Novar versus Agnar Lenses

[paul_brenner1]

I'm a black-and-white photographer working in both medium and large

format. One of my collecting interests is folding MF rangerfinders.

 

I have two Agfa 6x9s, each with Agfa "Agnar" f/6.3 lenses. I also

have two Ikontas, one a 6x6 and one a 6x9, each with "Novar" lenses,

one an f/3.5 (the 6x6) and one an f/4.5 (the 6x9).

 

I'm amazed at how sharp the "Agnar" lenses are, especially as I

assume that they are triplets. Can anyone tell me anything about

either the Agnars or the Novars, in terms of formula or anything

else?

 

Thanks,

 

Paul

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

Both the Agnar and the Novar are triplets, their cross-section looks very similar. The Agnar lenses had a successor, the Apotar lenses, a re-designed version of the 1950s using new optical glasses (but Agfa still made some cameras with Agnar lenses after releasing the Apotar).

 

There is not much known about re-designs of the Novar lenses. Most, if not all, post-war Novars were NOT manufactured by Zeiss but by Hensoldt and Rodenstock (there are even rumours that some of the non-Zeiss Novars had four elements). Maybe that's the reason why all post-war Novars I have seen do not have a serial number - pre-war ones are numbered and year of manufacturing can easily be determined.

 

The Novar is not that bad, either. I think most complaints about bad performance are caused by misadjustment - almost any old folding camera I have needed more or less readjustment. I once compared a pre-war 3,5/70mm Novar against a pre-war 3,5/75mm Xenar (four-element Tessar design) and found that the Xenar was not much better (but the post-war Xenars are very nice performers).

 

BTW if you are a triplet fan you should try a camera with a Meyer-Goerlitz Trioplan lens. The Trioplan is probably the best triplet lenses I ever came across.

[bueh]

And the poorest is the Schneider-Kreuznach 80mm Radionar f/2.9, in my humble opinion.

[charles_stobbs3]

In various posts here I have read that the Agfa Solinar was their best lens in folding cameras and they seem to command the highest prices on Ebay. It is supposed to be a four element lens. I have done no testing, all this is hearsay.

[bueh]

No, Charles, the Voigtländer Heliar and Apo-Lanthar (both five-element lenses) are the most expensive folder lenses. I can't remember which of the many Bessa folders sport these, but with the Apo-Lanthar the price will be indeed <i>astronomical</i>! The Solinar is pretty expensive for a four-element lens, but it is usually found on the rare high-end Agfa folders, especially the Super Isolette with a coupled rangefinder, which explains their value to collectors.

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

The Agfa Solinar can also be found on Isolette III's (with non-coupled rangefinder and without automatic framespacing). It seems to be a very nice lens.

 

I do not own a Heliar-equipped camera but it seems that you have to like the performance of this lens... even in a textbook about german camera optics (Das Auge Deiner Kamera) it is stated that this lens gives sharp details with a certain amount of flare. Also it seems to loose much of the detail rendering for details out of focus.

 

Many lenses of the 1940s and 1950s seem to perform similar, I found the Color-Skopar pretty sharp but also with a certain amount of gloom. The Xenons on the Kodak Retinas have much less gloom but it is still noticeable.

[patric_dahl_n]

Bueh, I think Charles meant Agfa lenses. Solinar was their best lens on 6x9 and 6x6 folders, but they had a six element lens on some 35mm folders. Solagon 2/50 I believe.

 

I have an Agfa Record II with Solinar and new bellows. Very sharp lens, just as the Tessar. I have another coated Solinar from a "kaputt" Record II that I will mount in a shutter/camera someday.

 

I don't think the five element Heliar is sharper than the tessar-type, but it has other qualities. I have never seen twodimensional photos look that close to 3D like the ones taken with a true Heliar lens.

 

The Apo-Lanthar is a Heliar with lanthanum-glass.

 

The Agfa Apotar also contain rare-earth mineral glass, and is little more expensive than the Agnar. They are both three element lenses.

[daniel_cytron]

I have an Isolette II (no rangefinder) with a Solinar 4.5 lens, so it is available on the less expensive/complex models.

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

"I have never seen twodimensional photos look that close to 3D like the ones taken with a true Heliar lens."

 

This seems to be a property of quite a few (german) lenses of the 40s and 50s. I do not own a Heliar, but I have read that it has very nice detail rendering, together with a certain amount of flare which makes things look a bit supernatural. It seems a similar property applies to the Color-Skopar lens. I could not easily decide whether some shots were sharp or not, due to the flare around contours. The Xenons on the post-war Retinas seem a bit similar (although with less of that flare), an old Retina user told me that many of his shots look 3-dimensional, too. I cannot say that about most of my shots but the results are very nice, maybe they are not perfectly sharp as with a modern high-end lens but they have a special look I miss with many other lenses.

[paul_brenner1]

Thanks to all for the fascinating comments!

 

Paul

[ole_tjugen]

Voigtl䮤er seems to have done it on purpose - Heliar, Apo-Lanthar and early Skopar all have the same carefully tuned spherical aberration. Advertisments from 1934 emphasise the rendition of out-of-focus areas and the transition between sharp and unsharp.

[charles_stobbs3]

By the way, some of the Agfa folding MF cameras were sold in the US as Ansco Speedex. Some Speedexes were entirely US made products.