Steinheil Quinar 2.8/135 in Pentacon Six...YES, P6!

[themoleman342]

I bought this beautiful Steinheil Quinar a few months back. It is in Pentacon Six mount and there's almost no doubt in my mind it's genuine. Seems to be quite a rare lens for that mount. Even at PentaconSix.com, in the "lenses from other manufacturers" section, the existence of the Quinar is not confirmed. I've been in contact with "Mr. Pentacon Six" so I think I might be able to confirm for him.

I took a roll of the cheap and nasty lomography 100 c-41 film (see post: http://forum.mflenses.com/damaged-film-t73050.html) and scanned a few pictures. Self-developed with Unicolor C-41 kit. Scanned on v700. Pentacon Six TL.

Here are a couple samples. Let me know what you think.

[themoleman342]

Stopped down to f5.6:


Underexposed so it's a bit overly grainy:

This is the 13th frame I can sometimes get with my P6. This time it got cut off a bit:

[kds315*]

WOW, great lens and very nice shots Marc!!

[inombrable]

First shot is just great !!!

The others show how nice rendering this rare lens has even with the "nasty" film , nice find and excelent work.

Thanks for sharing

[themoleman342]

Thank you both. Aside from being rather uncommon, it's also interesting in that there's no Zeiss or Arsenal 135mm lens for the Pentacon Six. It's great to have a little bit of a different focal length to work with. It delivers a different look when compared to the Biometar 120, Vega 120, Kaleinar 150, and Sonnar 180mm so it's a solid portrait lens.

The nasty film remark was meant to be facetious, just for the record. The film is a little on the grainy side for a 100iso but I still very much like it and believe it's a good film. There's very little editing going on with these.

[antico]

Nice photos!

[Attila]

[uddhava]

Nice shots, I especially like the first.
How do you like using that camera?

[themoleman342]

I like it quite a bit. After a C-L-A and a ground-glass change (to the Kiev type) it's a very usable camera. Have not had any reliability issues. There are "better" cameras that I could adapt my P6 collection to but they're all gonna be 6x4.5 and I simply wasn't willing to lose the 6x6.

I've had my run of Kiev cameras (several of each version: 60, 6c, 88, 88cm) and I just find the Pentacon to be a little more elegant, nicer to use. I also really love the chimney finder accessory.

[Attila]

Can you show picture from lens itself ?

[themoleman342]

I don't have anything setup for taking "product shots" right now so please excuse the cell phone pics:



The style of the DOF scale looks very much like what Steinheil used, with the dropped down "4" in the center, the open red triangle, and red dot to the right of the triangle. Looking from the back, there are specific light baffles, which probably would not have been done for a custom job. The focus guides are also attached to the mount which means it's integral to the focus system. The lens is also, maybe most importantly, dead-on at infinity on my Pentacon Six.

[Attila]

Genuine medium format lens for sure, but I doubt made for P6 in Steinheil factory, rather excellent conversion , try to search Steinheil Hasselblad lenses or some similar western made medium format camera lenses, but who knows

[themoleman342]

I've seen a lot of converted lenses and none that are close to the quality level of this one. If it's a conversion, they matched exactly how Steinheil engraved their DOF scales which I don't even think a professional would do.

The fact that PentaconSix.com does have a report for the Quinar's exsistence in P6 also makes me believe this is a factory job.

I also bought it attached to a Praktisix. Not that that is solid proof but it would have been the original camera it would have been used on:

[Attila]

Probably rare prototype or small, batch , even better!!

[littleearth]

Well done ! I'm into swirly bokeh, so I definitely find it much more interesting for portraits than the Biometar 120.
Too bad it's rare, otherwise I would get one. There's always the Petzvar option or a cheap TLR with a triplet lens.

[themoleman342]

I'm glad you like it! I like any bokeh other than smooth to be honest. There's a different amount swirl to this Steinheil than a triplet and as far as sharpness (especially corners) it's a decent level above. I've taken many rolls with a 1937 Ikoflex and its outstanding Triotar so I have a fair amount of experience with one.

You might be able to get something closer to the Quinar with the Industar 29 2.8/80. Easily adapted to the P6. This was another of mine: https://www.flickr.com/photos/10403737@N03/6962243339/

The Biometer 120 has it's own thing going on. It can be really busy depending on the situation. I still love it.

[Attila]

[Praktisix]

The lens has been factory made like this for the Praktisix camera. I am the one who reported this and also the Tele Quinar 4,5/200 to Trevor.

If you compare the lens to the common 35mm version you will notice the fluted part of the barrel is slightly different - it is longer than the medium format version and the bevelled lower end (with the distance) has a different anglethan the 35mm version. To convert one into the other you would need to take away metal in one place but add it in a different place.

Please tell me the serial number of your lens. Mine came from a large batch in 1957 or 1958 (I forgot but will check). As the lens had already been manufactured before the Praktisix was anounced, Steinheil probably never made prototypes but maybe a pre series batch. As the Praktisix mount version differs only in parts of the barrel, Steinheil apparently used preassembled lenses from their main production lot and fitted these with the Praktisix mount. Therefore I believe yours will have come from the same lot though the serials won't necessarily be very near to each other.

You will notice that you can take off the front part of the lens and use it on bellows with an M39 adapter. This is an intentional feature. The same applies to the Tele Quinar as well. As they both share the same base, Steinheil used the same helicoid/mount assembly for the Praktisix Tele Quinar 200 as for the Quinar 135. They only differ in the distance and depth of field engravings.

Actually there were several other 135mm lenses for Praktisix/Pentacon six/Exakta 66:
FOG ("Meyer") Primotar 3,5/135
Schneider Symmar-S 5,6/135
Schneider Symmar 5,6/135
Boyard Beryl 6,8/135
But of those, only one really was available.

The Primotar had an automatic apperture. Unfortunately, it never passed the prototype stage. The optical design of the lens was pre war, the apperture mechanism was completely new. FOG had a full range of lenses ready for Praktisix in 1956 (80mm, 135mm, 250mm, 300mm, 400mm) but only the 80mm and the 300mm lenses were produced in quantity.
Novoflex attached a Praktisix mount to the Xenar 4,5/150 and sold it as bellows lens from the late fities through the late seventies. They also sold remounted Xenar 4,5/135 for other cameras, not for Praktisix. But that was only because the lens did not achieve infinity focus on the Novoflex bellows (it does on the Pentacon bellows!).
Similarly, Schneider offered the Symmar-S as a bellows lens for the Exakta 66. Few people ever ordered those though. So you will probably never see one on the used market.
Atzmüller and Rendl announced two 135mm tilt shift lenses for Pentacon six in the seventies (Symmar and Beryl), but all they ever issued was a 90mm and a 105mm lens. The optical elements came from Schneider and Boyard.

Zeiss Jena never made a 135mm lens for the Praktisix as at that time they were trying to establish a geometric range of focal lengths and there is simply no room for 135mm. Due to economical reasons, they abandoned their original plans and used focal lengths already available for 35mm cameras.

Best regards,
Carsten

[Jiaming]

Glad to know! And great results!