Hansa? A Gem Amongst the Dross...

<p>In my very recent Soligor post, I mentioned that half the fun of collecting old low-end lenses was finding an occasional jewel amongst the junk. I'd no sooner posted the remark and a courier pack arrived, with quite an eclectic collection of junk, bought very cheaply as one lot off a local auction site. Among the bits and pieces was a little M42 35mm lens in a nice pigskin case, bearing the name "Hansa".<br /><br />The only "Hansa"s I've been familiar with have been photographic enlargers and lenses, definitely down-market. I knew that "Hanza" had been associated with the name Canon, very early in the piece, and a little searching revealed that the Hansa tradename is indeed the property of the Japanese Omiya Trading Co. Ltd, who originally produce the "Hanza Canon", back in the 1930's and 40's. But I've never seen, or even heard of, a Hansa lens for a SLR.<br /><br />It's a little f/2.8 pre-set lens, heavy as lead and strongly constructed. The glass is well-coated and brilliantly clear. It has a knurled rear chrome ring, strongly reminiscent of a Canon FD mount. Pre-set lenses are great to use on Canon DSLR's since one is obliged to use manual or aperture-apriority modes, so I stuck it on a 5D, walked out into a gloomy morning and took a few test shots of a neighbour's place, not expecting too much. The results delighted me, to say the least, and I went and shot a whole lot more, all of it good. No flare, no distortion, very few CA's, as good as some the really expensive glass I've bought over the years. So, a gem among the dross, indeed. I can't wait for the light to improve enough to give it a really good workout, but at a purchase price of about $12 I'm kind of happy.<br /><br />If anyone can shed any light on the origins or history of Hansa lenses, I'd love to hear. In the meantime, here are a couple of pics of the lens, one full frame photograph from it, and two 50% crops, one from the middle and one from the corner. Light was <em>very</em> flat, aperture f/5.6.</p><div></div>

<p>No.2</p><div></div>

<p>No.3</p><div></div>

<p>No.4</p><div></div>

<p>No.5</p><div></div>

<p>Heavy as lead is not out of the range of possibility. Flint glass is lead crystal -- lots of lead in it.<br>

Looks to be a T-2 interchangeable mount.</p>

<p>I suppose you won't be surprised that HANSA does not appear in the far-from-complete <em>Kadlubeks Objectiv-Katalog</em>. They rarely have smaller 'rebrands'. Nor was this brand one that came up when I tried to make a list of '<a href="../classic-cameras-forum/00XZXu">rebrands</a>' used by various vendors.</p>

<p>That certainly looks like a Japan Camera sticker, but clones were made by other Asian producers, so....<br>

It does generally resemble some of the Spiratone lenses.I've shown one 35mm f/2.8 one below, but it seems a little taller than the Hansa. How many different ways can you package a pre-set lens of this focal length anyhow?</p>

<p>Ironically, the original use of the HANSA brand was, as I understand it, intended to suggest that the products so branded were German in origin, as in Lufthansa, Hanseatic League (Hanse), etc. I'll bet that post-war uses would be intended to suggest Canon or other quality Japanese sources.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Really clean image. I was trying to recall if the Hansa was related to the Hanimex also. I had a 135mm f/2.8 that was my best lens at the time (on a Mamiya Sekor 1000 DTL). But what's up with the two aperture rings?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>what's up with the two aperture rings?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's preset as opposed to click stop. You set the main aperture, and then can turn the other ring to open the lens up for focusing, etc. and then can stop the lens down to the appropriate taking aperture without having to look at the stops on the lens while you're still looking through the viewfinder.</p>

<p>Thanks JDM, I do remember lenses like that. It must be one of those facts that spilled out the other side of my head some years ago.</p>

<p>You're right <strong>JDM</strong>, I'm not at all surprised that the Hansa is not in the <em>Katalog</em>; I'm not often at a total loss for information but this one has me stumped, as we say downunder. I shouldn't really be surprised by the occasional oddity, having bought (and quickly sold) what turned out to be an Asian-made "Helios" 28mm lens...Fun, ain't it! There<em> is</em> a passing resemblance to the Spiratone but, as you observed, many of the small pre-set lenses look very similar.</p>

<p>That looks much like a Hanimex 28/2.8 preset I have had for a long time.This one also has the silver T-style mount, with 3 setscrews to set rotation, but none to lock it to the lens, and the thread is larger than M42. I've forgotten the dimension and don't have a caliper at hand, but it was more like 45. The lens is nearly identical in appearance and construction to the one shown, except for the focal length. Even the serial number format is the same (mine is H80651). This lens has always been a bit of a mystery to me, since like Hansa it's a common enough brand but not usually found on a lens, and the mount is rare too. I've never seen another like it. I must confess I can't remember when I last took a picture with it, so I can't comment at the moment on its optical qualities, but I vaguely recall that it was all right. </p><div></div>

<p>Well done, <strong>Matthew</strong>, I'd say that the two lenses are probably stablemates. Not that it's a great help in determining a manufacturer, since Hanimex sourced lenses from all over the place. The T-style mount looks identical, but what on earth did your copy fit? It seems we might both have a rather unusual lens.</p>

<p>Hansa is alive and well, though they now concentrate on accessories: <a href="http://www.hansa.jp/">http://www.hansa.jp/</a></p>

<p>I had a Hansa enlarger lens in the 1960's.</p>

<p>Thinking back, I believe that the sticker is a worn-away JCII (Japan Camera Inspection Institute) sticker, used beginning (I think) in the 1950's to give Japanese goods a sense of quality and reliability on the Amercan market. The JCII tags were an offshoot of JCIA (Japan Camera Industry Association). IIRC, JCIA and the JCII tags were abandoned about 1989.</p>

<p>I remember my long-since-passed Uncle who married a Japanese woman told me that JCIA was instituted in about 1953 or 1954 to have a"standard" of quality labeling. Some lenses were actually produced prior to this, and may be marked "Made in Occupied Japan"...could be any Japanese brand. The grand scheme of things was to aid in Japan's economic recovery in the post-WWII years...Arms to Apertures if you will...</p>

<p>Rick, mine is a Nikon mount. I bought it at a thrift store many years ago for something in the <10 dollar range. Yours is the first I've seen like it.</p>

Could it not also be a rebranded lens sold by Hansa Foto in Cologne? At one time a very large store, at the Hansaring. But i havent been there in (literally) decades so don't know how they are doing today.

<p>That's an interesting possibility. <strong>Q.G</strong>. Do you know if they actually rebranded lenses? I had quite a few darkroom items, branded "Hansa" over the years, <strong>Fred</strong>; easels, focusing aids, flasks etc. I've seen their products currently advertised, but no lenses other than enlarger lenses. Thanks, <strong>Tom</strong>, I 'm sure it's the remains of the JCII sticker. Seems we paid about the same for our lenses, <strong>Matthew</strong>!</p>

<p>I would say that it was re-branded, and as you say, Hansa was/is known for it's darkroom accessories. I have some print tongs and a contact printing frame made by Hansa. Like many others, they must have decided to branch out into lenses, usually sourced from another manufacturer, possibly Cosina. I have similar lenses to that one, branded Hanimex and Vinson, they were everywhere in the sixties.<br>

Thing is, they are quite good! Hanimex put their name on some quite respectable lenses back in the day, I also have a 135mm 2.8 Hanimex in Nikon mount, great performer too.</p>

<p>I have one of those Hanimex 135mm f2.8 lenses too and agree that it is a good performer.</p>

<p>The t-mount and M42 are the same diameter, 42mm. It's the pitch that's different, so you can't thread one on to the other.</p>

 

Rick,<br><br>I forget. It's so long ago that i dealt with Hansa Foto. They were Big. Sold professional gear as well as amateur gear. And i wouldn't be surprised at all if they did (else i wouldn't have thought it a possibility, of course).<br>But despite it being that long ago, whenever i hear "Hansa" mentioned in connection with anything photographic, i think of Hansa Foto in Cologne. Could be completely off the mark too, of course.

<p>Yes, if a 42mm thread starts to bind when screwing it to something else, <em><strong>stop</strong></em> immediately or you will ruin the threads. The M42 lens mount is 42mm with a 1mm pitch, the T mount is 42mm with a 0.75 pitch.<br>

Some Tele-extenders are made to screw directly to a T-mount lens, with the camera adapter put behind the extender. Others are in the camera mount and need to be attached after the adapter. This is obvious when you're talking Exakta or some such, but can be tricky when dealing with M42.</p>

<p>I have found that some of the early Spiratone lenses have an adapter that looks like a T-mount adapter (and the pitch is 0.75mm), but is a little longer in flange-distance than the true T-mount, so some of those lenses will not focus properly if a true (later) T-mount adapter is put on them. Some of these not-quite-T-mount adapters for M42 are marked CS (for Contax S, the first M42x1 camera), rather than the P or other markings used later for this mount (from Praktica or Pentax).</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks, <strong>JDM</strong> and <strong>Professor</strong>, more useful information for the files. <strong>Q.G</strong>., it's certainly an interesting speculation, anyway. <strong>Tony</strong> and <strong>Steve</strong>, without wishing to expand this thread into alien territory, I've recently picked up a very nice "Hanimex" 135mm f/2.8. I have several others of the 135mm Hanimex family, but this one is exceptionally well-made and is a really excellent performer. It has the retractable hood, and I'm certain I've see the lens in some other guise. Is it like your copies?</p><div></div>

<p>Yes Rick, much like mine, right down to that retractible hood. Thet are quite good, love to know who actually made them.</p>