Jump to content

Lens Names - What Do They Mean?


Vlad Soare

Recommended Posts

Hello,

<br><br>

I'm just curious: do lens names like Skopar, Summar, Summitar, Takumar, Sonnar,

Tessar, etc. mean anything? Do they designate certain lens types (for example

Summitar = x lenses in y groups with z aperture blades), or are they simply just

market names of specific lenses (like the car names Mustang, Punto, etc.)?

<br><br>

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, but do they designate some lens types, or are they just market names? The name Sonnar, for example, designates a specific lens made by a specific company in a specific year, or does it designate all lenses constructed in a certain way (x elements in y groups, the first one being convergent, the second one being ... etc.)? Is it a market name or a lens type desgination?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The old convention of naming lenses according to their optical formulae seems to have been very much a German practice prior to the mid-1950's.

 

Back in the day when Voigtlander was an independent optical manufacturer in Braunschweig, the names Voigtar, Skopar, Heliar, Ultron referred to different optical forumulae.

 

With Carl Zeiss, the same was true. The photographer had some idea of what the lens design was to a particular lens with a Tessar, Sonnar, Planar or Biogon. Plus, there was a big price jump for example from a Tessar to a Sonnar.

 

******

 

On the current Cosina lens line up, the nomenclature usually does not follow this old convention. The exception that comes to mind with regards to Cosina's offerings are Cosina's 50mm Heliars. Those two Heliars are really Heliars.

 

For most Japanese optics, Nikkor, Takumar and Canon refers to the camera maker's in house branding.

Best Regards - Andrew in Austin, TX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most colorful Leitz lense stories:

 

Elmax = "E Leitz", designed by "Max Berek". The very first Leica A cameras came with this.

It was soon replaced with the Elmar.

 

Elmar = "Oops, Max designed an upgrade...well, Elmar sounds good". Elmar then became

generally used to designate any Leitz f3.5 lense.

 

Hektor = Max Berek's dog. No focus groups to pick names back in those days. Rex

(Summarex) was his other dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<i>Trade names for lenses are just that, trade names. Arbitrary designators that carry no information.</i>

<p>

They may be trade names, but it does not logically follow that they carry no information. Some, like Tessar, are particular lens designs. Others, like Leica's names, just specify a max aperture.

<p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Modern Leica lens-naming nomenclature:

<P>

<UL>

<LI>Noctilux = f/1.0 or f/1.2

<BR><LI>Summilux = f/1.4

<BR><LI>Summicron = f/2

<BR><LI>Elmarit = f/2.8

<BR><LI>Elmar = f/3.5 or f/4

</UL>

<P>

There are exceptions, such as the recent 50mm f/2.8 Elmar. By its maximum aperture, it should be an Elmarit. But I think because it's a modern version of the collapsible 50mm f/3.5 Elmar, Leica decided to keep the original name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Trade names for lenses are just that, trade names. Arbitrary designators that carry no information.

 

Examples are few, but they do exist. Zeiss have been using the names Sonnar and Planar interchangeably for a while, apparently dictated by marketing. The 90 ZM "Sonnar" is just the latest instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rokkor of Minolta comes from the name of german Dr. Rokko who contributed to the design of japanese lens.

The same situation with Pentax` Takumar - Prof. Tacuma designed the lens.

A lot of soviet lenses meant: Peace for Mir, Wave for Volna, Jupiter, Helios etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill, I've read what Zeiss said about the 85 ZM that was quoted repeatedly at RFF. It's just completely ad-hoc and apologetic marketing-speak, even worse than their "explanation" about the C-Sonnar's focus shift problem.

 

If you just let go of such "Zeiss talk" for a minute, you'd see from some of the block diagrams (also quoted at RFF I think) that how unconvincing their nomenclatures have been, e.g. the immensely assymetrical f/1.2 and f/1.4 (C/Y and ZF) 85mm "Planars" complete with very Sonnar-like rear groups. OTOH, the 85 ZM "Sonnar" is much closer to the classic double-Gauss design than any of those "Planars."

 

Nowadays, it seems the only classic Zeiss designs correctly named for every lens are Tessar and Biogon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...