Plaubel Makina IIS with F 2.9/100mm Anticomar Image Glare

[RYAN CHAN]

Hello All,

I recently purchase Plaubel Makina IIS and have shot two 120 rolls with F 2.9/100mm Anticomar. Most images are just fine except two images where glare appeared in the center of the images. Could anyone tell me what could have caused them?

Thank you so much in advance!

 

[nosmok]

That looks like a light leak from the front of the camera to me (bellows pinhole leaks look more like when you 'write' with a flashlight). Are these successive images on a single roll, or from 2 different rolls? If the former, it would seem to be getting worse. If the latter, maybe you can recall if you were doing something to the front when it happened (just changed shutter speed, say). The Makina front standard is a fancy rectangular support housing a big ol' Compur round shutter; it is hollow and these beasts are pretty elderly these days, so some light could be getting through.

 

[RYAN CHAN]

That looks like a light leak from the front of the camera to me (bellows pinhole leaks look more like when you 'write' with a flashlight). Are these successive images on a single roll, or from 2 different rolls? If the former, it would seem to be getting worse. If the latter, maybe you can recall if you were doing something to the front when it happened (just changed shutter speed, say). The Makina front standard is a fancy rectangular support housing a big ol' Compur round shutter; it is hollow and these beasts are pretty elderly these days, so some light could be getting through.

Thank you very much sir for your reply. They are from different roll I've taken. I did change the shutter speed often but that will leak light into bellow pinhole? I also called up my camera dealer and he told me to put the hook on. I'm not sure if it's light leak or lens' lacking of coating issue. What do you say?

 

[Alex Varas]

What film back are you using? The one with the ruby window at the back or without?

 

[RYAN CHAN]

What film back are you using? The one with the ruby window at the back or without?

Mine is just regular 6x9 film back holder without ruby window.

 

[nosmok]

Thank you very much sir for your reply. They are from different roll I've taken. I did change the shutter speed often but that will leak light into bellow pinhole? I also called up my camera dealer and he told me to put the hook on. I'm not sure if it's light leak or lens' lacking of coating issue. What do you say?

As I said, if it's a light leak it is coming from the front plate of the camera, near the lens-- a pinhole there means a cloud of light on the film, as opposed to the spidery 'fingers' of light one gets with a bellows pinhole. Try taking the back off, and put the camera up to one eye and go outside, see if you can see any light spots at the front. alexeivaras' question about the film back is also a good possibility, those Plaubel/RADA plate camera backs can be finicky, and fit may not be good and tight after many years.

 

[Alex Varas]

One more question, the negative, is the light leak on the borders of the negative or it finishes at the image and the borders are clear?

 

[Dan Daniel]

There is a way that this effect reminds me of both a Jupiter 12 and a 47mm Acugon (on 6x9) having a hotspot at times. Seemed to be related to light hitting lens in certain ways.

But both of those lenses are wide angle, which means lots of elements, weird curves.

But I figured I'd throw it out there- maybe this is a specific lens fault that shows up in some lighting?

 

[RYAN CHAN]

As I said, if it's a light leak it is coming from the front plate of the camera, near the lens-- a pinhole there means a cloud of light on the film, as opposed to the spidery 'fingers' of light one gets with a bellows pinhole. Try taking the back off, and put the camera up to one eye and go outside, see if you can see any light spots at the front. alexeivaras' question about the film back is also a good possibility, those Plaubel/RADA plate camera backs can be finicky, and fit may not be good and tight after many years.

Here I attached another 2 images that I just realized have light leak. The first image seems to receive leak light from center forward. The second one however seems to be from the film holder.

 

[RYAN CHAN]

One more question, the negative, is the light leak on the borders of the negative or it finishes at the image and the borders are clear?

I have uploaded 4 images in this threat and 3 of the light leaking seems to be toward the center except the last one with blue light at the lower-left side, which could be leaking from the border of the film back/holder.

 

[RYAN CHAN]

There is a way that this effect reminds me of both a Jupiter 12 and a 47mm Acugon (on 6x9) having a hotspot at times. Seemed to be related to light hitting lens in certain ways.

But both of those lenses are wide angle, which means lots of elements, weird curves.

But I figured I'd throw it out there- maybe this is a specific lens fault that shows up in some lighting?

Yes that's exactly what my camera dealer told me. He thinks it's lens lacking coating issue, especially lens this old.

The huge blurry (light blue/green) glare appeared consistently both during sunny afternoon shot and the night shot (the tunnel with many lights on top of tunnel ceilings).

 

[Dan Daniel]

Yes that's exactly what my camera dealer told me. He thinks it's lens lacking coating issue, especially lens this old.
The huge blurry (light blue/green) glare appeared consistently both during sunny afternoon shot and the night shot (the tunnel with many lights on top of tunnel ceilings).

Any idea of the design of the lens? I have never seen such an effect from a Tessar-type design. And I don't have enough experience with triplets to say yes or no, it's a common effect.

And is it a coated lens? Does it exhibit haze with a flashlight test?

The blue object lowr left corner in last shot is a strange one. Why blue? Again makes me wonder about a lens issue, but maybe the bellows/lens board leak picked up some sky only to project in?

Good luck. Intermittent light leaks and flares are a real challenge to track down. Be methodical.

 

[Alex Varas]

Lens is Tessar design coated in the front lens.

I still have no answer about the negative borders out of the photo frame, is also affected by leak light or is it clean?

Are the frames with leak the n#1 of each roll?

 

[RYAN CHAN]

Lens is Tessar design coated in the front lens.

I still have no answer about the negative borders out of the photo frame, is also affected by leak light or is it clean?

Are the frames with leak the n#1 of each roll?

Negative borders are all ok! It's very strange because each leak is different shape in characters.

 

[RJ-]

Ryan -

The halo effect is not a light leak. It is a characteristic of the Anti-comar 10cm f2.9 (uncoated) most like veiling flare.

Your aperture blades are very refined and form a very neat circular effect - the cemented two groups of elements of the Tessar type lens are very good at flare resistance when designed like the Zeiss original. The Plaubel Anti-comar lens design separates the two elements with the shutter and particularly in the absence of a lens hood, this kind of halo flare is spectacular. As the aperture stops down, differential diffraction of the colour spectrum occurs. I find the effect rather beautiful although with your imaging subject, perhaps it's less flattering - easily remedied once controlled.

I take it you are using the rangefinder patch and not the ground glass to focus. If you use the ground glass, you may observe the veiling flare form on the image and use it as a compositional device. Here's an example from 15 years ago using the same 4 element uncoated Anticomar 10cm f2.9. The ancient monastery abbey door was closed, however drew a strong halo effect from the veiling flare. You can angle the flare to the opposite side of the image and control it when using the groundglass for focussing.

 

[RJ-]

Any idea of the design of the lens? I have never seen such an effect from a Tessar-type design. And I don't have enough experience with triplets to say yes or no, it's a common effect.

And is it a coated lens? Does it exhibit haze with a flashlight test?

The blue object lowr left corner in last shot is a strange one. Why blue? Again makes me wonder about a lens issue, but maybe the bellows/lens board leak picked up some sky only to project in?

The first version of the Plaubel Makina Anticomar 10cm f2.9 came around in the late 1920s - 4 element cemented in two groups, simple unscrewing from around the shutter. As the iterations advanced to the II, IIs, III series and finally the IIIR, different permutations and combinations exist: these Anti-comar lenses are a family. The Tessar is only the schema layout - just like dogs are a family and cats are a different family. The peculiar differences arise across the iterations: some Anti-comars screw out completely (for example - the last edition of the IIIR with the 10cm f2.9 Anticomar, interchangeable with the Weitwinkel 7.3cm f6.8 Orthar or the 15cm f4.5 Telemakinar. The earlier versions and some of the III versions had fixed uncoated lenses.

The front thread of the uncoated simple around the shutter 4 element Anti-comar lenses is approximately 37.5mm: a step up ring to 46mm enables any standard lens hood to reduce the stray incident light. For a 6.5cm x 9cm format, I've never found the 10cm f2.9 Anticomar wide-angle: it acts more like a standard 53 degrees field of view making it approximate/equivalent to around 43mm - 45mm on 35mm film format.

Regarding "Why blue"?

Blue light has a shorter wavelength than red light. With chromatic aberration, the purple/blue side of the UV spectrum tends to distort into aberration faster than the red side. These lenses were not originally designed for colour. Recall that Dufaycolor invented 16mm colour film in 1932 and Kodakchrome arrived around 1935. The Plaubel Makina Anticomar lens preceded the colour era: colour correction and coating came later.

Kind regards
RJ

 

[nosmok]

It's certainly true that the Anticomar is a "flare magnet"! I've never shot color with mine, but you do have to be careful where you point it even in black and white. In the pic of the man on the balcony, I thought that since the sun was BEHIND the camera, essentially, that lens flare wasn't likely to be an issue. However there could have been a local 'hot spot' on the subject's chest that flared. Seeing the blue flare on that train picture on the same side as the sun seals the cause as lens flare for me. The Makina lens hoods are easy to use and well-made-- I guess they had to be!

 

[Nokton48]

Makina3 #10 by Nokton48, on Flickr

"Torturing" the F2.9 Anticomar lens. Shot straight into the sun. White spot in the center -is- the sun.
Plaubel Makina III F2.9 wide-open, Fomas Classic 200, Microdol-X replenished.

Image cropped slightly left and right, due to overlapping frames inside the film back.

 

[RYAN CHAN]

Ryan -

The halo effect is not a light leak. It is a characteristic of the Anti-comar 10cm f2.9 (uncoated) most like veiling flare.

Your aperture blades are very refined and form a very neat circular effect - the cemented two groups of elements of the Tessar type lens are very good at flare resistance when designed like the Zeiss original. The Plaubel Anti-comar lens design separates the two elements with the shutter and particularly in the absence of a lens hood, this kind of halo flare is spectacular. As the aperture stops down, differential diffraction of the colour spectrum occurs. I find the effect rather beautiful although with your imaging subject, perhaps it's less flattering - easily remedied once controlled.

I take it you are using the rangefinder patch and not the ground glass to focus. If you use the ground glass, you may observe the veiling flare form on the image and use it as a compositional device. Here's an example from 15 years ago using the same 4 element uncoated Anticomar 10cm f2.9. The ancient monastery abbey door was closed, however drew a strong halo effect from the veiling flare. You can angle the flare to the opposite side of the image and control it when using the groundglass for focussing.

I see. I know little about this vintage camera. Thank yo for so much great information!

 

[RYAN CHAN]

Makina3 #10 by Nokton48, on Flickr

"Torturing" the F2.9 Anticomar lens. Shot straight into the sun. White spot in the center -is- the sun.
Plaubel Makina III F2.9 wide-open, Fomas Classic 200, Microdol-X replenished.

Image cropped slightly left and right, due to overlapping frames inside the film back.

very nice shot. this one flare doesn't seem to bother ! yes when I converted image to black and white they all looked better. but I'm really interested in making color with this vintage camera.

 

[RYAN CHAN]

It's certainly true that the Anticomar is a "flare magnet"! I've never shot color with mine, but you do have to be careful where you point it even in black and white. In the pic of the man on the balcony, I thought that since the sun was BEHIND the camera, essentially, that lens flare wasn't likely to be an issue. However there could have been a local 'hot spot' on the subject's chest that flared. Seeing the blue flare on that train picture on the same side as the sun seals the cause as lens flare for me. The Makina lens hoods are easy to use and well-made-- I guess they had to be!

Yes I kinda now remember that I did pointed to a hot sun right before I took at first shot. Maybe that show the light go thru the shutter blades. I've tried to put in the film folder blade when I'm not using it or aim or focus. I'll see the result soon in my next roll!

 

[RYAN CHAN]

The first version of the Plaubel Makina Anticomar 10cm f2.9 came around in the late 1920s - 4 element cemented in two groups, simple unscrewing from around the shutter. As the iterations advanced to the II, IIs, III series and finally the IIIR, different permutations and combinations exist: these Anti-comar lenses are a family. The Tessar is only the schema layout - just like dogs are a family and cats are a different family. The peculiar differences arise across the iterations: some Anti-comars screw out completely (for example - the last edition of the IIIR with the 10cm f2.9 Anticomar, interchangeable with the Weitwinkel 7.3cm f6.8 Orthar or the 15cm f4.5 Telemakinar. The earlier versions and some of the III versions had fixed uncoated lenses.

The front thread of the uncoated simple around the shutter 4 element Anti-comar lenses is approximately 37.5mm: a step up ring to 46mm enables any standard lens hood to reduce the stray incident light. For a 6.5cm x 9cm format, I've never found the 10cm f2.9 Anticomar wide-angle: it acts more like a standard 53 degrees field of view making it approximate/equivalent to around 43mm - 45mm on 35mm film format.

Regarding "Why blue"?

Blue light has a shorter wavelength than red light. With chromatic aberration, the purple/blue side of the UV spectrum tends to distort into aberration faster than the red side. These lenses were not originally designed for colour. Recall that Dufaycolor invented 16mm colour film in 1932 and Kodakchrome arrived around 1935. The Plaubel Makina Anticomar lens preceded the colour era: colour correction and coating came later.

Kind regards
RJ

I see. Thank you for such an informative reply!!