Jump to content

Radionar Prejudice


Recommended Posts

I attach a photo taken with a Super Baldax with a gleaming, immaculate

Schneider f2.9 Radionar. It has an odd glow to it which I think is a

shortcoming of the lens (or advantage, however you choose to see it).

 

I am now toting an Akarette 1 to which I've attached a Radionar, and the first

negatives look okay but not brilliant. Anyone want to relate recent experiences

with this lens type?<div>00NBNB-39530584.thumb.jpg.f187a0a44bafb9d6cca41529106e2236.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, that's a pretty boat and your camera has given the photo a nice vintage look.

 

I don't have any Radionars myself, but I would assume that like all triplets that it's OK stopped down to F8 or 11.

 

I rekon that the beauty of these old triplets is to shoot with them wide open, especially on portraits.

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 105mm Radionar on my Franka Rolfix doesn't produce that kind of a fuzzy glow. Photos from the Franka are generally very clear, as long as it's stopped down to f8 or smaller and there's no bright light source in the frame. It kind of falls off at the edges for 6x9 so I generally leave the 6x6 mask in the camera.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The glow is probably caused by an film of oil on the "gleaming, immaculate" Radionar lens. I have a Rolleiflex Zeiss-Option Tessar that also looks very clean, but experiences noticeable flare because of an oil deposit on the lens. The effect doesn't hurt your photo, of course, so it's a toss-up whether or not you want to clean the Radionar or keep it as-is.

 

As the previous poster noted, most triplets perform best when stopped down to f/8 or f/11, producing results that aren't much different from four-element lenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Triplets are underrated today, and Tony's right, wide open you should get some really interesting things happening, especially in medium format. In the smaller 35mm format I think alot of the character of these lenses gets lost simply because there is less emulsion to go around, you also get longer DOF with 35mm which probably doesnt help in the character department either. The Baldax shot looks cool though! You could probably do things to increase the glow of the image like using a yellow filter which Ive found adds a nice glow off of peoples faces, as well as increases general contrast.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck, you were shooting right into the reflected light-- did you have the lens fully shaded? A bit of flare could explain your 'glow' and give a bit of contrast reduction, even with a (single) coated lens.

 

I like the photo too-- nice retro feel, even on modern film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate all the great responses to this post.

 

May be tempted to put some infrared through the Super Baldax to supplement the glow! I'll use Rollei IR because one needs the red window for the first alignment, after which a really annoying automatic spacer takes effect.

 

Will also be careful to use the lens hood. Good thing about this beast is that the filter size is 40.5mm, so all my exakta filters fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, I suspect your Radionar might not be really clean? I used a radionar on 35mm on my Adox Polomatic and I got very nice results! it is a Radionar L though and well coated.

 

I have also used in the past a very early Radionar on 6x9 with an unknown camera... The camera had focusing problems even on infinity, but I didn't notice any strange halos. Only the out-of-focus zones have strange effects which I have seen with other lenses too.

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...