
shutter. I would say your experience with the Artar is
unusual.
The Apo Artar was designed for use on process cameras.
These were used for making printing plates, or rather,
negatives used to expose the photo-resists that were used to
control the etching of the plates. Process lenses are
designed to work best at magnifications near unity. The
Artar is designed for three-color work where the color
separation negatives must all be in focus and be of exactly
the same size. Although the lens is optimized for equal
object and image distance (unity magnification) it performs
very well even at infinity focus if stopped down a bit.
One cause of flare in lenses is haze but this won't
cause ghost images. Haze seems to form on many lenses with
time. I am not sure of the cause but the haze is easily
removed with any lens cleaner. The problem is getting to the
inside surfaces. Most Artars have back caps on the cells so
that cleaning the insides is not difficult.
Richard Knoppow
<jjs> wrote in message
news:13r8viu...@news.supernews.com...
although it manifests itself in different ways. Lenses have
two kinds of color aberration: one is longitudinal chromatic
aberration, the other is lateral chromatic aberration. The
first is the one we usually think of where the lens focuses
different colors at different distances: in effect the focal
length changes with color. This is inherent due to the
characteristics of glass and is reduced by balancing the
dispersion of the positive and negative elements by choosing
the kinds of glass used for them. The newer low-dispersion
glasses make the job of correcting color while maintaning
other corrections easier.
Lateral color is a difference in the _size_ of images at
different colors. The images are all in focus but different
in size so that there is still fringing. In fact, because
the images are all sharp the fringing may be more noticable.
Lateral color can be reduced by symmetry or by choice of
glass types. In non-symmetrical lenses it is sometimes
difficult to correct.
In a convertible lens, where the cells are similar but
can be used alone the correction for lateral color due to
symmetry is lost when only one cell is used. Some of these
lenses have cells which are corrected fairly well and others
show considerable color fringing when single cells are used
but all are inferior to the complete lens (two cells).
Color problems may actually be more appearant in B&W
because the film records everything at once and the eye can
not longer ignore some of the information at it can in color
pictures.
Now, if the colors recorded throught an aberrated lens
are limited the aberration will have less effect. Some very
old lenses are not very corrected for the red end of the
spectrum because before about the mid 1920's most film was
orthochromatic (not sensitive to red) or even "ordinary"
(not sensitize to any color but blue). A filter which
reduces red light may make such lenses sharper. Green
filters cut off some blue light and some red light so are
good choices where a lens has serious chromatic aberration.
A cyan filter will somewhat duplicate orthochromatic film
and will usually also improve sharpness when the lens has
some chromatic aberration.
My experience with the T-R lens is that the individual
cells have very noticable color fringing. The Zeiss
Convertible Protar is better although still having some
fringing. Even the older convertible version of the
Schneider Symmar has some fringing, actually a little worse
than the Protar.
A general purpose lens which was very well corrected for
both kinds of color aberration is the Kodak Commercial
Ektar. These are Tessar types and don't have the advantage
of symmetry but were very carefully designed to eliminate
color problems because they were intended to promote the use
of color film for commercial photography. Most symmetrical
or nearly symmetrical lenses have good correction for
lateral color, the Goerz Dagor, Dogmar and of course Artar
being examples.