visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 11026 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Blazer0ne wrote: |
Quote: |
Co-assembly
When two lens types were in co-production the train of serial numbers moves between alternating batches until the required quantities of each is made, or parts are no longer available. On certain occasions to complete a batch when supplies of parts were exhausted an alternative part has been used deliberately, or in error. Other types of irregularities do occur, some intended and some not.
​A special case of co-production occurs when a model is upgraded. Alternating batches of the old and new models are created until the transition is complete. Some interesting effects were produced under arrangements in play. It is not known if more than one assembly line existed. A single chain serial assembly is assumed. |
Interesting! This product method would be very fashionable and green in today's standards. Not a prototype, but a limited run mashup saved from the expense of a recycler or land fill.
This would certainly explain a situation where they took a blank name ring sized for a 55mm f2.2, which has a different cone shape and depth than the heliar version, and engraved upon it 58mm f2.4.
Thanks! |
also from https://takumarguide.weebly.com/takumarology.html
Quote: |
Takumar 2.4 / 58mm
In 2017 members Pentaxforums found several aberrant lenses (SN 154623, 154662) in the “final†batch of approximately 100 lenses (see lens page) of the Takumar 2.4 / 58mm as it was being discontinued. It is suggested copies were assembled using bodies from the other more popular lens with which it was being co-assembled. (An assembly line cross over?) It seems the correct Heliar bodies were unavailable at the time or in very short supply because their manufacture had ceased. Only 3 single lenses follow this “final†batch (see lens page). The lenses were destined for export, having single distance scales calibrated in Feet, an important goal for the company at the time. |
_________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2020 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
Great to hear, SunnyChap. Following the discussion output here, with an M37 silver version you'd have no doubt in getting a Heliar design. It still worth noting that its adaptation is a kind of PITA if you don't use a custom helicoid.
I think the lens could gain pretty much from using a hood which I haven't used yet. Even if stray light may add some nice atmosphere, like in this case (the same place as on #2 of the previous set, but there I avoided the stray light, so the difference in contrast is pretty clear).
#1
When there is no stray light, the rendering is pretty amazing in terms of sharpness and colour rendition, including the normally difficult night light situations. There are some CA for sure, but not that much as one might expect from an old single coated lens which was not necessarily intended for shooting in colour.
The next two shots have no PP, just resized.
#2
#3
|
|