Sweet Dreams on Ulm Street

<p>Around 1959 a man named Albert Schacht, rumoured to have been a lens designer for Zeiss, set up shop in the town of Ulm, Germany. He began producing lens in a variety of mounts, all built to a very high standard of design, materials and finish. I'm delighted to have obtained one of his fine creations, the M42 135mm R Travenon f/4.5</p><div></div>

<p>Schacht lenses are rather rare in my part of the world, and correspondingly rather expensive. The company made lens up until about the '70's, initially in Exacta, Leica, Edixa and some M42 mounts, The first lenses were beautifully made but basic, typified by the Travenon, lacking even pre-set apertures. But because of their excellent quality the lenses were sought after by discerning photographers. In time, pre-set lenses were produced, followed by auto lenses in the various mounts. A confusing series of names were generated, all very similar, such as Travanar, Travenon, Travelon, Travegar and Travegon. It's been suggested that the "Trav" prefix denoted four elements, and this is consistent with my observations. Production seems to have ceased in the early '70's.</p>

<p>My copy reached me as a gift from a nice lady in town who'd heard that "I like old cameras and things". It was in a parlous state and I initially despaired of restoring it; enclosed in it's beautiful leather case it had sat in a workshop behind her house, untouched for a couple of decades. The case was encrusted with filth, and the lens had begun to develop a verdigris on it's fine polished body. The glass was reasonable, but oil from the aperture blades had found their way onto the rear elements; at some stage someone must have decided a little bit of oil was required to keep things moving as the quantity present was vastly in excess of any manufacturing application. So, I stripped it down; the oil had created a patina on the face of one element, working into the coating, but luckily it's visible only by reflection rather than in transmission. The diaphragm is a glorious piece of machinery which I gently cleaned with Zippo and a Q-Tips, sixteen blades in a very small circumference, producing a circular aperture.</p><div></div>

<p>The lens is a strange structure. Four elements in three groups, all the optical bits and pieces are contained in the little body at the front of the lens. This screws into the long extension tube with it's helical focusing mechanism. Aperture is changed by revolving the knurled ring at the very front of the lens. And that's it; beautifully machined, everything now revolving smoothly, and the body of the lens restored by copious washing and gentle polishing with metal polishes. The case is an absolute work of art, now reeking sweetly of saddle dressing. The lens screws into a plate in the cap of the case, the cap and lens is inserted into the case and the carry-strap tightened to hold everything in place.</p><div></div>

<p>I tried it out this morning, hand-held, holding my breath, afraid I'd be disappointed. But I wasn't. The Travenon is a remarkable lens, with a glorious bokeh, great contrast and colour rendition, and exquisite resolution, and very soon I'm really going to put it through it's paces. It's not a lens one can point into the light, but that's typical of the era and design. To me, the fact that Albert Schacht managed to get four simple little pieces of glass to perform so well is quite astounding. I attach a few samples, taken between rain showers this morning, none of them at an aperture smaller than f/8 and many with the lens wide open. There are no works of art, but you may find something of interest.</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>No.6</p><div></div>

<p>No.7</p><div></div>

<p>No.8</p><div></div>

<p>That lens is truly a work of art, and it performs as well as it looks - mind you, you have repeatedly demonstrated an ability to, first off, produce beautiful images in a graphic sense, and secondly to extract the very best from whatever equipment you're using! I think this particular lens is pretty enough to justify its existence with its looks alone:) <br>

I admire also your faith in your mechanical skills - I have yet to crack open a lens... and I don't even mean something as special and rare as the subject of this post. I have a Canon FD 100mm f2.8 (pretty much as garden variety as they come) that stopped stopping down and I am afraid to have a look see lest I break it... mind you, its next to useless now and I am still mystified by it as I am by any lens, and therefore afraid to look inside;)<br>

Pleasure as always!</p>

<p>The color rendition and sharpness are both gorgeous. That's a sweet old lens.</p>

<p>What an interesting post.</p>

<p>Excellent restoration work. Very nice pictures, as always. Enjoyed it all. I have looked for those stop-down lenses. But hardly any coming up these days. sp.</p>

 

<p>What a beautiful piece of equipment.<br>

I always love to see your reviews.</p>

<p>Such a pretty lens, the like of which is not seen any more; and we're poorer for it. Thanks for sharing, and thanks for taking the time to perform and document the rescue!</p>

<p>What an interesting lens, and what a lovely restoration job! Good pictures too.</p>

<p>"Four blades in three groups" -- so is it basically a Tessar design, or is it a different arrangement of four elements in three groups?</p>

<p>Peter and Les -- I have that same Canon lens and now you've got me worrying that its aperture will fail! It's fine so far, fortunately.</p>

Nice work, Rick. I believe that with your talents, the lens is quite secondary.

Ted

<p>I'll second Ted's comment. The lens is nice, but the pictures nicer. Wonderful combination. :)</p>

<p>However, I have to show my M42 copy on a more suitable and beautiful camera ;)<br>

I've also got the lens in Exakta mount.</p><div></div>

<p>A little web research turned up this page, which has pictures of several Schacht lenses in Exakta mount, along with frustratingly-small images of some vintage Schacht brochures:</p>

<p><a href="http://captjack.exaktaphile.com/Schacht%20page.htm">http://captjack.exaktaphile.com/Schacht%20page.htm</a></p>

<p>I note that the brochure describes this lens as "long-focus" in contrast to telephoto (they have another, noticeably shorter 135mm lens that was a telephoto design), and the lens diagram appears to be pretty much a straight Tessar as far as I can tell. So this lens is as long as it is because it really is 135mm focal length, not just 135mm "effective focal length" as would be the case with a telephoto. This allows it to avoid some of the issues related to telephoto designs as well. Hmm. I may have to look around for one of these...</p>

<p>Thank you all for the interest and responses. <strong>Craig</strong>, I would have loved to gone deeper into the Schacht design philosophy, and the short but productive history of the company, but space doesn't allow in these posts, and as you've found, there's not a lot of information available. Good ol' Captain Jack is one of the better sources, and I would have liked to have found a post-able copy of the brochure. I find the lens a neat design concept, with basically a fine Tessar-type lens bunged into a long focusing extension. As you've observed, it side-steps many of the complications of building a true telephoto. I hope you can find one.</p>

<p>You're right, <strong>JDM</strong>; I should have used a more appropriate camera, and your Contax combo looks superb. I often use the old Zenit as a carrier in photographs, as it's severity accentuates the beauty of almost any lens. The only exception would be the Zenit with it's Industar 50, when the camera actually manages to look prettier than the lens...<strong>Peter,</strong> I'm not an accomplished technician in any sense, and I have quite a collection of lenses I've set aside for "One day..." This lens was a very simple challenge. I haven't had a Canon lens let me down as yet, touch wood...You're right, <strong>Donnie</strong>, we seem to forget how very simple lenses can produce fine results, but that leads to the delight of re-discovery.</p>

<p>And thank you<strong> Steve</strong>, <strong>Gene</strong>, <strong>Ted</strong>, <strong>Marcel</strong>, <strong>S.P.</strong> and <strong>Les</strong>, for the kind words. While much of the satisfaction lies in completing one of these posts, it's always great to get a little praise!</p>

Though I've stumbled upon the name.. didn't realize the exclusivity! Your sense for product presentation and I think the Zenith matched the lens particularly well!! Looking forward to some more photos!! Please`?

<p><strong>Rick</strong>, I am just glad folks like you take the time to bring us these tidbits of history and eye candy - I always look forward to these posts and eat 'em up when I see them. As a by the way, the Canon 100mm was a first for me too, and I don't even know when it happened, there was no apparent bump or abuse, just one day a grinding feeling when there is usually a click-click-click:)</p>

<p><strong>Les</strong>, if I ever do crack it open I will be sure to post the inevitable sitcom... I fear it will be something along the lines of "Idiot vs Lens, lens wins..." lol :D But given the prices of these, I don't feel I have much to lose.</p>

<p><strong>Rick</strong> - what can I say but Bravo, Rick, Bravo.</p>

<p><strong>Peter</strong> - have you considered sticky aperture blades? I had a similar problem with an 80-200 F4L and Ken Oikawa eventually diagnosed it as oil on the blades.</p>