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

100mm f2 lens for 35mm movie SOLD! US $750.00
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home Marketplace  Finished transactions
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:44 am    Post subject: 100mm f2 lens for 35mm movie SOLD! US $750.00 Reply with quote
Click here to see on Ebay

Reading between the lines, this is a forged, not genuine Kinoptik, lens that nonetheless performs brilliantly. Colllimation being that clue.

Any comments? Confused


PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yeah, whoever did that forging did a good job. The giveaway it's not real (apart from the aperture ring being marked 2.3 while the front says it's f2) is the condition, it's mint, like those 'Luftwaffe Leicas' made from Russkies RFs.

What you should ask is 'what Russian lens did they put that re-engraved front plate on?'

Quite possibly the barrel is completely bespoke, made up from some parts from other lenses - that gnurled aperture ring is probably re-used from a Russian lens.

But what optics are inside? There is a Russian 2.8/100 lens, Kaleinar I think it's called.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The different numbers on the front and on the aperture ring might indicate a genuine copy. Kinoptics were labelled with the geometrical aperture, but had Tstops (actual light transmission) on the aperture rings. The 100mms were 6 element gauss designs and before the advent of multicoating light losses of half a stop were usual.

p.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That's not much. 4"/2.0 TTH lenses, ex-F95 or -F134, have brought considerably more.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@Dan... I have a set of Rank Taylor Hobson Ortal 3inch/f2, 5inch/f2.8 and 8inch/f4 lenses in c-mount. I believe they were originally intended for the type of cameras you mention.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ekoe wrote:
@Dan... I have a set of Rank Taylor Hobson Ortal 3inch/f2, 5inch/f2.8 and 8inch/f4 lenses in c-mount. I believe they were originally intended for the type of cameras you mention.
Edward, I'm not sure.

A Lens Collector's Vade Mecum says that Ortals were made for TV cameras with Image Orthicon tubes, suggests that they were designed for high contrast at low resolution, not high resolution at much lower contrast, so aren't good matches to film cameras. I'm not sure this is true.

I've never had any, have seen a 318/4 Ortal offered on eBay that was engraved with the same US Patent number as the 12"/4 TTH Telephoto made for the Vinten F95 and Williamson F134 and F139. These are all aerial cameras that shoot 6x6 on 70 mm film, have proprietary mounts. The F95 has a lens cone that's held to the front of the camera by four nuts. The F134, F139, and their child the AGI Agiflite (AGI bought Williamson after Williamson went bust) all use lens cones with the same large bayonet mount.

I have a 12"/4 TTH tele, ex-F139. It is quite a good lens.

I don't know the size of an Image Orthicon tube's sensitive area -- the RCA 5820's outer diameter is 3", the EEV 9224's is 4.5" -- so have no idea of the size of the circle your lenses were made to cover. My 12"/4 has to cover 80 mm, in fact covers around 150. The 4"/2.0 mentioned earlier in this thread also has to cover 80 mm, covers 100 (nominal 6x9) wide open, probably little more.

Have you shot any film with your Ortals? If so, how are they? All but the 3" are quite long for S8. And, could they have been remounted in C-mount?

Cheers,

Dan


PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The c-mount could be a post-manufacture adaptation. Looking up Image Orthicon I can immediately recognize
the metal lens hoods of my RTH lenses on those cameras.
Those Image Orthicon tubes are described as 3" which is about 76mm. I'm not convinced the will project a 76mm
image circle through the 25mm diameter of the c-mount, however.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ekoe wrote:
Those Image Orthicon tubes are described as 3" which is about 76mm. I'm not convinced the will project a 76mm
image circle through the 25mm diameter of the c-mount, however.


Agree completely.

One of my treasures is a 100/2.0 Canon TV-16 in C-mount. It was sold to be used on C-mount TV and 16 mm cameras, is more than sharp enough to use on S8. In fact, I shot some of my best S8 footage with it.

It appears to be this http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/s/data/100-1000/s_100_2.html lens in C-mount. The len itself should cover 43 mm easily, but in C-mount it doesn't come close.

Cheers,

Dan


PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Interesting, I have a Canon TV-16 zoom lens and it has a 2 inch long chromed tube screwed on the back that forms the C mount, it doesn't cover my NEX sensor, makes me wonder if this is due to that tube on the back? Would be great to be able to use this lens on my NEX to shoot video.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Interesting, I have a Canon TV-16 zoom lens and it has a 2 inch long chromed tube screwed on the back that forms the C mount, it doesn't cover my NEX sensor, makes me wonder if this is due to that tube on the back? Would be great to be able to use this lens on my NEX to shoot video.


Ian, which one?

I'm not sure what you can do. If the lens focuses to infinity on a C-mount camera, you might be able to replace that 2" tube that ends in a male C-mount with a 2" tube that ends in something larger and that can be mounted with the right (.6900") flange-to-film distance on your NEX. I don't know enough to know how feasible this is or how costly if feasible.

Cheers,

Dan


PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
1.8 25-100. Looks to me like it was designed to use a variety of mounts and this one just happens to have a C mount.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That Canon 25-100 is intended for 1" video, which is a 16mm image circle. That may explain the TV-16 designation. How deep is the rear element recessed from the c-mount? Won't know for sure until someone tries.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bugger, I thought it would have a 1-inch image circle, that explains why it vignettes on NEX.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home Marketplace  Finished transactions
Page 1 of 1