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

Bausch & Lomb Super Baltar 35mm f/2
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:51 am    Post subject: Bausch & Lomb Super Baltar 35mm f/2 Reply with quote
I can get this lens which sounds interesting, but I do not know more than that it is a Cine lens and it has a 3cm screw thread. Would this be adaptable to an APS-C DSLR?











Last edited by Spotmatic on Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:49 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Interesting find there ! I did not realised Bausch & Lomb made lenses till you post it up. Over here, Bausch & Lomb makes contact lenses and solution.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Actually Bausch & Lomb was, at the time, a well-known optics maker. They made the Cinemascope lenses for 20th Century Fox and made and sold other movie lenses. In the 80's most of the optical activities were sold and that's probably why you only know them for their contact lenses).
But you probably also know them for their famous Ray-Ban sunglasses (a brand which also has been sold off).


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Must not forget the Rapid-Rectilinear camera lenses of 100 years ago either!


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nesster wrote:
Must not forget the Rapid-Rectilinear camera lenses of 100 years ago either!


Of course... I still have the Kodak Autographic camera here with exactly that lens! Smile


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The seller has just sent me more pictures of the lens. I have added them to the first post. I think it's getting more interesting now Smile

It does not have a focusing shaft, so it seems.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
oepsa,
i guess we're bidding on the same lens...


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
mkleywegt wrote:
oepsa,
i guess we're bidding on the same lens...


That's what I was suspecting too Wink

It's a nice lens, isn't it?


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, sometimes it gets boring to having to repeat myself that often, but that lens is well described in that source here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/lens-vademecum-t10219.html

Secondly, I honestly doubt that a 35mm lens (no retrofocus design froim what I know) has a much too short back focal length to allow for infinity (except you plan on using it on a Lumix)


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
Well, sometimes it gets boring to having to repeat myself that often, but that lens is well described in that source here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/lens-vademecum-t10219.html

Secondly, I honestly doubt that a 35mm lens (no retrofocus design froim what I know) has a much too short back focal length to allow for infinity (except you plan on using it on a Lumix)


Thanks for the link, Klaus. Can you please update your first post in that topic so that it does not feature broken links? Both of the provided links are dead and I must admit I did not read further than the first post... Something that's important for a sticky topic, I think (I mean working links).


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
A few years back I had a B&L 28mm lens for the Canon FD mount. It was sold through a local shop after I went EOS.

Last edited by greg on Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:11 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Spotmatic wrote:
kds315* wrote:
Well, sometimes it gets boring to having to repeat myself that often, but that lens is well described in that source here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/lens-vademecum-t10219.html

Secondly, I honestly doubt that a 35mm lens (no retrofocus design froim what I know) has a much too short back focal length to allow for infinity (except you plan on using it on a Lumix)


Thanks for the link, Klaus. Can you please update your first post in that topic so that it does not feature broken links? Both of the provided links are dead and I must admit I did not read further than the first post... Something that's important for a sticky topic, I think (I mean working links).


Here's a working download http://www.mediafire.com/?ozmtovntxwj


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Dave! According to the Vade Mecum tt appears that the 35mm f/2 Super Baltar is supposed to have a retrofocus design as the shorter Baltars were more expensive than the longer Baltars. Who knows... I'll try to get this nice lens.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I thought of them mainly as a microscope manufacturer, actually.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
OK, the lens is on its way to me now. We'll see how it performs Cool


PostPosted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:09 pm    Post subject: Bausch & Lomb Reply with quote
ChrisLilley wrote:
I thought of them mainly as a microscope manufacturer, actually.


Bausch & Lomb has never attracted the attention it really merits, particularly (and strangely) in the USA.The firm was formerly a very large and important optical business with interests ranging from spectacle lenses through to optical munitions - the firm had pre-1914 connections with Zeiss and some highly contentious post-1919 links which eventually landed B&L in some very embarrassing trouble with the US government in the late 1930s. In the 1960s it became an importer of photographic instruments and phased out most, if not all, of its consumer manufacturing operations. The company continues today chiefly in ophthalmics.

The lack of any authoritative published history is frustrating, particularly as the firm has managed to retain a substantial archive. Access to that (or even locating it) seems impossible, perhaps because the company remains sensitive about its unhappy relationship with the US government in the 1930s.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 7:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, the lens is in my hands now. It's do darn small and there's no back clearance, so it's unusable on a normal DSLR. On the Panasonic G1 it might work though.

What's interesting, to me though, is that there are what appears to be two diaphragms in the lens, on top of each other. I haven't seen this before in any of my lenses. The second diaphragm (seen from the front of the lens) closes a little later than the first one, and the second one never closes past the smallest f/stop of the first one. What's the point of this strange configuration, especially when you consider that the two diaphragms are snugly running back to back?

I know the Sony 135mm f/2.8 [T4.5] STF lens and it indeed looks exactly like this, with the difference that in the Super Baltar, the diaphragms are positioned flat to each other.

Any ideas?

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1