fergus
Joined: 21 Jan 2009
Posts: 61
Location: Surrey, UK
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:37 pm Post subject: Lens group separation |
|
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:37 pm Post subject: Lens group separation |
|
|
fergus wrote:
Just got a Rodenstock Rodagon 210mm F/5.6 lens.
Sellers description:
| Quote: |
| Cosmetically, there are clear signs that it has been used, but only in the paintwork, there are noo dinks or dents andit is mechanically as tight and precise as the day I bought it. Optically, it is in truly excellent condition. |
I am a realist and did not really expect it to be in truly excellent condition, but was a little shocked by this
and as view through from lens rear
The photos are taken at with just the right angle of light to highlight the problem, viewed normally the effect is not quite so obvious.
I suspect this is caused by partial separation/cement failure between the two elements in the lens group at front of lens.
How do you think this will impact on results from the lens 1. as an enlarging lens 2. as a DSLR camera lens?
PS Taken on 40D with Tamron SP 90mm
_________________
DSLR: Canon EOS 400D, EOS 40D
SLR: Pentax: LX, MV, Ricoh: KR10 Super, XR6, Canon Pelix, Zeiss Ikon Contaflex Super
Medium Format: Agfa Isolette II, Lubitel 166B, Yashica Mat 124G
Lenses
CZJ: Flektogon 2.8/35, Tessar 2.8/50, Sonnar 3.5/135 zebra , Sonnar 3.5/135 MC, Sonnar 2.8/180 P6 (Star wars).
Meyer/Pentacon: Lydith 3.5/30, Domiplan 2.8/50, 1.8/50 MC, 4/300,
Russian: Industar-50-2 3.5/50, Helios 44-2, Helios 44M, Helios 44M-4, jupiter-9 2/85MC, jupiter-9 2/85 Kiev/contax (EOS mod), ZM-5A 8/500
Tamron: SP2.5/90 (52BB), CT-135 2.8/135, SP2.5/180 (63B), 3.5/200 Adapt-A-Matic(870Au), SP2.8/300mm (60B), SP35-80mm F/2.8-3.8 (01A), 70-150 F/3.5 (QZ-150M), 70-210 F/3.8-4 (46A), SP70-210 F/3.5 (19AH), SP 60-300mm F/3.9-5.4 (23A), SP 1.4X (140F), SP 2X (01F)
Rikenon XR 3.5/28, XR 2/50, EE 3.5/135
Carl Zeiss: Contax Sonner 2.8/85, Pro-Tessar 3.2/35, 2.8/50, 4/115, Pantar 4/30, 4/75
Leica - Leitz Wetzlar: Macro Elmarit-R 2.8/60
Canon: FL 3.5/35. 1.4/50, 1.8/50, 2.5/135
Olympus - Zuiko: G.Zuiko Auto-W 35/28, F Zuiko Auto-S 1.8/50
Other: Panagor Auto Macro Converter, Voightlander Color-Skopar X 2.8/50, Schneider-Kreuznach Retina-Tele-Arton 4/85, Vivitar Series-1 28-90mm F/2.8-3.5, Tokina RMC 2.8/28mm S, Tokina RMC 80-200 F/4, Hanimex 3.5/135, Pentax-A SMC 1.7/50, Palinar 4/100, Enna Lithagon 4/24, Ina 2.8/35, Harmony 2.8/35, Penaflex-color 2.8/50, Various retina lenses, Various Meopta lenses
Photography Obsession Gallery |
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 3710
Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
...
_________________
---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS
Last edited by Pancolart on Sun May 06, 2012 12:13 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
danfromm
Joined: 04 Sep 2011
Posts: 600
|
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
danfromm wrote:
Don't ask us how well the lens will perform for you, ask the lens.
FWIW, I have a 58/5.6 Grandagon with rings of fire in front and rear cells. I've shot it on my 2x3 Graphics, found it usable. There's a hint.
Rodenstock and Voigtlaender both used the wrong cement for a number of years. Lenses from both houses made in the late '60s are often badly separated. |
|
