HOW COME NO CANON OR HASSELBLAD ENLARGING LENSES?

[BMbikerider]

Badge engineering is not unknown among lens manufacturers. I used to have a Durst 50mm/F2.8 Neonon which I believe was made by Pentax for them. But then again, I also believe Pentax did not make all their own lenses anyway. Whoever made it, matters not, it was a damn good lens - easily as good as my later Nikon 50/2.8, but not as good as my current 50/2.8 APO Rodagon

 

[blockend]

Rodenstock made many of the triplets in Zeiss Ikon Nettars.

 

[Lachlan Young]

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.

I really don't know why you think a Rodagon is less capable of making an excellent enlargement from film shot with a Zeiss lens than what is essentially a rebranded Schneider Componon...

The Orthoplanar is one of the handful of lenses that are well optimised for mural scale enlargement - though I'd take a Rodagon-G or a G-Componon any day in preference.

 

[choiliefan]

Didn't early Hasselblads come with a Kodak Ektar lens? Kodak made some fine enlarging lenses.

 

[MattKing]

When I see this thread, the only thing I think of is that chip j and jnanian would both benefit if they shared use of a properly working shift key on their keyboards .

 

[Sirius Glass]

When I see this thread, the only thing I think of is that chip j and jnanian would both benefit if they shared use of a properly working shift key on their keyboards .

They do not care if the lack of shift key use makes their posts hard to read. That just means that I pay less attention to those posts.

 

[bdial]

Didn't early Hasselblads come with a Kodak Ektar lens? Kodak made some fine enlarging lenses.

Yes

Hasselblad Historical shows 4 Ektars and 6 Zeiss lenses for the pre-1957 models;
http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HW/HWPre57Lenses.aspx

 

[removed account4]

So who was making cameras for Canon and Hasselblad before they started to make them by themselvers?

not Sure about canon ... but victoR hasselblad had a shop and mR szilard szabad,
a hunGarian born Woodworker/cabinet maker worked in the hasSelblad store
and repaired/madE film holders and cameras for him. the hasselblad universal view camera
was A large format camera similar/ based on to the koDak ...
eventually mr szAbad told Mr hasselblad they weren't hasselblads, buT szabads, and they parted ways ...
i have a 5x7 aNd 8x10 ( both are somewhat rare, NONmetric models shipped to the us] ...
they aRe extremely well mAde and whether a european or us model worth every peNny charged
... the metric mod3ls are/were plEntiful.
neith3r came w¡th lenses though
you can read a little bit more if you want: https://sites.google.com/site/prittsel/szilardszabad

( ¡'M trying MaTt but its n0t eaSy )

 

[Patrick Robert James]

That cracked me up.

 

[Sirius Glass]

not Sure about canon ... but victoR hasselblad had a shop and mR szilard szabad,
a hunGarian born Woodworker/cabinet maker worked in the hasSelblad store
and repaired/madE film holders and cameras for him. the hasselblad universal view camera
was A large format camera similar/ based on to the koDak ...
eventually mr szAbad told Mr hasselblad they weren't hasselblads, buT szabads, and they parted ways ...
i have a 5x7 aNd 8x10 ( both are somewhat rare, NONmetric models shipped to the us ...
they aRe extremely well mAde and whether a european or us model worth every peNny paid charged
... the metric mod3ls are/were plEntiful.
neith3r came w¡th lenses though
you can read a little bit more if you want: https://sites.google.com/site/prittsel/szilardszabad

( ¡'M trying MaTt but its n0t eaSy )

Thanks that is interesting.

 

[AgX]

The Hasselblad 1600F likely did not come out of nothing.

See here the Bentzin Primarflex from 1935, and on the right, after the introduction of the Hasselblad 1600F, the Prmarflex II:
https://cdn.globalauctionplatform.c...9e36-56f9-4a04-9853-a50000ea059a/original.jpg

And here an intermediate model:
http://collectiblend.com/Cameras/images/Bentzin-Primarflex-(Primar-Reflex).jpg

 

[Arklatexian]

Didn't early Hasselblads come with a Kodak Ektar lens? Kodak made some fine enlarging lenses.

The first Hasselblads sold in the USA had Ektar lenses. At that time Victor Hasselblad owned a company in Sweden that distributed Kodak products. I always thought that might have had something to do with Hasselblad using Ektars on the 1600s. The later Hasselblad 1000 used Zeiss Tessars. At least mine did. The 1600's problems were not their lenses but the cameras themselves........Photo/camera history is very interesting reading. We should all read more about our hobby/profession and try to remember that the world did not begin in the 30s,40s, 50s, etc. and especially in 2000........Regards!

 

[BMbikerider]

Thinking about it, probably the reason Canon or Hasselblad did not make their own enlarging lenses is simply down to economics. There are/were so many damn good lenses designed and created for enlarging that they would be struggling to make it worth while to get a decent payback from the market that was in place at that time. The three best (my opinion) enlarging manufacturers at the time, Nikon, Rodenstock and Schneider all made enlarging lenses to cover 35mm and medium format so there would be so little of the 'cake' left for for Canon or Hasselblad to make a decent return on their design and manufacturing investment.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

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?

to use a well-recognized brand name to make a profit; simple really.

 

[silveror0]

...( ¡'M trying MaTt but its n0t eaSy )

Very creative, using an "oval" (zero) for an "O" (circle). I know, picky picky.

 

[removed account4]

Very creative, using an "oval" (zero) for an "O" (circle). I know, picky picky.

Gn0-1'S pr3FExt

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thinking about it, probably the reason Canon or Hasselblad did not make their own enlarging lenses is simply down to economics. There are/were so many damn good lenses designed and created for enlarging that they would be struggling to make it worth while to get a decent payback from the market that was in place at that time. The three best (my opinion) enlarging manufacturers at the time, Nikon, Rodenstock and Schneider all made enlarging lenses to cover 35mm and medium format so there would be so little of the 'cake' left for for Canon or Hasselblad to make a decent return on their design and manufacturing investment.

Remember that Victor Hasselblad had the money from his other parts of his financial empire to built the best cameras he could at a loss. He controlled everything so he set the goal of being the best at building medium format cameras.

 

[silveror0]

Gn0-1'S pr3FExt

Agreed.

 

[miha]

not Sure about canon ... but victoR hasselblad had a shop and mR szilard szabad,
a hunGarian born Woodworker/cabinet maker worked in the hasSelblad store
and repaired/madE film holders and cameras for him. the hasselblad universal view camera
was A large format camera similar/ based on to the koDak ...
eventually mr szAbad told Mr hasselblad they weren't hasselblads, buT szabads, and they parted ways ...
i have a 5x7 aNd 8x10 ( both are somewhat rare, NONmetric models shipped to the us] ...
they aRe extremely well mAde and whether a european or us model worth every peNny charged
... the metric mod3ls are/were plEntiful.
neith3r came w¡th lenses though
you can read a little bit more if you want: https://sites.google.com/site/prittsel/szilardszabad

( ¡'M trying MaTt but its n0t eaSy )

Amazing, thanks John.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Why doesn't Harley Davidson make semi trucks? Same kind of question.

 

[AgX]

But valid nonetheless.

 

[16:9]

Canon did make enlarging lenses - well, one, at least:

Search Results for “canon” – delta

deltalenses.com