Jump to content

Wide angle in the 50's


Recommended Posts

Nowadays there are lenses available covering 180 degrees right down to just a

few - a massive range.

 

My question concerns wide angle lenses. In the 1950's (for the 35mm format)

the 50mm was what everyone used, but was there no call for wide angle lenses?

I know that 35mm lenses were available (at a slow speed - f5.6) but were there

any wider lenses, and if so, why were they not more popular like today?

 

Even for the Exacta range, I seem to recall only 40mm being available, but you

could get telephoto I think.

 

This is from a 35mm lens from the mid 1950's:

http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/6517762-md.jpg but there must have been wider.

 

Any information on wide angle lenses in the 50's much appreciated.

 

Ian, UK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, there HAVE been lenses covering 130 deg or so, like the Goertz Hypergon. This was a large format lens and had awful light fall off, a spinning star-shaped iris was used to compensate this.

 

Second, wide-angle lenses following the traditional design always will have light fall-off towards the edges. Maybe this was a major problem, it was more or less solved by introducing the retrofocus design (as a by-product).

 

Third, do not underestimate cost of lenses in the 50s. A Leica body was available for more than a month's pay of an average employee, and lenses were rather expensive, too. This limited the commercial success of lenses and maybe of wide-angle lenses, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input. I do have the Retina 28mm f/4, but that was right at the end - 1959/60 IIRC. I have not heard about the Leica wides - any good? Any results to share? What year were they made available?

 

To make this a bit clearer, what is the widest lens for any 35mm camera/system I could have purchaced in around 1954-1957?

 

Ian, UK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leica 28 6.3 were made in the 30`s or 40`s as were 35s. In 1960 the 21 4.0 was available.

 

I got my first Pentax in 1966 and they were on the second generation of 35mm lens designs.

 

The problem was making a wide lens that could clear the mirror of a reflex camera. P. Angeniux developed the retro-focus lens and that started the ball rolling. The trade off was distortion. Hasselblad made the 38mm as a fixed lens camera+ non reflex body to resolve the distortion. They also made a 40 that could be used on the reflex.

The 38 was the better uality lens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently, until WW2 35mm lens designers didn't really know very well how to design WA lenses. 35mm lenses were available, but that's only a little bit wider than the film diagonal (which is 43mm). Zeiss had a 28mm but it was f:8.0 Tessar! And Leica countered with their f:6.3/28mm Hektar which was less than spectacular in performance.<P>Remember that there was no coating of lenses in those days, and WA lenses, even today, require many elements to correct their aborations.<P>Also, before WW2 film was pretty grainy, and anything less than the standard 50mm required additional enlarging which was not always technically successful.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to look to rangefinders for the ultrawides, since in the 50s they hadn't figured out how to make ultrawide retrofocus lenses. Contax had a 28 in the mid 30s, and in the 50s had a 21, 25, and 28s. I believe both Nikon and Canon both had 25s around then, too--the Canon was introduced in 1956. By the end of the 50s, Canon had already made three different 28s.

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/s/19-35.html

 

The first really wide lens I remember for through-the-lens viewing on an SLR was the 20mm/4 Flektagon, which came out around 1965 or so, if I remember right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote><i>In the 1950's (for the 35mm format) the 50mm was what everyone used, but was there no call for wide angle lenses?

</i></blockquote><p>

 

In case we're talking about <abbr title="single-lens reflex camera">SLR</abbr> lenses... You know all about retrofocus design and when it was introduced by Angenieux? As the others mentioned, non-<abbr title="single-lens reflex cameras">SLRs</abbr> had wide angles available, but at a high cost and with some optical drawbacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you - interesting stuff. I would love to see a selection of contemporary Kodachromes projected taken with some of those early wides.

 

Is the C lens system (used by the Kodak rangefinders and the Reflex type 025 - fron cell exchange) a retrofocus design? It is this type: http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/6517534-md.jpg to fit this camera: http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/6517531-md.jpg

 

Ian, UK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of credit should go to the late Herbert Keppler of first Modern Photogrpahy and later Popular Photography magazine for popularizing the use of wideangle lenses. He wrote many columns of his travels using moderate wideangle lenses, mostly 35mm lenses, and the examples he published created a lot of consumer interest in wideangles. I think that in turn pushed the manufacturers to make 35mm and 28mm lenses available at affordable prices.

 

-Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thirty-five mm really isn't all that wide. In any other format a 50mm would be a short tele, "normal" being defined as a film format's diagonal, which is 42mm for 35mm. I think the origin of 50mm for 35mm was that the 24x36mm frame was twice a movie frame, and normal for a 35mm movie frame was 25mm, and 35mm still frames are 2X that, so. . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's an interesting comment of Herb Keppler. Manufacturers seemed to be pushing a longer focal length during the 1950's.

 

The Canon Serenar 28/3.5 that I had for while dated to 1951 or there abouts.

 

Most of the pre-1960 wide angles had a fair degree of sharpness fall off towards the edges of the field, unless closed down a coupled of stops from wide open aperture. My Serenar was no exception.

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

Ian, if you do a google search for Rodenstock Heligon 35, one of the first links will be to an ebay listing for one like mine, with an astonishingly high "buy it now" price! The listing claims it's very rare, but of course this is fleabay and someone may be stretching the point a bit. Anyway, it's a nice enough lens and mine looks like that one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, y'know, there were many many wide angle lenses for professional formats as far back as the late 19th century. 35 mm was really a fringe amateur format until the early '50s, but from the mid-'30s on, perhaps a little earlier, there was a range of wide angles for range finder cameras, e.g., Leica and Contax, pitched to rich amateurs. By the early '50s there were, um, upper crust wide angles by, e.g., Angenieux, for Exakta and Alpa, but these two weren't SLRs for the many. And by the late '50s Zeiss Jena (DDR) was producing short lenses for east zone SLRs.
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...