View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3928 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2023 7:46 pm Post subject: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Yesterday I got this tiny normal lens with a Deckel (DKL) mount. A short search on the net didn't reveal much information, but it may have the same construction as the Staeble Ultralit 2.8/50mm. Some German postings suggests it's a Tessar (at least the Staeble version for rangefinder Paxette), but I'm a bit puzzled since my Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm clearly has four strong and one weak reflexion in the front part of the lens, and only two reflexes behind the aperture. A real Tessar (e. g. the CZJ Tessar 2.8/50mm or the Rodenstock Retina-Ysarex 2.8/50mm) has four reflexes in front and three reflexes behind the aperture.
Thus I'm fairly sure the Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm has a cemented doublet and a single lens in front of the aperture, and a singe lens behind the aperture. That's a substantial deviation from the classical Tessar scheme.
This lens has a certain relevance for me since my fathers Braun SLR probably had a 2.8/50mm Ultralit, and most of my early childhood images may have been taken with this lens ...
Here's another image, comparing the rather scarce Rodenstock Ysarex with the Braun (Staeble) Ultralit:
Does anyone have some additional information on the Braun Reflex-Ultralit? Maybe even a lens section?
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
simple.joy
Joined: 30 May 2022 Posts: 586
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2023 10:02 pm Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm |
|
|
simple.joy wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
Yesterday I got this tiny normal lens with a Deckel (DKL) mount. A short search on the net didn't reveal much information, but it may have the same construction as the Staeble Ultralit 2.8/50mm. Some German postings suggests it's a Tessar (at least the Staeble version for rangefinder Paxette), but I'm a bit puzzled since my Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm clearly has four strong and one weak reflexion in the front part of the lens, and only two reflexes behind the aperture. A real Tessar (e. g. the CZJ Tessar 2.8/50mm or the Rodenstock Retina-Ysarex 2.8/50mm) has four reflexes in front and three reflexes behind the aperture.
Thus I'm fairly sure the Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm has a cemented doublet and a single lens in front of the aperture, and a singe lens behind the aperture. That's a substantial deviation from the classical Tessar scheme.
Does anyone have some additional information on the Braun Reflex-Ultralit? Maybe even a lens section?
S |
I don‘t have a drawing of this particular lens but have you seen the lens designs for the Ultralit PL projection lenses?
They‘re shown here for example:
https://www.digicamclub.de/showthread.php?t=22371
Perhaps it‘s similar to the 90 mm f/2.4 version?
Edit: If the images don‘t work on digicamclub you can also find the same scan on several ebay listings:
https://www.ebay.at/itm/314341767872 _________________ ---
Manual lens enthusiast
https://www.flickr.com/photos/simple_joy/
Last edited by simple.joy on Sun Dec 31, 2023 10:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ernst Dinkla
Joined: 30 Nov 2016 Posts: 391
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2023 10:04 pm Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm |
|
|
Ernst Dinkla wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
Yesterday I got this tiny normal lens with a Deckel (DKL) mount. A short search on the net didn't reveal much information, but it may have the same construction as the Staeble Ultralit 2.8/50mm. Some German postings suggests it's a Tessar (at least the Staeble version for rangefinder Paxette), but I'm a bit puzzled since my Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm clearly has four strong and one weak reflexion in th
e front part of the lens, and only two reflexes behind the aperture. A real Tessar (e. g. the CZJ Tessar 2.8/50mm or the Rodenstock Retina-Ysarex 2.8/50mm) has four reflexes in front and three reflexes behind the aperture.
Thus I'm fairly sure the Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm has a cemented doublet and a single lens in front of the aperture, and a singe lens behind the aperture.
S |
Could be a reversed Elmar or a Hektor/Elmaron type then. _________________ Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3928 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2023 10:48 pm Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Thanks for that link! The optical construction of the two "long" lenses (90mm and 85mm) is typical for short teles: Ernostar and Cooke Triplet. Interestingly, the 2.8/55mm lens (a normal lens!) is a retrofocus and not a double Gauss as one might expect. My assumption would be that it has a very good corner performance
simple.joy wrote: |
Perhaps it‘s similar to the 90 mm f/2.4 version? |
I don't think so. Ernostar designs (here with a thick second lens to reduce astigmatism) aren't well suited for 45° image fields, but more so for 18° to 24° (corresponding to 100mm ... 135mm for 35mm photography).
I was thinking of the Leitz Elmar 3.5/5cm with its shifted aperture (that was a patent issue to circumvent the Tessar patents):
Reversing the Elmar would result in the number of reflexion seen in the Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm:
It's interesting to see that this lens wasn't just called "Ultralit" - no, it was Reflex-Ultralit, probably indicating a (slightly) changed optical construction. Maybe to allow for a larger backfocal length?
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7555 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 2:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
Enna supplies lots of lenses to Paxette Reflex. If the manual don't lie to us, this lens will be an Ennit with 4 elements.
From https://www.butkus.org/chinon/braun/braun_paxette_automatic/braun_paxette_automatic.htm _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3928 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
calvin83 wrote: |
Enna supplies lots of lenses to Paxette Reflex. If the manual don't lie to us, this lens will be an Ennit with 4 elements.
|
OK - that's interesting! I had (wrongly) assumed that the "Ultralit" name came from Staeble, but it seems that it was a genuine Braun trademark, used for all kinds of lenses from several different manufacturers.
S
EDIT Things seem to be even more complicated. "photobutmore" (usually pretty detailed and precise information) lists two lenses for the Braun Paxette Reflex (https://photobutmore.de/vintagephoto/verschluss/):
1) Staeble Reflex-Ultralit 2,8/50
2) ENNA Reflex-Ultralith 2,8/50
I have no idea whether this is true ...
EDIT II: Here's a "Staeble/ENNA Ultralit 2.8/50mm": http://knippsen.blogspot.com/2020/03/dkl-das-uneinheitliche-westdeutsche.html _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7555 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 4:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
I never see a ENNA Reflex-Ultralith in my life. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3928 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
calvin83 wrote: |
I never see a ENNA Reflex-Ultralith in my life. |
How would you distinguish between a "Staeble" and a (potential) "ENNA" Reflex-Ultralit(h)? Sorry, I'm not into these German lenses from the 1950s/1960!
Thanks for your help - always appreciated
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7555 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
calvin83 wrote: |
I never see a ENNA Reflex-Ultralith in my life. |
How would you distinguish between a "Staeble" and a (potential) "ENNA" Reflex-Ultralit(h)? Sorry, I'm not into these German lenses from the 1950s/1960!
Thanks for your help - always appreciated
S |
The trademark "Ultralit" is own by Braun and has nothing to do with other parties. A lens named "Ultralit" can be potentially from any supplier. For example, we can say it is a (potential) Zeiss Tessar as there exists a Zeiss Tessar in Braun M39 mount.
If the name says Staeble/Enna, I will trust the name. If not, then I will check the official documents(ads and manuals). If nothing helps, best to to buy and compare the lenses side by side. For Paxette Reflex, I don't see any evidence that Staeble supplies any of the lenses. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3928 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
calvin83 wrote: |
The trademark "Ultralit" is own by Braun and has nothing to do with other parties. A lens named "Ultralit" can be potentially from any supplier. |
That's what I found out myself as well - see posts above.
calvin83 wrote: |
If the name says Staeble/Enna, I will trust the name. If not, then I will check the official documents(ads and manuals). If nothing helps, best to to buy and compare the lenses side by side. For Paxette Reflex, I don't see any evidence that Staeble supplies any of the lenses. |
OK
calvin83 wrote: |
I never see a ENNA Reflex-Ultralith in my life. |
Ah, you say "never" because of the additional "h" in the above "Ultralith" ... I ignored that obvious spelling mistake (found in the original photobutmore website) and thought you've never seen an ENNA Ultralit
Mystery solved!
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7555 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
_________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
blotafton
Joined: 08 Aug 2013 Posts: 1616 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
blotafton wrote:
I didn't know about that lens either. But I have the Paxette Ultralit.
Looks like it has 3+3 reflections from the front. But 3+2 reflections from the back.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7555 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
blotafton wrote: |
I didn't know about that lens either. But I have the Paxette Ultralit.
Looks like it has 3+3 reflections from the front. But 3+2 reflections from the back.
|
It might be a triplet as the zebra one with no SN on the ID ring is a triplet. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
blotafton
Joined: 08 Aug 2013 Posts: 1616 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
blotafton wrote:
[quote="calvin83"]
blotafton wrote: |
I didn't know about that lens either. But I have the Paxette Ultralit.
Looks like it has 3+3 reflections from the front. But 3+2 reflections from the back.
It might be a triplet as the zebra one with no SN on the ID ring is a triplet. |
This one has a serial number on the front ring: 147623 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BrianSVP
Joined: 09 Jun 2023 Posts: 335 Location: Philadelphia
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 3:08 pm Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm |
|
|
BrianSVP wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
It's interesting to see that this lens wasn't just called "Ultralit" - no, it was Reflex-Ultralit, probably indicating a (slightly) changed optical construction. Maybe to allow for a larger backfocal length?
|
I was under the impression that it was so named not because of any differences in the optical formula but rather because it used the SLR version of the DKL mount, i.e. no integrated aperture ring as on the Vitessa/Colorette RF version of the mount.
Incidentally, this lens was also rarely seen branded as a Wittnauer Chronostar, sold with their obscure Professional RF (a rebadged Colorette model). I actually have one of these buried in my collection somewhere.
Last edited by BrianSVP on Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7555 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
calvin83 wrote: |
blotafton wrote: |
I didn't know about that lens either. But I have the Paxette Ultralit.
Looks like it has 3+3 reflections from the front. But 3+2 reflections from the back.
It might be a triplet as the zebra one with no SN on the ID ring is a triplet. |
This one has a serial number on the front ring: 147623 |
I make a mistake here. Please forget it. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3928 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 5:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
blotafton wrote: |
Looks like it has 3+3 reflections from the front. But 3+2 reflections from the back.
|
What do you mean by "3+3 reflections"?
Three reflections in front of the aperture and three behind?
Or three strong plus three weak refections in front of the aperture?
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
blotafton
Joined: 08 Aug 2013 Posts: 1616 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2024 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
blotafton wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
blotafton wrote: |
Looks like it has 3+3 reflections from the front. But 3+2 reflections from the back.
|
What do you mean by "3+3 reflections"?
Three reflections in front of the aperture and three behind?
Or three strong plus three weak refections in front of the aperture?
S |
I think the best description is three strong plus three weak.
Example:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3928 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
blotafton wrote: |
stevemark wrote: |
blotafton wrote: |
Looks like it has 3+3 reflections from the front. But 3+2 reflections from the back.
|
What do you mean by "3+3 reflections"?
Three reflections in front of the aperture and three behind?
Or three strong plus three weak refections in front of the aperture?
S |
I think the best description is three strong plus three weak.
|
That's somehow weird. Usually the strong reflections are from glas/air surfaces, and the week reflections are caused by a cemeted surface. For me your image looks like six strong and one weak reflection though (which would be in accordance with a Tessar structure).
If you're closing the aperture completely, you'll get some additional information ... A Triplet would have four reflexes on one side and two on the other side of the aperture.
That said, I've been playing a bit with the Reflex-Ultralit today. While my sample looks like new, it's a really bad lens. The center is OK at f2.8, but quite soon (= slightly outside of the center) there are lots of aberrations. The lens is OK at f11, but even at f5.6 there are pretty visible weaknesses over large parts of the image (always talking about infinity nd 24 MP FF). Much much worse than e. g. a CZJ postwar Tessar 2.8/50 or a Rodenstock Retina-Ysarex 2.8/50mm ...! So it seems to be an Enna lens as suggested by Calvins information from 1950s - both my Enna 2.8/135mm as well as my Enna 4.5/240mm Enna lenses are similarly bad lenses ...
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
blotafton
Joined: 08 Aug 2013 Posts: 1616 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
blotafton wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
blotafton wrote: |
stevemark wrote: |
blotafton wrote: |
Looks like it has 3+3 reflections from the front. But 3+2 reflections from the back.
|
What do you mean by "3+3 reflections"?
Three reflections in front of the aperture and three behind?
Or three strong plus three weak refections in front of the aperture?
S |
I think the best description is three strong plus three weak.
|
That's somehow weird. Usually the strong reflections are from glas/air surfaces, and the week reflections are caused by a cemeted surface. For me your image looks like six strong and one weak reflection though (which would be in accordance with a Tessar structure).
If you're closing the aperture completely, you'll get some additional information ... A Triplet would have four reflexes on one side and two on the other side of the aperture.
That said, I've been playing a bit with the Reflex-Ultralit today. While my sample looks like new, it's a really bad lens. The center is OK at f2.8, but quite soon (= slightly outside of the center) there are lots of aberrations. The lens is OK at f11, but even at f5.6 there are pretty visible weaknesses over large parts of the image (always talking about infinity nd 24 MP FF). Much much worse than e. g. a CZJ postwar Tessar 2.8/50 or a Rodenstock Retina-Ysarex 2.8/50mm ...! So it seems to be an Enna lens as suggested by Calvins information from 1950s - both my Enna 2.8/135mm as well as my Enna 4.5/240mm Enna lenses are similarly bad lenses ...
S |
Ok now I understand.
It's the same with the Paxette version, it's only marginally better than the Cassarit 50mm 2.8. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7555 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
That said, I've been playing a bit with the Reflex-Ultralit today. While my sample looks like new, it's a really bad lens. The center is OK at f2.8, but quite soon (= slightly outside of the center) there are lots of aberrations. The lens is OK at f11, but even at f5.6 there are pretty visible weaknesses over large parts of the image (always talking about infinity nd 24 MP FF). Much much worse than e. g. a CZJ postwar Tessar 2.8/50 or a Rodenstock Retina-Ysarex 2.8/50mm ...! So it seems to be an Enna lens as suggested by Calvins information from 1950s - both my Enna 2.8/135mm as well as my Enna 4.5/240mm Enna lenses are similarly bad lenses ...
S |
I sold my Braun Reflex-Ultralit and I don't regret selling it. It is the worst 50/2.8 in DKL mount compare to Xenar/Lantar/Ysarex. The only DKL 50/2.8 I owned now is the Ysarex as it is a part of the complete set.
BTW, the SN of my copy is not far away from yours.
_________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3928 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
calvin83 wrote: |
I sold my Braun Reflex-Ultralit and I don't regret selling it. It is the worst 50/2.8 in DKL mount |
Good to know I'll keep mine though ... just for fun!
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ernst Dinkla
Joined: 30 Nov 2016 Posts: 391
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ernst Dinkla wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
blotafton wrote: |
stevemark wrote: |
blotafton wrote: |
Looks like it has 3+3 reflections from the front. But 3+2 reflections from the back.
|
What do you mean by "3+3 reflections"?
Three reflections in front of the aperture and three behind?
Or three strong plus three weak refections in front of the aperture?
S |
I think the best description is three strong plus three weak.
|
That's somehow weird. Usually the strong reflections are from glas/air surfaces, and the week reflections are caused by a cemeted surface. For me your image looks like six strong and one weak reflection though (which would be in accordance with a Tessar structure).
If you're closing the aperture completely, you'll get some additional information ... A Triplet would have four reflexes on one side and two on the other side of the aperture.
That said, I've been playing a bit with the Reflex-Ultralit today. While my sample looks like new, it's a really bad lens. The center is OK at f2.8, but quite soon (= slightly outside of the center) there are lots of aberrations. The lens is OK at f11, but even at f5.6 there are pretty visible weaknesses over large parts of the image (always talking about infinity nd 24 MP FF). Much much worse than e. g. a CZJ postwar Tessar 2.8/50 or a Rodenstock Retina-Ysarex 2.8/50mm ...! So it seems to be an Enna lens as suggested by Calvins information from 1950s - both my Enna 2.8/135mm as well as my Enna 4.5/240mm Enna lenses are similarly bad lenses ...
S |
The other possible lens type I suggested, that fits the number of reflections too, is an Elmaron/Hektor variation on the Triplet. Aperture can be either in front or behind the central negative group, in a Triplet more an arbitrary choice. I would expect more resolution loss to the edges in that case. _________________ Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BrianSVP
Joined: 09 Jun 2023 Posts: 335 Location: Philadelphia
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:19 pm Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm |
|
|
BrianSVP wrote:
NM - see msg above
Last edited by BrianSVP on Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:20 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3928 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Seems I'll have to dismantle it
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|