What is wrong with my summar?

[MattKing]

AgX: one is not attaching the lens to the mount in this case so one can 'make' the flange distance any distance one wants. Again, the 'in focus' is fleeting due to the hand holding the lens. - David Lyga

David:

If the flange distance is much less for the lens then the camera is designed for, you would need to put the lens inside the camera to get it close enough for your test to work with distant objects.

Close-up objects are different.

 

[David Lyga]

MATT: Yes, you are putting it 'inside', but watch your semantics! The 'inside' is only a couple of millimeters! You do NOT have to worry about the mirror crashing into the lens because you are not flipping the shutter. It is really not rocket science. - David Lyga

 

[darkosaric]

MATT: Yes, you are putting it 'inside', but watch your semantics! The 'inside' is only a couple of millimeters! You do NOT have to worry about the mirror crashing into the lens because you are not flipping the shutter. It is really not rocket science. - David Lyga

I did put summar inside touching a mirror of F3 - no focus.

 

[John Koehrer]

MATT: Yes, you are putting it 'inside', but watch your semantics! The 'inside' is only a couple of millimeters! You do NOT have to worry about the mirror crashing into the lens because you are not flipping the shutter. It is really not rocket science. - David Lyga

No it's not rocket science.
You don't want to accept that FF distance doesn't matter. For work with a bellows, yes the lens will form an image but not at infinity.
With the mirror down it will not allow the lens to be close enough to the film. Remember, the focusing screen in the camera is equivalent to the distance to the film plane.
Raise the mirror and put a ground glass at the film plane and it will work, otherwise no go.

 

[MattKing]

No it's not rocket science.
You don't want to accept that FF distance doesn't matter. For work with a bellows, yes the lens will form an image but not at infinity.
With the mirror down it will not allow the lens to be close enough to the film. Remember, the focusing screen in the camera is equivalent to the distance to the film plane.
Raise the mirror and put a ground glass at the film plane and it will work, otherwise no go.

John:

I think you threw one too many negatives into the phrase "You don't want to accept that FF distance doesn't matter." I think it should be "You don't want to accept that FF distance does matter."

And no one seems to be mentioning that the size of the opening in the camera also matters - just try to fit a Canon breech lock FD lens through a Pentax screw mount lens mount.

 

[BMbikerider]

Leitz Summar on an enlarger

This may not work as well as you think. The Summar was designed for use as a taking lens and using it in such a short range on an enlarger will introduce all sorts of aberrations. Camera lenses CAN be used for printing quite successfully but they should be reversed so that the front element faces the film. The same principal that suggests that a reversed camera lens on a camera body will give very good macro images. They still make adapters for this purpose.
I found this out when I tried to use a Pentax F2 Takumar on an enlarger with a 42mm adapter lens panel, the centre was sharp but the fall off was dreadful. Get the edges sharp and the rest was out of focus.

Yes the Summar was not a bad lens considering when it was made. Stopped down it could produce some fine results. I would like to see the one that had been coated, (Mentioned a while back in this thread)

 

[Ian Grant]

No-one has suggested using the Summar to make enlargements, only to test the focussing.

Ian

 

[John Koehrer]

John:

I think you threw one too many negatives into the phrase "You don't want to accept that FF distance doesn't matter." I think it should be "You don't want to accept that FF distance does matter."

And no one seems to be mentioning that the size of the opening in the camera also matters - just try to fit a Canon breech lock FD lens through a Pentax screw mount lens mount.

Hi Matt.
Thanks for catching that & letting me know

Howz 'bout an RB lens on a Minox? Duct tape?

 

[David Lyga]

The lens in question has a 39mm screw mount. That should easily fit in most mounts sufficiently in order to evaluate focus. - David Lyga

 

[darkosaric]

Hi all,

to share end of story with you. I have sold broken summar for 1/3 of price I paid (with clear explanation what is wrong). Later I saw summar on one Polish auction site and I got it very cheap! It is in superb condition, like it came from factory yesterday, without a since sign of use, I test it with fomapan 400 - is works like a charm - behaves like it should: wide open dreamy and stopped down sharp.

regards,

 

[Ian Grant]

You've done well, use it shere the images .

Ian

 

[brucemuir]

Darko,

excellent news. i'm glad things worked out which they usually will with a bit of patience.

don't let any summar naysayers dissuade you (i know they can't )
I have seen some beautiful images made with them I just guess they are a bid flarey if you get careless.
I want one to complement my Zeiss 50 1.5 for my IIIf

 

[elekm]

Glad to hear you found a good lens but sorry you took a big loss.

By the way, Zeiss Ikon's enlarger called for the use of the Tessar as an enlarging lens. I have this enlarger and will give it a try.

I don't think that Zeiss Ikon recommended the use of the Sonnar as an enlarging lens, probably for the reasons mentioned in this thread.