Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

List of lens diagrams: triplets, planars & hybrid lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Idea WOW Idea
thank you no-X!


PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 6:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is very well made one..
Excellent. Finally i am able to understand the comparisions ...
Thanks a lot..


PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 8:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well done - a useful piece!


PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for the provided details.
Informations about the Steinheil Cassars and others would be helpful, too.
A well honoured work you have done with providing your list.

Very Happy


PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi no-x, than you for helpful information. What about the Tairs? I think, they are Triplets too.
Tair-2/3
Tair-11


PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excelent!!!!

It´s in the same level of your comparision of 35 mm lenses, pancolar, 135 mm, etc.

Now I can see why the rendering of my mamiya TL 2,8/135 mm lens (ernostar) is so different than the CZJ 2,5/135 sonnar one.

But I have a doubt :

1- The mamiya 2,8/135 first version (TL) is the ernostar schame
See the link posted in http://freenet-homepage.de/stauber/mamiya-nc/m42_mamiya_135_2.8_tl.htm

2- The mamiya 2,8/135- 2nd version -DTL- had the same schame than the first version.
See http://freenet-homepage.de/stauber/mamiya-nc/m42_mamiya_135_2.8_dtl.htm

3- The mamiya 2,8/135 3rd version is the SX had the same design (4/4) that the 2nd.
See http://freenet-homepage.de/stauber/mamiya-nc/m42_mamiya_sx_135_2.8.htm

4- But the rolleinar (made by mamiya) 2,8/135 isn't the TL, DTL or SX version
Becuase it's a sonnar design??? (4/4)
See http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/Rollei_QBM_Schneider_dt.html#Rolleinar

5- and Rolleinar is not the last mamiya CS 2,8/135 lens (5/4).
See http://freenet-homepage.de/stauber/mamiya-nc/cs_135_2.8.htm

Rolleinar-Mamioya isn't clear to me.

Rino.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote



4/4 construction is typical Ernostar. Typical sign of Sonnar is (at least one) cemented triplet:



(while Primoplan is Ernostar with cemented doublet instead of the 2nd element)

These Rolleinars were manufactured by Mamiya and because of that I mentioned "Mamiya-Rolleinar" in the list.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, NoX

But did you note the following:

The second, thick element of the rolleinar (same as the present in the sonnars 135 lenses), is more similar to the sonnar 2nd and 3rd cemented elements (in only one element) than to the 2nd ans 3rd elements in the ernostar?

The ernostar didn't have a thick 2nd element.



Rino.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The thickness depends on focal length and speed of the particular lens. The longer focal length, the thicker element. The triplet and ernostar in the picture examples are valid for standard lenses. Basic Ernostar is described as a lens consisting of two positive elements (meniscus), one negative element and one positive element at the end of optical block.

Despite many lenses are marketed as Sonnars, they are based on Ernostar designs and even the patent descriptions call them Ernostars.

Anyway, here is the rest...

double-gauss:


triplets:


hybrid designs:


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd like to suggest a few lenses to add to your list.

1. Nikkor 135/3.5 (pre-Ai) falls into "Sonnar (simplified, 4 elements)"
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/6070nikkor/telephoto/135mm.htm

2. Nikkor 135/3.5 (Ai, Ai-S), Nikkor-Q 135/2.8 fall into "Ernostar"
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/135mmnikkor/index.htm

3. Nikkor pre-Ai and Ai 180/2.8, Leitz Elmarit 180/2.8 are... well, they are Sonnars, but yet another type; this optical construction was shared by many 135mm and 180mm lenses:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/late70nikkor/telephoto/180mm.htm

3. Nikkor pre-Ai 85/1.8 is "Biotar / Xenon"
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/preAI70/85mm.htm

4. Nikkor Ai, Ai-S 85/2 are "5-element Takumar (hybrid of Ernostar and simplified Ultron"
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/85mmnikkor/85mm2.htm


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 5:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey no-x, what an awesome body of work you're creating here. Bravo. It is invaluable.


One thing I noticed; I thought that Volna-9 was Tessar design

http://www.luciolepri.it/lc2/marcocavina/articoli_fotografici/kiev_volna9/00_pag.htm

not double gauss?


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very nice of you to have made all this data available to us, no-X. I'm no optics expert, but it's always nice -- and valuable -- having this sort of reference.

I suppose I should mention this: I've recently been going through some of my old collections of photo-related publications, and I have some items that members here might find interesting. I have two different editions of Canon's An Introduction to the F-1, which has lens formula diagrams for all their FD lenses (as of 1977, my most recent copy), plus I have a copy of The Eyes of Nikon, which dates to sometime during the mid-80s, and it has lens formula diagrams for all Nikkors that were current at that time, plus I have Joseph Cooper's Nikon/Nikkormat Handbook and Minolta Handbook, both of which have lens formula diagrams for all the lenses produced by each manufacturer up to the dates of each of these publications (mid-70s). And I also have a copy of Osterloh's Leica M, which has some lens formula diagrams as well. His book probably dates to the mid-to-late 80s.

I've been giving this some thought for the past several days, and I think what I will do is digitize the lens formula data and drawings I have in these books. I can make them available to the members here, but the size of the file collections will be LARGE. And you'll have to allow me some time to do this because we're talking about hundreds of lenses.

Regardless of forum interest, I plan to do this anyway, since I like having this sort of information handy, and it will be easier to do comparisons across brands with image files than having to page through an assortment of different books.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rawhead: Relayer is all right. It is definately not Tessar. I took my Volna and counted reflections separately for front group and rear group:

front group: 6 reflections = 6 air/glass surfaces = 3 optical elements
rear group: 5 reflections = 4 air/glass surfaces + 1 cemented surface = 3 optical elements in 2 groups.

aoleg wrote:
I'd like to suggest a few lenses to add to your list.

1. Nikkor 135/3.5 (pre-Ai) falls into "Sonnar (simplified, 4 elements)"
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/6070nikkor/telephoto/135mm.htm

2. Nikkor 135/3.5 (Ai, Ai-S), Nikkor-Q 135/2.8 fall into "Ernostar"
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/135mmnikkor/index.htm

Thanks. I'm not into Nikon lenses, but I'll try to add these.

aoleg wrote:
3. Nikkor pre-Ai and Ai 180/2.8, Leitz Elmarit 180/2.8 are... well, they are Sonnars, but yet another type; this optical construction was shared by many 135mm and 180mm lenses:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/late70nikkor/telephoto/180mm.htm

This is the same as Meyer/Pentacon 135/2.8 ("bokehmonster")... variation of Primoplan (=Ernostar with cemented doublet instead of 2nd element).


Btw. here are some interesting information (esp. for Asahi fans) I revealed during my search of old patents:


Patent for Asahi Takumar 24/3.5 (Pentax 24/3.5) lens:

Takumar 24/3.5:


patented scheme:


inventor: Yasuo Takahashi, Asahi Kogaku (patent number: 3545845)


Patent for Asahi Takumar 135/2.5 (version 1):

Takumar 135/2.5:


patented optical scheme:


inventor: Yasuo Takahashi, Asahi Kogaku (patent number: 3459469)


Canon's copy-shop example #1

Asahi/Pentax 40/2.8 lens produced in 1976:




patent by Canon, 1978:



Very Happy


Canon's copy-shop example #2

Asahi 55/2.2 lens produced in 1957:




patent by Canon, 1958:



PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Many thanks for the new set of drawings! Fascinating.

I guess the Nikkor 85/1.5 is the Nikkor-S 8.5cm f/1.5 rangefinder lens?


Would the Nikkor-S 5cm f/1.4 rangefinder lens also fall int he same category?


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would this design fall into "Tele Takumar/ Enhanced Ernostar with 2 rear groups"? It looks just like your Tele Takumar/ Enhanced Ernostar category, with an additional rear element.

This is the Cosina Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 90mm f/3.5 SL



PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ChrisLilley wrote:
Would the Nikkor-S 5cm f/1.4 rangefinder lens also fall int he same category?

Lovely Sonnars, both of them Laughing I'll add them, too.

As for the Lanthar, I'm not sure. I don't have this lens. Is its optical block "fixed", or does the rear element stays in the same position during focusing?


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does the Cosina Voigtländer Ultron 40mm f/2 fall into the Ultron group? It seems similar, but the second and third elements are different. 9also, the final element is aspherical).



PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, this is quite typical Ultron (basic Ultron: 1-1-1|2-1). I'd like to get this lens in M42 mount, but I have no luck...


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:

As for the Lanthar, I'm not sure. I don't have this lens.


Okay. I do, so does Orio and Klaus.

no-X wrote:
Is its optical block "fixed", or does the rear element stays in the same position during focusing?


Its fixed (unit focusing). The whole block moves as one unit to focus.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In this case I think it isn't possible to place it in any of these group. It's kind of "floating" desing (I don't know the exact term which should be used for this type of construction) like the Macro 125/2.5...


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And this would fall under "Ultron with 7 elements"? Cosina Voigtländer Nokton 58mm f/1.4 SL2



PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
In this case I think it isn't possible to place it in any of these group. It's kind of "floating" desing (I don't know the exact term which should be used for this type of construction) like the Macro 125/2.5...


No, nothing floats. All optical elements move forwards, by the same amount, as you focus closer. That's what I meant by "unit focusing". This is also shown by the fact that the focal length at closest focus is the same as at infinity.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe a few Komura lenses can also be added, because of their Ernostar design?

See also: http://forum.mflenses.com/komura-fast-100-105-and-135mm-lenses-king-of-ernostar-t20547.html

And a diagram of the 105mm f/2 Komura:



PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is this design derived from a triplet? It seems to be, the first and third elements being replaced by doublets while retaining the predominantly convex character in each case.

But I can't slot it into one of your existing categories. Does it have a name?

This is the Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/4, which was originally derived from a "short mount" bellows lens. There are no floating elements or CRC.



PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ChrisLilley wrote:
no-X wrote:
In this case I think it isn't possible to place it in any of these group. It's kind of "floating" desing (I don't know the exact term which should be used for this type of construction) like the Macro 125/2.5...


No, nothing floats. All optical elements move forwards, by the same amount, as you focus closer. That's what I meant by "unit focusing". This is also shown by the fact that the focal length at closest focus is the same as at infinity.

Sorry, my bad. It could be (tele-)ultron then Smile

Spotmatic: This komura is already present in Primoplan category (Primoplan is version of Ernostar with doublet instead of 2nd element).

ChrisLilley: The Micro Nikkor is Heliar (Heliar is 2-1-2)

Relayer: The Tamron 200/3.5 reminds me some Takumars/Pentax lenses. It doesn't fit to any category - it's quite modified Ernostar

The 135/3.2 Hexanon is similar to some Nikkors. It's Ernostar-based, but i have no category for this particular version.

As for the Fujinons: I'd add the 100/2.8 to enhanced Ernostar category. Orientation of the reat doublet likely doesn't change a much, I've seen many patents showing both positions are possible - results should be very similar.

55/2.2 - 4 elements in 4 groups - I think it could be basic Ernostar. I'm not sure if simple gauss configuration using only 4 elements could be that fast (and perform acceptably).