Rodenstock Trinar lens vs. Schneider Xenar or Tessar

[leonard_isaksson]

Hi. I am thinking about a Welta 6x9 that has been worked on, and well

cleaned, and am just curious about the lens, which is a Rodenstock

trinar. McKeown's records the lenses which came with this as being

the Xenar 3.8f, or a Tessar 4.5f, all of them being 10.5 cm lenses.

Any thoughts about its capabilities, in comparison? I am interested

in a 6x9 folder.

[leonard_isaksson]

To answer my own question, using the information found on other conversations here, the Trinar is a three element lens, the Tessar type four, and so too the Xenar, very much like the Tessar, and these lenses both shouuld be capable of a finer picture, finer resolution, particularly to the outside of the centre of the lens focus.

 

Thanks to the people who answered the question on other threads, pertaining to larger and smaller Trinar lenses than 105mm.

[mike_elek]

Leonard, I was going to say that the Trinar sounds like a triplet, much like the Zeiss Triotar, the Schneider Radionar or the Novar that Zeiss-Ikon used on many of its lower-priced models.

 

This should be an adequate lens though soft in the corners at the larger apertures. If someone else has worked on it, make sure that it focuses correctly at infinity.

[roland_haid]

Hmm, what do you want?

 

Tripletts are fine lens, especially post war types which are coated and have the new Lanthanium glass. Pre war types are often found soft until the aperture is closed to F11 or F16. Tessar and Xenar versions will hold their value better and, mostly, have the better shutter: It should be a Compur or Compur Rapid (Pre-war) or a fast Prontor. The speed should go from 1 sec to, at least 1/250. The lens adjustment is critical on folders, make sure that an expert worked on the camera, if there are a lot of marks, the body might be still unadjusted.

[leonard_isaksson]

What does the man want? Well, thinking about purchase of a camera, if I may spend in the neighbourhood of 250$ of hard earned funds, to be sure of what I am buying.

 

I am looking around for a 6x9, I like the larger negatives. I found this, and so the query.

 

Thanks for the thoughts, I appreciate them. The lens is uncoated. So, it dates, I think, from the time of the camera. The camera had its trigger replaced by another non Welta piece, I believe. This was done by someone who knows what they are doing. I am just proceeding carefully, as there are many cameras out there to pursue.

[jerry_friedman]

Hello Leonard:

 

Please do not spend more than about $50 for a 6x9 Welta with a

Trinar lens!!! I have lots of experience with 6x9 folders and even

have a Welta with a trinar right in front of me right now. Everyone

has told you the situation; a three element lens is OK for

distances between 12 feet and infinity and when the lens is

closed down at least to f/11 but I try to use f/16 or f/22. The

Rodenstock Trinar was supposed to have been a "better" three

element lens than the Sch. Radionar so Welta put the Trinar in a

better Synchro-Compur shutter after the war. The shutter on

mine goes to 1/500 second but the speed is actually 1/250

second, which is something that happens to old shutters before

they are cleaned. If you have them cleaned, they will work

perfectly. --- The Radionar is no less good than the trinar but it

was les sexy so Welta put it with a shutter that only went to 1/250

second. I have not found any real difference in optical

performance.

 

I keep a 6x9 folder in my car because it uses no batteries and

does not suffer in the cold.

 

What I would do is this. Buy a folder on ebay, and there are many

Weltas from after the war with a coated Radionar lens. If the

general condition of the camera is good esp. the bellows, it

means that the shutter and lens can be adjusted if needed. But

before you have adjustment done, first take pictures and see if

the lens is OK for your needs and if the film plane is OK. If you

like the pictures, then spend the $50-$75 to have the camera

adjusted and the lens cleaned. Even if there is some fungus on

the lens, a triplet is very very easy to clean because it has three

separate lenses and all surfaces can be cleaned. Sometime a

four element Tessar type is more difficult to clean because the

two rear elements are glued.

 

I use a fast black and white film, EI 400, so that I can use a

higher shutter speed (1/500--> really 1/250 second) and still

close down the lens to f/11 to f/22. I decided not to clean the

shutter becarse the Welta camera that i have has a very clean

lens and film alignment is good. If I spent the money, the camera

would be even better.--The results you will get will be very good,

but never excellent. Even closed down, a three element lens can

not resolve the very fine detail that you might like. But, if you use

most of the negative to make an 11x14 inch enlargement, you

can get very good results.

 

I have a Fuji 6x7, a Plaubel Machina III and a Plaubel 67, all of

which I use all the time for different things and think are first rate.

But who wants to leave expensive cameras in the automobile,

esp. in winter when the temperature here is Ohio goes down to

zero most of the winter.?

 

Folders are also wonderful fun!!!!!

 

If you want a very very good folder, but only 6x6, consider a

Perkeo II or even a Perkeo I, but only with a Color Skopar lens.

The Vascar, Voightar triplens are less good. The Skopar is

VERY FINE!! And the camera is actually very small. I do not like

6x6 but i had a Perkeo for several months and found it to be a

wonderful camera. And if you can live with 645, the Fuji folder is

a jewel in every way possible. They are available for $350 or so

and are not as troublesome as people think. The bellows are

fine and the lens, shutter, exp. meter and rangefinder are

excellent. And because it folds up, it is small.

 

Best of luck to you! BUT DO NOT SPEND $250 for an older 6x9

folder!! If you do, then i am going to come live in your house and

you can feed me for a week!! Maybe two weeks.

 

Regards, Jerry

[davecollopy]

Jerry is correct about the price and the 11x14 print limit. In general three element lenses don't make the grade for me personally. But the trinar is a very good lens. Its the only 3 element I continue to use in 105mm focal length 6x9mm format. I have a coated f2.9 version that seems every bit as sharp as my uncoated Xenar. My tessars, Ziess and B&L are sharper than either, both coated and uncoated. The Xenar and tesssars are for the most part f4.5 lenses and the extra stop and a half on my trinar comes in handy sometimes. I use it often for that reason. All three lenses perform to satisfaction but expect to pay a little more for the tessar.So let the shutter be the tie breaker, and settle for nothing less than a compur.

[leonard_isaksson]

Well, thanks guys, for the replies that you put up. I shied away from the Welta, although it takes good pictures. There is one picture up on the web now, from that particular camera, which is up for auction on a certain site. It is the 6x9 Weltur. Actually there are two Welturs of that lens/film size up for auction. The picture is of a boat. Pretty good picture. The fellow who does this cla is pretty good from what I can see. So that must be figured into the cost. Anyway, I am being conservative, or I think that I am, but thanks for your answers.

[stan_rifken]

The Ebay dealer of folding cameras that you refer to, "Certo6", is Jurgen Kreckel. When you buy a camera from him it has been cleaned, resored and recalibrated.

 

He also replaces old bellows with new ones, freshly made of colored leather. Some of his offerings have had the old, worn chrome removed to create lovely brass instruments.

 

The extra cost of his cameras comes with the guarantee that everything is in perfect working order.

 

You can get cheaper folding cameras, ususally described on Ebay as "looks to be in mint condition, but I don't know much about cameras", but then you might have to find the craftsman to upgrade it from "paper-weight" grade to usable camera.

 

You can read about his work at:www.foldingcameras.com/articles.htm., clicking on "Medium Format In Your Pocket".

[donald_dinaro1]

<p>The Trinar 105mm by Rodenstock is considered by experts to be the BEST triplet design ever made! Multi coated, in a late pc synch type shutter with self timer, its a real shooter. Adjusted and cleaned by certo6 it can out perform many new film camera designs from Japan. I do my own servicing never for the public and I use it on a Franka rolfix ll camera. I was amazed at the results possible. A great triplet optical design is far better than you may think. Less interfaces in lens design often yields much sharper results as bounce back of light passing through a lens is a big problem in optical designs of seven or eight elements. I cleaned a Zeiss tessar 5cm f:2.8 coated lens in exakta mount(4 elements) , the metal alloy super compact from 1948 and was shocked how good it was on a new Sony A7r at 36 meg full frame! I would never sell this lens to anyone, its a trade secret! Triplets are highly capable when they were made by high end lens makers! most photographers don't have a clue! regards, Don@Eastwestphoto</p><div></div>

[John Seaman]

<p>Donald, I wonder if you have created a record for the biggest gap between posts in a thread - ten years! I stumbled on it whilst looking for information about a Bilora Bella DC4 which has, unusually for these low end cameras, a Rodenstock Trinar 55mm f3.5 lens. I'm hoping to share some pictures when it arrives.</p>

[donald_dinaro1]

<p>Donald, I wonder if you have created a record for the biggest gap between posts in a thread - ten years! I stumbled on it whilst looking for information about a Bilora Bella DC4 which has, unusually for these low end cameras, a Rodenstock Trinar 55mm f3.5 lens. I'm hoping to share some pictures when it arrives.<br>

<br>

John Seaman posted a response to a thread in the photo.net Medium Format Forum, on which you registered an alert:<br /><strong>Subject:</strong> Rodenstock Trinar lens vs. Schneider Xenar or Tessar <br>

John-Yes ten years later, mostly because theres NOT many using folding 120 rollfilm cameras left in the world and fewer still who understand a excellent made Triplet was exceptional , even by today's standards. True abberations resulted, but the 1950's manuafactures got around it by using more of the center of the circle of confusion of the lens. thus even on 6x9cm the image was very good. Center sharpness was exceptional and that has been forgotten in modern optical designs that are so perfect, they lose a characteristic that makes old images so desireable. regards, Don@Eastwestphoto<br>

</p>