- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 2,193
- Format
- Multi Format
I found a page online that tests different projection lenses and thought it would be useful to share here since this thread is also about slide projection: https://deltalenses.com/projector-lens-group-test-1-fast-90s/
Thanks!Thanks Miha.
Just an addition from my side, as I have also tested projection lenses:
From my results I can put the Leica Super-Colorplan and the Zeiss P-Sonnar on a higher ranking compared to the results in the test you have linked.
And my assessment is confirmed by several other tests done and published in Germany (which has been the country in which slide projection has been most popular).
Based on my and these other published tests I can give the following recommendations for different projector brands:
Leica:
Best lens: Leica Super-Colorplan 2.5/90.
Second best: Leica Colorplan 2.5/90 and Zeiss P-Sonnar 2.5/90 (it can be used in the PC projector line with a slight adjustment).
Zeiss-Ikon / Zett:
Best lens: Zeiss P-Sonnar 2.5/90.
Kindermann silent 1500 / 2500 series:
Best lens: Kindermann MC-B 2.4/90 (made by Docter Optics, this lens has an aperture and can be stopped down).
Braun Paximat Multimag series:
Best lenses: Braun Ultralit PL 2.4/90 and Braun Ultralit 2.8/85 MC-B (with aperture).
Rollei Rolleivision twin series (35mm):
Best lens: Rollei AV-Apogon 2.4/90.
Rollei Rolleivision 66 medium format projectors:
Best lenses: Schneider AV-Xenotar 2.8/150 and Rollei AV-Apogon 2.8/120.
Kindermann diafocus 66T medium format projector:
Best lens: Kindermann 2.8/150 MC.
For slide projection I always recommend using the best lense(s) for the specific projector available.
It is really worth it!
Best regards,
Henning
Increased optical performance when stopped down a bit as with most lenses I've read about?As for the Kindermann lens - I wonder why would a projection lens need an aperture?
I don't think this is the case. If you read the literature, Leica advertised the Super Colorplan to be on par with their APO taking lenses. Achieving optimal quality already at f/2.5 with a 90mm lens designed specifically for the projection of a 2-dimensional object is an easier task for optical designers than achieving the same on a comparable taking lens.Increased optical performance when stopped down a bit as with most lenses I've read about?
You are welcome @Henning Serger . As for the Kindermann lens - I wonder why would a projection lens need an aperture? My Pradovit has a switch to adjust brightness, with a 'normal' setting for full brightness and a dimmed option to help extend the lamp's life. I don't understand why anyone would want to dim the brightness through the lens aperture.
Thanks!
Are you aware of any good ~60mm projection lens - neat to have large image in smaller rooms.
Ivo, with the standard 90mm projection lenses you normally don't have any problems to project to a screen size of 1.5 meters width. Which is possible even in relatively small living rooms (I am doing that regularly).
Thanks Miha.
Just an addition from my side, as I have also tested projection lenses:
From my results I can put the Leica Super-Colorplan and the Zeiss P-Sonnar on a higher ranking compared to the results in the test you have linked.
And my assessment is confirmed by several other tests done and published in Germany (which has been the country in which slide projection has been most popular).
Based on my and these other published tests I can give the following recommendations for different projector brands:
Braun Paximat Multimag series:
Best lenses: Braun Ultralit PL 2.4/90 and Braun Ultralit 2.8/85 MC-B (with aperture).
Rollei Rolleivision twin series (35mm):
Best lens: Rollei AV-Apogon 2.4/90.
Rollei Rolleivision 66 medium format projectors:
Best lenses: Schneider AV-Xenotar 2.8/150 and Rollei AV-Apogon 2.8/120.
Best regards,
Henning
Hope you don't mind if I ask you a couple of tangentially related question, given that you've tested all these lenses:
1.) From my own observations I would say that the AV-Apogon 90 mm f/2.4 HFT is a 4 elements in 4 groups (Sonnar or Ernostar variant) optical design. Can you confirm that? Do you know if there are any offical drawings of this design?
2.) It's said to have been made by Schneider Kreuznach and that it is identical to the AV-Xenotar 90 mm f/2.4, apart from the coating and perhaps some light corrections (the latter is unconfirmed).
3.) There's also an AV-Xenotar 90 mm f/2.4-8 HFT (with variable aperture) which I own. I suspect that it is completely identical in terms of optics, but it has a metal barrel. Do you know if a Rollei version of that one exists as well?
4.) The Braun Ultralit PL 90 mm f/2.4 seem quite similar (though not identical) in terms of construction as well. It is a confirmed 4/4 design. I wonder who made it... because as far as I know Ultralit lenses were made by a couple of different manufacturers. Could it have been made by ISCO? Or was it made by Staeble, Docter?
Or did Braun have their own lens manufacturing capabilities?
5.) Is the Kindermann MC-B (made by Doctar) also a 4 elements in 4 groups design? And was it sold with any other name/labeling as well?
Sorry for the vast number of questions all at once... I really hope you can help me with some of these. Thanks a lot!
I don't have any drawings of the lens design of this lens. Due to my Rollei literature Schneider-Kreuznach made indeed the AV-Xenotar 2.4/90. It is very likely that the AV-Apogon is (almost) identical. Anyway, it is an excellent lens.
AFAIK that is the only existing version. Never seen or heard of another one.
German lens manufacturers ISCO or Docter-Optics are the most likely sources. They were very active in that market.
No, AFAIK they had not, and had lens manufacturers with lots of experience in projection lens manufacturing like ISCO or Docter-Optics as suppliers.
Yes, it is a 4-element design. I have this lens for my Kindermann Silent 2500, and it is really excellent. AFAIK it was only sold with Kindermann, I have never seen it in connection with any other projection manufacturer.
No problem at all.
I hope my answers are helpful for you.
Best regards,
Henning
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?