Congo large format lenses

[DREW WILEY]

Badger Graphic was a minor supplier of LF, but a good one. They are still around. They once carried Fuji LF lenses too. The major sources of shopping in the US were the big actual pro photo stores not only in NYC but here on the West Coast too. I could run across the Bay Bridge on my lunch hour and inspect or purchase things. There were even big graphics houses on both sides of the Bay which offered still wider lines, including what was still left of Goerz taking and graphics lenses.

But in terms of trade show presence and advertising, and also photo academies, Schneider was the most dominant actor. But when they fell behind in newer designs, Rodenstock Sironars started getting a lot of traction. Fuji was far less aggressive in this country, but by then largely superior to Schneider in terms of innovation and quality.

Another significant factor, at least among outdoor photographers, was the stunning work being done and widely published by Japanese mountaineering photographers, including Shirakawa and Shirohito, and what lightweight equipment they chose. Both used Linhof 4x5 Technikas, although Shirakawa is best known for his Pentax 6X7 aerial images (he shot his Technika from airplanes sometimes too, but under different sponsors). That put Fuji tele lenses firmly on the map with many Technika shooters here, and enticed them to try other Fuji lenses, like the tiny A 180's and 250's. And it is what allowed a dealer once down the street from me to make most of his living on just Pentax 6x7 gear sales. Even painters were inspired by Shriakawa's work. A trend had begun.

I don't even remember precisely why I bought a little 240/9 G Claron, except that my Fuji 250/6.7 was stolen, and I decided to replace it with something even more compact. It certainly wasn't because a Schneider Rep put two and two together with respect to the demand for lighter weight view cameras lenses among the numerous outdoor LF photographers then on the West Coast.

 

[Ian Grant]

I was aware of this - especially with Pentax, as the difference between SMC and the immediate predecessors seems not to have been single vs multi-coating, but rather multicoating vs an evolutionary step in multicoating.

The issue is many people don't realise this, a clue is Pentax added the word "Super" to Multi Coating..

Ian

 

[DREW WILEY]

Well, the Pentax SMC multi-coatings were in fact quite good for their era. Still are. Hoya got a lot of deserved traction with their own designation, "HMC". And Fuji used, "EBC" to make certain lens line stand out which were already being multi-coated. Now when someone is sitting at the camera counter at the local store, they think they need a 16-layer super-duper-duper "digital" colorless protective filter costing $150 to go along with their latest and greatest digital camera purchase.

I find it amusing how the price on certain filter lines basically doubled once they added "digital" to the package label. Now even black and white contrast filters are often labeled "digital", even if only single-coated. It's kinda like the up in pricing for "organic" produce that might not have involved pesticides, but was otherwise grown beside a busy freeway or in a field right across the tracks from an oil refinery! You never know.

 

[Mark J]

The EBC from Fuji just stands for Electron Beam Coating, which is a method of deposition-assist that inproves the compaction of the layers and hence the durability against abrasion and damp. It did also happen to coincide with a move to multicoating or improved multicoating as well.
These methods ( Ian-Assisted Deposition being another variant ) are standard in recent years.

 

[Ian Grant]

Drew, I think the reason Schneider sold off the Xenars & G-Clarons through Badger Graphics and Robert White in the UK, was while small companies they both imported LF cameras, advertise nationally, and had good websites. They also sold into a different sector of the LF market compared to traditional professional dealers, these were the growing number of Hobbyist photographers, and that's who they advertised to, Badger Graphic in View Camera magazine.

Funny you mention Hoya HMC coatings, I bought a Hoya HMC 28mm wide angle lens, in the early 198os, the new Hoya range of lenses had excellent magazine reviews and tests. However the flare into any light was awful, apparently not all the internal air/glass surfaces had been coated, the range was not around long and quietly disappeared. Hoya went back to the drawing board and release a new range of lenses AT-X under their Tokina brand. The Tokina/Hoya link is murky and secretive.

I have two Hoya Center filters bought just before Covid, their HMC coating are excellent, nothing like my old Hoya 28mm lens.

Ian

 

[Ian Grant]

The EBC from Fuji just stands for Electron Beam Coating, which is a method of deposition-assist that inproves the compaction of the layers and hence the durability against abrasion and damp. It did also happen to coincide with a move to multicoating or improved multicoating as well.
These methods ( Ian-Assisted Deposition being another variant ) are standard in recent years.

Mark I don't remember ever coating lenses, lots of photographic emulsion in the 1970s-80s I restore early LF SLRs and get new front silvered mirrors (actually it's Aluminium these days) using Ion assisted splutter deposition.

Ian

 

[DREW WILEY]

Again, Ian, there were all kinds of vendors for LF gear all over this country back then. Three huge ones within relatively easy driving distance from me. I did buy my 4x5 Ebony folder from Badger Graphic; but Ted Bromwell introduced those to this country significantly earlier, along with his own re-branded Tachihara cameras. But just about every large format model then in production could could be purchased right in this very area.

The preferred nature and landscape system was still generally the 4X5 Technika, and then for lighter weight purposes, the pretty little Wista wooden folders were popular. I was one of the few who seriously used Sinar gear out in the rough. But all kinds of other things were in use - Wisners, Dorffs, Tachis, Nagaoka, Graphics, Horseman, on and on - you could buy any of that in person right around here. It was all in stock - plus huge selections of view camera lenses, not to mention all the MF gear! One notable climber actually used an ultralight Gowland monorail, and another figured out how to get a heavy 8x10 Dorff and two supporting tripods up to precarious places.

Most of the big climbing gear and outdoor gear brands actually began right around here too, several within walking distance from my own office. Most climbers and canyoneers of course used 35mm cameras, the reliable fully manual Nikon or Pentax kind; but a handful preferred bigger cameras, and made their living off 4x5 chromes.

My own boss lived in an hour north close to the largest optical coating facility in the world, OCLI. He invested in some of their stock. Then when they discovered how to use their plant to make trans-oxide nano-pigments by vacuum deposition, much like coating lenses but on way bigger scale, they hit a gold mine. His stock value shot up so fast that, just after 2 years, he managed to pay the entire college tuitions of both his son on daughter on the profit. But he soon regretted that, because if he had held onto that same stock just another two years, he could have retired for life at a relatively early age.

Of course, nowadays transoxides are mainly made electrolytically far less expensively; and OCLI has long been broken up into separate pieces, with that giant plant no longer there. But back in the day, their customer service and tech support was amazing. Even a little guy like me could order sized scraps of specialty filters with just much respect as a major customer. They knew that it's a few of the little guys who eventually end up becoming the big boys.

 

[Mark J]

Mark I don't remember ever coating lenses,

D'Oh !
I'm sure you would have been very good at assisting those coatings.
Like if Carlsberg made Anti-reflection coatings.

 

[David Lindquist]

There's a big difference between ceasing manufacture and assembling what's left from stock. A more recent example is Schneider who had a large over-stock of unsold late Xenar cells, that's the 150 f5.6, 210, f6.1., & the 300mm f6.3, as well as G-Clarons. These were assembled and 2000 and sold at discount prices, these had contemporary serial numbers, bu tit's known the cells were made some years earlier.

Then there's lenses like the 184mm f4.5 Wray Lustrar introduced in 1953 and fitted in a Dial-set Compur #2 with flash sync. Were these shutters surplus stock ?

Ian

You and I had a conversation about this last June here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...ompur-184mm-wray-lustrar.200008/#post-2695279
... and were both left wondering if these dial-set Compurs were "new old stock" that survived the war or if Deckel made new ones after the war. Again, Arne Cröll did not comment on this in the reference that I cited in my post #2.

Again I highly recommend Dan Fromm's piece on Ilex (see above, my post #41) to anyone interested in the industrial history of U.S. made large format lenses.

David

 

[BrianShaw]

I’m learning a lot by listening to you guys chit-chat! (I hear you talking in my head.)

 

[Ian Grant]

You and I had a conversation about this last June here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...ompur-184mm-wray-lustrar.200008/#post-2695279
... and were both left wondering if these dial-set Compurs were "new old stock" that survived the war or if Deckel made new ones after the war. Again, Arne Cröll did not comment on this in the reference that I cited in my post #2.

Again I highly recommend Dan Fromm's piece on Ilex (see above, my post #41) to anyone interested in the industrial history of U.S. made large format lenses.

David

There's a lot we don't know. For instance how long were Compound shutters made, it appears to be into the later 1970s, But then one would ask how many 300mm f4.5 Xenars were Schneider selling in Compound V shutter, when their own 300mm f5.6 Symmar was in a smaller and better Compur #3

 

[Lachlan Young]

300mm f5.6 Symmar was in a smaller and better Compur #3

The whole genesis of that lens seems to link up with Linhof launching a lighter weight 8x10 monorail specifically aimed at the emergent 8x10" Polaroid market.

both left wondering if these dial-set Compurs were "new old stock" that survived the war or if Deckel made new ones after the war.

Were they #1 or #2 Compurs? Found a reference very recently (a Burleigh Brooks catalogue from 1957) which specifically refers to "This new rim-set Compur II has T-setting which does not have to be cocked" which suggests that dial set Compur #2's existed up to somewhere close to that point.

 

[MTGseattle]

Ok. I'm trying to adapt one of the little wide angle congo 90mm lenses to a different camera. (Holga pan project)
In the chart we have "back focus" of 81.9mm
and we have "flange back" of 88.3mm

Is "flange back" measured from film plane to back of shutter housing? What the heck is the reference point for "back focus?" the rear lens cell?

 

[reddesert]

"Back focus" usually means the mechanical clearance between the rearmost part of the lens and the film plane. "Flange back" is likely the usual mounting surface to film plane distance (flange to film).

 

[Ian Grant]

I’m learning a lot by listening to you guys chit-chat! (I hear you talking in my head.)

The day we stop learning bis the day we should give up.

Ian

 

[Ian Grant]

The whole genesis of that lens seems to link up with Linhof launching a lighter weight 8x10 monorail specifically aimed at the emergent 8x10" Polaroid market.

Were they #1 or #2 Compurs? Found a reference very recently (a Burleigh Brooks catalogue from 1957) which specifically refers to "This new rim-set Compur II has T-setting which does not have to be cocked" which suggests that dial set Compur #2's existed up to somewhere close to that point.

Well as David Lindquist mentions I posted a thread about the 184mm f4.5 Wray Listrar I bought last June, which is in a flash sync dial set Compur II. The lens is in the 1953 BJP Alamanacwhich was published December 1952. I was asked about the serial number, which I thought unreadable however it;s only 6 numbers and starts 7, I stuck an 85mm lens on some extension tubes and here's the surprise,

The serial number is for 1926, so old stock pre-WWII Dial sset Compur II shutters being used in the 1950s.

Ian

 

[Dan Fromm]

Well as David Lindquist mentions I posted a thread about the 184mm f4.5 Wray Listrar I bought last June, which is in a flash sync dial set Compur II. The lens is in the 1953 BJP Alamanacwhich was published December 1952. I was asked about the serial number, which I thought unreadable however it;s only 6 numbers and starts 7, I stuck an 85mm lens on some extension tubes and here's the surprise,

View attachment 362643

The serial number is for 1926, so old stock pre-WWII Dial sset Compur II shutters being used in the 1950s.

Ian

Ian, P-H Pont's Deckel chronology puts 751103 in 1950.

Cheers,

Dan

 

[Lachlan Young]

Ian, P-H Pont's Deckel chronology puts 751103 in 1950.

Cheers,

Dan

I strongly suspect the changeover happened somewhere around the Symmar design change/ the launch of the 150mm Xenotar and just before the end of the 150/3.5 Xenar (as I've seen the latter in a new-style Compur II).

 

[Mark J]

What the heck is the reference point for "back focus?" the rear lens cell?

It can be the edge of the rear lens cell as reddesert has said, or the distance from the centre of the rear optical surface to the image. It depends what sort of datasheet or part of a datasheet you are looking at .
The difference is usually only 1 or 2mm.

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian, P-H Pont's Deckel chronology puts 751103 in 1950.

Cheers,

Dan

Are you sure Dan, the 1950 Compur serial numbers are in the 7 million, 1926 serial numbers 750 thousand.

I strongly suspect the changeover happened somewhere around the Symmar design change/ the launch of the 150mm Xenotar and just before the end of the 150/3.5 Xenar (as I've seen the latter in a new-style Compur II).

That's what I suspect as well.

Ian

 

[Lachlan Young]

Are you sure Dan, the 1950 Compur serial numbers are in the 7 million, 1926 serial numbers 750 thousand.

The thing that's bothering me is that the s/n is somewhat off centre, as if there is supposed to be a 7th digit before the 7 - but on the other hand, weren't most of the 184's for cameras that were going to the Air Ministry - and that could have led to a degree of digging stuff out of stores/ ransacking other manufacturers stockpiles for enough examples of a shutter that was not that widely used without having to deal with importing more? Or, at some point, the #2 that was fitted from new stopped working & someone found a suitable replacement (from the way some people talked about the Compur #2 not that long ago, they were supposedly really rare) to keep it running?

 

[Ian Grant]

I have two more Dial set Compur II shutters, one is in th late 660 thousands the other 700074 is a Schneider lens with a serial number that's 1925/6. The SN of this shutter is offset the other way. My Wray 184mm came on an MPP monorail lens board, so presumably it was sold with a 7x5 monorail.

If you see my other thread Wray advertised this Lustrar in a Dial set Compur CII

Ian

 

[BrianShaw]

Not sure if this helps the conversation or not, but a dial-set Compur that appears to have ben original to my 1940/1941 Anniversary Graphic is numbered 723806 (and is centered)

 

[Ian Grant]

Not sure if this helps the conversation or not, but a dial-set Compur that appears to have ben original to my 1940/1941 Anniversary Graphic is numbered 723806 (and is centered)

Now there's a complication, is the lens German, and a Deckel Compur, or US made and in a B&L Compur.

Ian

 

[BrianShaw]