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
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home Manual Focus Lenses  LENSES-STICKY
View previous topic :: View next topic  


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).


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
This is one of the most educative threads on our forum, (or maybe now i am able to understand it Razz ) Thanks a lot guys.

This could be make STICKY.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
no-X wrote:

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


Indeed! I was still looking at the first version, on my HDD. I have downloaded your updated version.

Maybe you can also create PDF versions? This way we'll be able to search through the lens names (unless the original is a picture too, in which case that wouldn't work).


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'll prepare PDF version (it's possible, but I tried it and browsing is slower than viewing the PNG picture) after I add all mentioned info.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dakoo wrote:
This is one of the most educative threads on our forum, (or maybe now i am able to understand it Razz ) Thanks a lot guys.

This could be make STICKY.

+1000


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Stickied.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 9:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
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 never seen an optical diagram to Micro Nikkor 105/2.8 (Ai-S). Do you have one? Smile


PostPosted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
no-X,

I have been dipping in at this thread for a little while.

In his book "Optics", later "Photographic Optics", Arthur Cox had done a lot of work tracing the developments of each type of lens; I think it would be helpful to use his work as an additional reference.

You would be most welcomed if you want to consider my way of looking at it as another way of considering the various divergence in development. Here I'll have a go at the triplet:

Our foundation: the Cooke Triplet by Harold Dennis Taylor; first with the front two elements very close together, later the elements were arranged with a somewhat more balanced spacing.

First divergence: Aldis Uno Anastigmat: a reversion to its former configuration and taken to extreme, where the two front elements are cemented into a doublet, making for a 2:1 scheme.

Development method one: replacing each element with a cemented doublet:

Rear element replaced by a doublet: classic Tessar type, even though its genesis was a combination of an Unar front with a Protar back, making it 1-1:2.

Variation: placing the diaphragm behind the front element making it 1:1-2 as in Elmar.

I do not recall off-hand any lens with the front element replaced by a doublet.

Middle element replaced by a doublet: another type of Hektor.

Both front and back elements replaced by doublets:

Version 1: positive on the outside: Original Heliar.

Version 2: negative on the outside: Dynar, later renamed Heliar.

All three elements replaced by doublets: Hektor (and also the Dallmeyer Triple Achromatic designed way before the Cooke Triplet).

Development method two: replacing each element with a pair of lenses.

Front element replaced by a pair of lenses: Kern Kino-Objektiv.

Rear element replaced by a pair of lenses: Taylor-Hobson Speedic and Coric.

Middle element replaced by a pair of lenses: Taylor-Hobson Aviar. This makes the lens symmetrical and closer to the Double-Gauss type. In the Aviar the two negatives are placed very close to each side of the diaphragm, then the Dogmar type makes them pulled further apart.

I hope you follow my line of thought.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
End of my doubts. Great job.
Thanks. Smile


PostPosted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Update:


Triplets (V4):

PNG: http://www.abload.de/img/lens_scheme_tri_v4fm83.png
PDF: http://www.load.to/SRhoFPbHN2/lens_scheme_tri_v4.pdf


Planars (V2):

PNG: http://www.abload.de/img/lens_scheme_dg_v2k8hu.png
PDF: http://www.load.to/gRJvVeEy9c/lens_scheme_dg_v2.pdf

Last edited by no-X on Mon Jan 11, 2010 10:33 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Kaleinar-5N 100/2.8 (an Ernostar/Sonnar type):

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home Manual Focus Lenses  LENSES-STICKY
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5