• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

HOW COME NO CANON OR HASSELBLAD ENLARGING LENSES?

AgX

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,972
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Hasselblad never made any lenses.
 

AgX

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,972
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Well, I googled up and down, looked into my books and I did not find even a hint at a Zeiss enlarging lens, aside an ancient 160mm Tessar at an ancient wooden-box enlarger.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,814
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
As noted Hasselblad does not make lenses, they use mostly Zeiss lenses and a few Rodenstock lenses. Rodenstock does make enlarging lenses.
 

miha

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
3,037
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
So who was making cameras for Canon and Hasselblad before they started to make them by themselvers?
 

AgX

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,972
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
In a way Leitz and Bentzin...
 

miha

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
3,037
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
Only in the spiritual sense, If I may...
 
OP
OP

chip j

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
2,193
Location
NE Ohio
Format
35mm
Patrick Robert James said:
Zeiss never made an enlarging lens? I have one word for you- Orthoplanar. Not exactly for consumers though.
Click to expand...
Yes, Patrick, but that is, I believe, an old lens. How IS it, BTW? I shudder at the thought of a 'Blad negative being enlarged thru a Rodenstock--I have a few of 'em, incl. an APO. Only way to go would be a 100mm Focotar 2.
 

NortheastPhotographic

Advertiser
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Messages
1,571
Location
Maine!
Format
Medium Format
A better question would be, why would they need to? If for any other reason than being able to say "I use a brand X enlarging lens". Can you really imagine that they would do better than Rodenstock or Schneider? Or even Nikon for that matter.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,814
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Ko.Fe. said:
And how many film cameras Rodenstock made after Canon and Hasselblad started to make theirs?
Click to expand...

To my knowledge Rodenstock never made cameras, only lenses.
 
  • AgX
  • Deleted

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
55,156
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
The "name" on an enlarging lens is a question of marketing.
What good reason would there have been for Canon or Hasselblad to enter the market for enlarging lenses?
 

bdial

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 2, 2005
Messages
7,515
Location
North East U.S.
Format
Multi Format
Hasselblad did make a mount that would let you mount a taking lens on other stuff, like enlargers. I don't think it was common practice however.

Happily, Hasselblad negatives enlarge just fine using other maker's enlarging lenses.
 

Poisson Du Jour

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
5,462
Location
.
Format
Digital
miha said:
So who was making cameras for Canon and Hasselblad before they started to make them by themselvers?
Click to expand...

Ahh, what—??
So who were they? I find nothing in Canon's long and fascinating history starting from 1933...
 

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council
Advertiser
Allowing Ads
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
11,599
Location
Washington DC
Format
Multi Format
Sirius Glass said:
As noted Hasselblad does not make lenses, they use mostly Zeiss lenses and a few Rodenstock lenses. Rodenstock does make enlarging lenses.
Click to expand...
And don't forget the one and only zoom lens for the V-series Hasselblads, the 140-280 Variogon, by Schneider. The Rodenstocks were made specifically for the Arcbody/Flexbody cameras.
 
OP
OP

chip j

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
2,193
Location
NE Ohio
Format
35mm
Minolta made enlargers, too--I have a MOD 3. I also have the Rokkor-X 50mm enlarging lens.
 

Jayd

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Dec 6, 2008
Messages
90
Location
Central Ohio
Format
Multi Format
European market Kodak Retinas often had Rodenstock lens, I have a couple of them, and while the price is usually substantially higher for a Retina with Rodenstock here in the USA I don't think they are any better than the Schneider lenses.
Kodak Jay
 

Patrick Robert James

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 31, 2012
Messages
3,417
Format
35mm RF
chip j said:
Yes, Patrick, but that is, I believe, an old lens. How IS it, BTW? I shudder at the thought of a 'Blad negative being enlarged thru a Rodenstock--I have a few of 'em, incl. an APO. Only way to go would be a 100mm Focotar 2.
Click to expand...

I think they made them in the 80s maybe? IDK. I would have to look at the serial numbers. In truth it is a great lens. Just from my personal experience with it for a couple decades now, it is about as good as you can get, but I have never used the APO El Nikkor, so it would be hard to make a comparison. It is technically a better lens than any common enlarging lenses. Does it really matter? Not sure. Probably only when it does. I've used a bunch of lenses over the years and still have a few in the range of the Orthoplanar. Two Computar ELs (50/65), Fujinon EX, Durst Neonon (Pentax apparently) and I think some others. If I was going to make a huge print, I would use the Zeiss. Otherwise, the others work just fine. The Zeiss is a special lens though. I have the 60. You would need the 105 if you wanted to enlarge a Hassy neg. Good luck finding one these days. They are ridiculously expensive. I guess macro people love them which drove the price way up. They are unforgiving too. The first thing I did after I mounted the Orthoplanar years ago was buy a laser alignment tool! No way around it. None of that mushy grain Nikkor stuff! kidding I honestly don't think I've used mine in a few years.

There are lenses though that swing above their reputation. I hesitate to mention a couple because I think I want to get another copy of them. People think that Nikon, Rodenstock and Schneider are the best, but my experience with all of them and many others doesn't really jive with that. They are just the most popular lenses. Doesn't make them the best. Nitpicking though. Any lens is good enough in the end if your photos are good enough. Sharply printed crappy photos are still crap! I've got lots of those. I've seen a lot of crappily printed photos in museums too, so there is that.
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,409
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
Jayd said:
European market Kodak Retinas often had Rodenstock lens, I have a couple of them, and while the price is usually substantially higher for a Retina with Rodenstock here in the USA I don't think they are any better than the Schneider lenses.
Kodak Jay
Click to expand...

All the Retina's were made in Europe at the former Nagel factory after Kodak bought the company. Nagel himself had founded Contessa which had become part of Xeiss Ikon, when he left to form his new company (under his own name) he had to source lenses from Schneider which was a much smaller company than Zeiss, Later under Kodak Ltd (UK) the Nagel factory began using some Zeiss lenses and also Rodenstock.

Ian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register