peter_naylor1 Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 Dean W's excellent monochrome pix taken with his c. 1958 Silette with the humble f2.8 45mm Color-Agnar, have reminded me of something that I've never got to the bottom of, and maybe this is a timely moment to bring up. Just what is the difference between the Agnar and Apotar lenses from AGFA? They're both 3-element Cooke triplet types, and in some cameras the Apotar is faster than the Agnar, but Dean's 1958 Silette was offered with either an f2.8 Color-Agnar or Apotar. The Agnar seems to have invariably been the cheaper alternative, no matter what the model. I once read of somebody's theory that they're actually the same lens, with the ones that tested better labelled as "Apotar" and the rest as "Agnar" - although Dean's efforts tend to disprove that! Maybe somebody in our erudite Forum can throw some light on this? PN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dean_williams Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 I'm not as up on things in the Silette realm as you are Peter. Maybe my camera tested well, but got put in the wrong lens labeling box at the factory. Lucky me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_mckeith Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 compliments of google- The Apotar was a redesign of the Agnar lens and used 'new glasses' which were available in the 50s. These new optical glasses allowed for better chromatic correction and were helpful to reduce some other lens aberrations, too. The Apotar seems to perform a bit better than the Agnar. Agnar lenses were still used on some cheap Agfa cameras in the 60s when the Apotar was already released. http://www.kyphoto.com/classics/forum/messages/674/1443.html?1057325683 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_mckeith Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 hmmmm- I just noticed that post was by Winfried Buechsenschuetz- who also posts over here and ,imo really knows some chit about classic cameras- he recently explained to me how to fix my Yashica electro 35- thank you very large,Winfried Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patric_dahl_n Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 Don McKeith wrote: "The Apotar was a redesign of the Agnar lens and used 'new glasses' which were available in the 50s." Yes and no. The Apotar was available already in the mid 30s. I don't know the story of Agnar though. Maybe it was a redesign of Agfas simplest triplet Jgestar? Before the war you could buy an Agfa Record 6x9 with Jgestar, Apotar or Solinar. After the war the lenses were Agnar, Apotar and Solinar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew in Austin Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 On the Apotar, one of the elements is made from rare-earth glass, which in this case means the glass contains barium. On post 1950 lenses, the Apotar has a superb, hardened, anti-reflective coating. The previous Steinheil Apotar was soft coated and not as sharp, in my opinion. As mentioned beginning in the 1930's, the Apotar was Agfa's designation for its second tier lens. Prior to the Solagon, the Solinar held the number one spot. I have a late 105mm Apotar from a Record II mounted to my Billy Record II and you'll hear no complaints from me. By the way, does anyone have a prewar Billy Record in their collection with an Apotar? I'd be interested on how well it performs. Best Regards - Andrew in Austin, TX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patric_dahl_n Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 "The previous Steinheil Apotar was soft coated and not as sharp, in my opinion". Oh drat! I bought a Record II with one of those last year. Now I must buy a Record II with Agfa Apotar! I have one with Solinar, and it's very good. Bought new bellows from Jurgen Kreckel for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry h-l Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 I have an Agnar off of a Viking, and an Apotar on an Isolette II. The Agnar always looks better. The Apotar is sharp around the frame, except in the center where it is always a tad soft. Any ideas? I guess it could be film flatness, but that usually shows up on one side or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_fromm2 Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 Andrew Yue wrote "The previous Steinheil Apotar was soft coated and not as sharp, in my opinion." Andrew, did you make a typo? I ask because I hadn't known that the Apotar was a Steinheil product. I've looked for Apotar in the Vade Mecum's Steinheil section. No Apotars there, unless the Adobe Reader 6's search function has problems. Cheers, Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charles_stobbs3 Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 In another discussion, I read that Solinars were the best, Apotars next, and Agnars the worst although very little difference stopped down. I have two Solinettes, one with a Solinar and one with an Apotar. I haven't used the Solinar yet so I can't give any first hand opinion. Fun cameras however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patric_dahl_n Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 Dan Fromm, yes Steinheil made some of the Apotars for Agfa after the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patric_dahl_n Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 Here's a scan of the Steinheil Apotar lens on my Agfa Billy Record II<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_fromm1 Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 Thanks, Patric. Cheers, Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_m Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 All of ther Solinars were not that good, some of the ones fitted to the Agfa Silette were dogs. It all comes down to quality control. I'm sure there are good and bad Agnars and good and bad Apotars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__stu_evans Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 Certainly one bad Apotar won't spoil the whole bunch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now