robert_byrd1 Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 <a href=http://www.photo.net/photo/466080> go here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silent1 Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 Nice shot, Robert. Do you have any taken on actual 9x12 sheet film? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gib Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 very nice portrait, I will have to do a little search on that camera name, it is a new one to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_byrd1 Posted September 2, 2003 Author Share Posted September 2, 2003 Yes, I did shoot on 9x12 film (Kodak sold 9x12 in several emulsions 20 years ago), and yes, I did print some shots. However, the pictures are in a warehouse now, god knows in which box. The shots were wonderful. This greatly enlarged shot above from 120 film gives only a hint. I have a minty Zeiss Recomar from the same period, and--as soon as I get some 9x12 sheets--I want to try it out, as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron_gratz Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 The Recomar was not made by Zeiss-Ikon. It was first manufactured by Nagel Camera Werke in Stuttgart and later continued by Kodak when they bought the company. The same plant later made the retinas. Perhaps you mean Maximar?? Ron Gratz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_byrd1 Posted September 2, 2003 Author Share Posted September 2, 2003 Groan. Ron, I make that mistake all the time. The minty camera I have is a Zeiss Maximar. That's the one I want to try out. I have used a Kodak Recomar, but didn't care for the lens. Just not the look I prefer. I can't recall what kind of lens it was. Do you know? Anyway, I didn't know that Nagel made the Recomar. I'm a fan of the Retinas, so maybe I should rethink the Rocomar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron_gratz Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 My Recomar has a "Kodak Anastigmat" which I have been told - but cannot confirm - is a Tessar design. The Maximar is a great camera. With 9x12 cm film available now I plan to use mine more often than I was able to in the past. Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_nebenzahl Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 Hmm, this is getting to be like baseball-card trading as kids. Zeiss Maximar: got it (got 2 actually, one "minty" with Kalart rangefinder). Got an Avus (story below). Got the Kodak Anastigmat (130mm in rimset Compur, probably from a Recomar), which I do believe is a Tessar design (but don't quote me on that), which I got for less than $10 at a local recycled-materials store. The Avus actually got put together out of a couple of pieces. I got the carcass of the camera (basically everything minus lens + shutter) from a local guy 'round heah, Graham Pilecki, who has an antique camera shop in Albany (California, just north of Bezerkeley). It was in a box of carcassi that he was selling for cheap (still is). I put in the lens from the Ica Trona with the blown bellows I got from eBay (one of them "Doppel Anastigmats"). But I ran across a Skopar (in dialset Compur) on eBay, so now I have the complete Avus (well, except for ground glass back) with its original lens. Actually, out of all my 9x12 folders, it's kind of my favorite, with a beautiful patina of age and wear on the "leather" which has turned it kind of dusky brown. What I don't have, yet, are any beautiful shots like the one taken by the O.P. But I have supreme confidence in the capabilities of these old machines and glass. So, anyone interested in one of my Maximars? Maybe I don't need two of them ... (they both have extremely clean CZJ Tessars). So: I haven't heard anything yet about 6x9 folders. Anyone here got one of them? (I mean a plate camera, not a rollfilm camera.) I'm just starting to play around with my Voigtlander Vag (the low-end model). Even used it hand-held. First prints to come soon ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silent1 Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 I must say, I understood the Kodak equivalent to the Tessar was the Ektar -- the Anastigmat is, IIRC, a Cooke Triplet equivalent to a Radionar or Voigtar (or half the other lenses sold in mid-range cameras through the 1930s). I have a Kodak Reflex II with Anastigmat lenses -- and had one such in 1974, as well, which I took apart to lube the shutter (with graphite); there were only two cells in the lens, though I think the back cell had two elements in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_nebenzahl Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 About the Anastigmats and Ektars, I seem to remember reading Richard Knoppow on this subject, who I take as an authority on such things, saying that the Ektars were the coated descendents of the Anastigmats. There's probably a retrievable posting on that somewhere on the "medium format" site. I could be wrong about that, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_byrd1 Posted September 3, 2003 Author Share Posted September 3, 2003 OTOH, I seem to remember that "Ektar" didn't denote a lens formula or coating, but simply a high level of quality. Anyone know for sure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_goldfarb Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 What Robert says is correct. Many Ektars are Tessar types, but two--the 100/3.5 Ektar on the Medalist and a 105/3.7 (if I remember correctly) version for press cameras were Heliar types, and there may be others. Here's an Ektar page (also see graflex.org): http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/ektar.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_byrd1 Posted September 3, 2003 Author Share Posted September 3, 2003 David, do you know what kind of Ektar is on the Kodak Signet 35. That is one superb lens! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_fromm2 Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Robert, for information on Ektar lens formulas (some, if not all) and more, go to http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~b-wallen/BN_Photo/Kodak_index2.htm. FWIW, I use a couple of Ektars. The 25/1.9 Cine Ektar II is a fine lens for moderately high magnification photomacrography. Not as good as a 25/3.5 Luminar, but close enough to be a good inexpensive alternative. Yes I have the Luminar and have shot the two lenses against each other. Both are best wide open. The 25/1.4 Cine Ektar II isn't so good for photomacrography, but is just super facing the right way at normal distances. The 80/6.3 WF Ektar is a keeper, I think. At any rate, mine produces very satisfactory images on 2.25 x 3.25. I shoot it at f/11 and f/16, haven't had to try it wider or stopped down farther. And the 101/4.5 Ektar is phenomenal at f/11 and f/16. I haven't shot it wider open. Yes, only the 101 is a tessar type. Cheers, Dan 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