View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Mos6502
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 Posts: 961 Location: Austin
|
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mos6502 wrote:
tromboads wrote: |
A Tessar.... Your eyes are doing better then mine, we need 3 systems, er groups, and fourish elements?
Mos6502 wrote: |
One lens up there is a tessar variant, not a double guass, can you spot it?
casualcollector wrote: |
Excalibur wrote: |
Very interesting but doesn't explain why some lenses are sharper\better than others |
Different goals on the designer's part. Different capabilities of the manufacturer. Economic considerations (selling price). Different quality standards of makers. Sample variation. Differing tastes of user.
I have an issue of Camera 35 Magazine from 1971. The Canon F-1, Pentax Spotmatic F and Mamiya/Sekor Auto XTL were tested with their f-1.4 standard lenses. I believe this was a test chart on film test. The Canon had the best numbers with Pentax and Mamiya falling in behind. Today it seems the Pentax Super Takumar is the most highly praised and desirable of the group, judged by the comments of this forum. |
One thing is that designers had to work around each other presumably, some designers were just better than others, or had other goals (ie. speed vs. sharpness, or aberrations vs. distortion etc.) so lenses of similar design perform differently, and as pointed out constraints of selling price, materials, etc. also make differences.
Lenses which are in "convenient" mounts like M42 will be more popular these days than lenses in esoteric mounts, which pretty much explains why the Takumars are more popular than other lenses which are as good or better but only available in other mounts. |
|
In this case it has five elements. The maximum aperture is another give away. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 2877
|
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
fermy wrote:
Ufff, found it, but had to go through the list a couple of times. Pentax lens. _________________ Many lenses and some film bodies for sale here: http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-fd-minolta-md-c-mounts-m42-pentax-and-more-t50465.html
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/96060788@N06/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
56 DIN
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 Posts: 1656 Location: Germany Erbach /ODW
Expire: 2021-11-18
|
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
56 DIN wrote:
thanks a lot _________________ Thomas
NEX & manual lenses
Nikon & manual lenses |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JohnBar
Joined: 21 Jun 2012 Posts: 581 Location: Liverpool
|
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
JohnBar wrote:
Schneider have produced a number of DG variations which do not appear in those charts, Xenon, Xenar etc _________________ Rectilux 3FF Series single focus anamorphic attachments
http://www.transferconvert.co.uk/cinemania/rectilux-3ff.html
Regular News on https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rectilux/704770636267200 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MacTak
Joined: 15 Jun 2011 Posts: 110
|
Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MacTak wrote:
Forgive me for dredging up an old thread, but I thought this would be the perfect thread to make some mention (and hopefully get a little discussion) of the new Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art lens announced today. For it features a very strange and (I think) novel design: the first quadruple-Gauss lens!?
Let's start with the rear half of the lens, which would itself be a relatively expected design for a fast 50--a Biotar/Xenon type, though one with a particularly enhanced rear group (two elements in the rear has been done on some fast 50mm, but here one of those elements is turned into a doublet and the other is aspherical). This rear half is much the same as the entire prior Sigma 50mm f1.4 DG EX lens (including that enhanced rear group with doublet + aspherical), except that lens split the front doublet (Ultron-type). But then there is also the whole front part of the lens design, and guess what, it clearly looks like another double-Gauss feature (stripped of any extra elements besides the opposed Gaussian elements themselves). In this case the front group remains split, and the rear group, instead of being the usual doublet (or split), has been made into a triplet! Like I said, pretty crazy. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ray Parkhurst
Joined: 04 Jul 2011 Posts: 497 Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
|
Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
To me, the most interesting thing was to find the Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 Macro there; one of my favorite and treasured lenses. Who were Opcon? |
Have you seen the M42 mount Vivitar 90/2.5 on eBay? It has 25 watchers. The 1:1 converter is in a separate auction. Serial number starts with 378, so am I correct to assume this is the Opcon version? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
danfromm
Joined: 04 Sep 2011 Posts: 576
|
Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
danfromm wrote:
Interesting thread that I missed when it was young. I'm glad it was resurrected and made visible again.
Doubly interesting because it is so sharply focused on fast narrow angle (normal) lenses for, mainly, 35 mm still. It omits 4/4 double Gauss wide angle types used on larger formats, e.g., Kodak Wide Field Ektar; Cooke Ser. VIIb and other similar lenses from Dallmeyer, Ross and Wray; Meyer Aristostigmat; CZJ's Topogon and all of the Topogon derivatives from many makers. It also omits slow narrow angle process lenses such as Lomo's f/10 RF-2, ..., RF-5.
Surprising in that it missed TTH's 6/4 double Gauss types completely.
The Sigma thingy is strange. No way are the first three groups a double Gauss type, the third group is a more or less a single Dagor (or clone) cell. The rearmost group is a little hard to read, not clear whether it contains a cemented doublet, air space, and cemented triplet (Dagor-like, again) or is five elements cemented together. Either way, not half of a conventional fast double Gauss type. Calling the lens a quadruple Gauss type is a large stretch.
Interesting phenomenon, trying to stretch an old idea to include what seems to be a new one.
Last edited by danfromm on Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:17 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
danfromm
Joined: 04 Sep 2011 Posts: 576
|
Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
danfromm wrote:
JohnBar wrote: |
Schneider have produced a number of DG variations which do not appear in those charts, Xenon, Xenar etc |
The Xenon started out as a 6/4 f/2 double Gauss type licensed from TTH, turned into a trade name that includes other design types, all fast.
The Xenar is Schneider's Tessar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sichko
Joined: 20 Jun 2008 Posts: 2475 Location: South West UK
|
Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sichko wrote:
MacTak wrote: |
Forgive me for dredging up an old thread, but I thought this would be the perfect thread to make some mention (and hopefully get a little discussion) of the new Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art lens announced today. For it features a very strange and (I think) novel design: the first quadruple-Gauss lens!?
Let's start with the rear half of the lens, which would itself be a relatively expected design for a fast 50--a Biotar/Xenon type, though one with a particularly enhanced rear group (two elements in the rear has been done on some fast 50mm, but here one of those elements is turned into a doublet and the other is aspherical). This rear half is much the same as the entire prior Sigma 50mm f1.4 DG EX lens (including that enhanced rear group with doublet + aspherical), except that lens split the front doublet (Ultron-type). But then there is also the whole front part of the lens design, and guess what, it clearly looks like another double-Gauss feature (stripped of any extra elements besides the opposed Gaussian elements themselves). In this case the front group remains split, and the rear group, instead of being the usual doublet (or split), has been made into a triplet! Like I said, pretty crazy. |
There's a strong negative element in the front half, and the back half is positive and Double-Gauss-like. A retrofocus lens ? _________________ John |
|
Back to top |
|
|
spoilerhead
Joined: 25 Jan 2012 Posts: 68 Location: Austria
|
Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
spoilerhead wrote:
MacTak wrote: |
Forgive me for dredging up an old thread, but I thought this would be the perfect thread to make some mention (and hopefully get a little discussion) of the new Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art lens announced today. For it features a very strange and (I think) novel design: the first quadruple-Gauss lens!?
Let's start with the rear half of the lens, which would itself be a relatively expected design for a fast 50--a Biotar/Xenon type, though one with a particularly enhanced rear group (two elements in the rear has been done on some fast 50mm, but here one of those elements is turned into a doublet and the other is aspherical). This rear half is much the same as the entire prior Sigma 50mm f1.4 DG EX lens (including that enhanced rear group with doublet + aspherical), except that lens split the front doublet (Ultron-type). But then there is also the whole front part of the lens design, and guess what, it clearly looks like another double-Gauss feature (stripped of any extra elements besides the opposed Gaussian elements themselves). In this case the front group remains split, and the rear group, instead of being the usual doublet (or split), has been made into a triplet! Like I said, pretty crazy. |
It looks a lot like a very sofisticated medium format wide angle design. i.e. a read block "normal lens" and a front block "wide angle converter"
compare to:
Zeiss Biogon 21mm ZM
and the medium format wideangles at http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Rolleiflex_vs_Hasselblad_2/00_pag.htm
the new Zeiss Otus 55 1.4 is also similar:
_________________ Eos (A/D) + M42 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sichko
Joined: 20 Jun 2008 Posts: 2475 Location: South West UK
|
Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sichko wrote:
spoilerhead wrote: |
compare to:
Zeiss Biogon 21mm ZM
|
A useful comparison - the lens is Distagon (retrofocus) by design if not by name.
Quote: |
the new Zeiss Otus 55 1.4 is also similar:
|
Described explicitly - by Zeiss - as a Distagon (retrofocus). _________________ John |
|
Back to top |
|
|
atiratha
Joined: 07 Mar 2009 Posts: 77 Location: Czech Republic, Prague
|
Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
atiratha wrote:
Well, this seems to be a trend these days. The revered Zeiss Otus 55/1.4 is a Distagon design if I'm not mistaken? They claim this leads to better sharpness distribution across the field and minimizes aberrations. _________________ In my bag: Fuji X-T20, Samyang 12/2, Voigtlander Ultron 28/2, Voigtlander Nokton Classic 40/1.4, Mitakon Speedmaster 35/0.95, 7artisans 50/1.1, Canon LTM 100/3.5, Canon LTM 135/3.5. www.vh-photo.tk |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CuriousOne
Joined: 31 Dec 2013 Posts: 669 Location: Home
|
Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CuriousOne wrote:
I have large "reproduction" lens, used in photocopy machines for large format documents. It is very huge, front element diameter is 105mm and fully symmetrical - image enters and outs of same size. I've opened it and it is 6 element double gauss design. Specs are 497mm/F6.5, photos can be found here (not my specimen): http://tumanyan.ucoz.ru/photo/mom/43-2-0-0-2
So I have an idea, if I remove the one gauss set, and attach smaller "rear" one from some 35mm lens, considering the large "entry" diameter of this lens, if I choose the attachment point properly, is there chances for me to get something like 300mm/F2.8 ? _________________ I have nothing to compensate with lens |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7547 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
sichko wrote: |
MacTak wrote: |
Forgive me for dredging up an old thread, but I thought this would be the perfect thread to make some mention (and hopefully get a little discussion) of the new Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art lens announced today. For it features a very strange and (I think) novel design: the first quadruple-Gauss lens!?
Let's start with the rear half of the lens, which would itself be a relatively expected design for a fast 50--a Biotar/Xenon type, though one with a particularly enhanced rear group (two elements in the rear has been done on some fast 50mm, but here one of those elements is turned into a doublet and the other is aspherical). This rear half is much the same as the entire prior Sigma 50mm f1.4 DG EX lens (including that enhanced rear group with doublet + aspherical), except that lens split the front doublet (Ultron-type). But then there is also the whole front part of the lens design, and guess what, it clearly looks like another double-Gauss feature (stripped of any extra elements besides the opposed Gaussian elements themselves). In this case the front group remains split, and the rear group, instead of being the usual doublet (or split), has been made into a triplet! Like I said, pretty crazy. |
There's a strong negative element in the front half, and the back half is positive and Double-Gauss-like. A retrofocus lens ? |
It is a Double-Gauss (last five groups) based retrofocus . FYI, the much older Voigtländer Skopagon 2.0/40 has a 9e/6g Double-Gauss design too. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MacTak
Joined: 15 Jun 2011 Posts: 110
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
MacTak wrote:
danfromm wrote: |
The Sigma thingy is strange. No way are the first three groups a double Gauss type, the third group is a more or less a single Dagor (or clone) cell. The rearmost group is a little hard to read, not clear whether it contains a cemented doublet, air space, and cemented triplet (Dagor-like, again) or is five elements cemented together. Either way, not half of a conventional fast double Gauss type. Calling the lens a quadruple Gauss type is a large stretch.. |
Based on Sigma's stated 13/8 design (sorry I had forgotten to put that in my prior post), it is clear that (from the rear) it is single aspherical element, air space, cemented doublet, air space, cemented doublet (which is the same as their prior 50mm f1.4 from the rear, by the way). Good point about the Dagor in the third group, but the first two groups still look Gaussian to me (given their shape and proximity), so I guess Sigma is replacing the rear of an opposed Gaussian with a Dagor to better correct some aberrations (and they can get away with this since they have more space afterwards to correct remaining abberations)? Hence the spacing to the third group.
By the way, I agree it is a double-Gauss based retrofocus (which has indeed been done, though less common than a retro-telephoto design), but my particular interest is that the front bit of it is more than just a few negative elements; the first two are indeed negative, but the third group (correct me if I am wrong) should be positive. The Zeiss Biogon spoilerhead has helpfully provided seems a little closer in thought to that than the Zeiss Otus. It still seems to me that Sigma is taking a rather novel approach to the design.
Thanks to everyone for the replies; I really know very little about optical design and am eager for a chance to expand my knowledge via a discussion like this!
Edit: It might be helpful to bring in another recent fast 50, the Pentax DA55/1.4.
Pentax has always liked the Ultron-type double-Gauss for their standard lenses, and three elements at the rear is not unheard of either. What is unique here is the element between the opposed Gaussian groups, which thus makes the two groups after the aperture into somthing resembling a Plasmat cell. So might this be another case, like in the forward portion of the Sigma, of upgrading the rear of an opposed Gaussian (Sigma to a Dagor cell, Pentax to a Plasmat cell)?
Last edited by MacTak on Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sichko
Joined: 20 Jun 2008 Posts: 2475 Location: South West UK
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sichko wrote:
MacTak wrote: |
.... but the first two groups still look Gaussian to me (given their shape and proximity).... |
What do you mean by Gaussian ? Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauss_lens ) tells us ...
The Gauss lens consists of two lenses; in its most basic form, a positive meniscus lens on the object side and a negative meniscus lens on the image side. The power of the positive element predominates...
Yes - I know this is Wikipedia, and there are no links to authorative sources. However it fits my own experience (ignorance?). In most of the pictures of Gauss lenses that I have come across, the front positive element seems to be stronger than the inner negative element. In the new Sigma lens it appears to be the other way around - with a weak positive element in front of a strong negative element. Can we still call this a "Gauss" ?
Quote: |
... or we can simply think of the first two elements as negative elements.... |
The front element appears to be positive. _________________ John |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MacTak
Joined: 15 Jun 2011 Posts: 110
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MacTak wrote:
MacTak wrote: |
Quote: |
... or we can simply think of the first two elements as negative elements.... |
The front element appears to be positive. |
You're right, the front element is positive, the second element is negative (now fixed). Indeed, that it's only that second element/group in that front section of the lens that is negative is why I do prefer not to think it is particuly helpful to think of this lens as a retrofocal design.
I think it's still fine to talk in terms of double-Gauss (the term is still used even when not a symmetric design, for instance), however it does become a bit of a question of semantics. To me, the question is what did they work from and modify. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 16497 Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
sichko wrote: |
MacTak wrote: |
.... but the first two groups still look Gaussian to me (given their shape and proximity).... |
What do you mean by Gaussian ? Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauss_lens ) tells us ...
The Gauss lens consists of two lenses; in its most basic form, a positive meniscus lens on the object side and a negative meniscus lens on the image side. The power of the positive element predominates...
Yes - I know this is Wikipedia, and there are no links to authorative sources. However it fits my own experience (ignorance?). In most of the pictures of Gauss lenses that I have come across, the front positive element seems to be stronger than the inner negative element. In the new Sigma lens it appears to be the other way around - with a weak positive element in front of a strong negative element. Can we still call this a "Gauss" ?
Quote: |
... or we can simply think of the first two elements as negative elements.... |
The front element appears to be positive. |
There are two possibilities mentioned in lens books, one is called Gauss type I and the other Gauss type II in which the sequence is reversed. Nevertheless both are Gauss type lenses. _________________ Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
sichko
Joined: 20 Jun 2008 Posts: 2475 Location: South West UK
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sichko wrote:
MacTak wrote: |
MacTak wrote: |
Quote: |
... or we can simply think of the first two elements as negative elements.... |
The front element appears to be positive. |
You're right, the front element is positive, the second element is negative (now fixed). Indeed, that it's only that second element/group in that front section of the lens that is negative is why I do prefer not to think it is particuly helpful to think of this lens as a retrofocal design.
|
Have a look at this patent : http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GB&NR=355452A&KC=A&FT=D&date=19310827&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_pl
It's from 1931 and it's by Horace Lee of TTH. If you look at the first picture on page 5 you can see that the lens design has a Back Focal Distance is longer than the focal length. Many people (see, for example, this Zeiss article : http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GB&NR=355452A&KC=A&FT=D&date=19310827&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_pl ) would call this a Retrofocus lens. Of course Lee didn't call it that. The name was invented by Angénieux some 20 years later.
The arrangement of the first two elements of the new Sigma lens clearly resembles that of the first two elements in the 1931 Lee lens.
Quote: |
To me, the question is what did they work from and modify. |
Well, the 1931 Lee lens looks like a useful starting point. If you tweak the Double-Gauss relay at the back the essence of the design is unchanged. But what about the cemented triplet - the Dagor if you want to call it that - what does that do? Maybe it's just another "relay" with the introduction of three more elements adding another dozen or so degrees of freedom. _________________ John |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sichko
Joined: 20 Jun 2008 Posts: 2475 Location: South West UK
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sichko wrote:
kds315* wrote: |
sichko wrote: |
MacTak wrote: |
.... but the first two groups still look Gaussian to me (given their shape and proximity).... |
What do you mean by Gaussian ? Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauss_lens ) tells us ...
The Gauss lens consists of two lenses; in its most basic form, a positive meniscus lens on the object side and a negative meniscus lens on the image side. The power of the positive element predominates...
Yes - I know this is Wikipedia, and there are no links to authorative sources. However it fits my own experience (ignorance?). In most of the pictures of Gauss lenses that I have come across, the front positive element seems to be stronger than the inner negative element. In the new Sigma lens it appears to be the other way around - with a weak positive element in front of a strong negative element. Can we still call this a "Gauss" ?
Quote: |
... or we can simply think of the first two elements as negative elements.... |
The front element appears to be positive. |
There are two possibilities mentioned in lens books, one is called Gauss type I and the other Gauss type II in which the sequence is reversed. Nevertheless both are Gauss type lenses. |
Thanks Klaus. I didn't know. Is there on online source for this kind of information ? _________________ John |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|