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

Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Dec 31, 2023 7:46 pm    Post subject: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm Reply with quote
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


PostPosted: Sun Dec 31, 2023 10:02 pm    Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm Reply with quote
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

Last edited by simple.joy on Sun Dec 31, 2023 10:07 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Dec 31, 2023 10:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm Reply with quote
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.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 31, 2023 10:48 pm    Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm Reply with quote
simple.joy wrote:

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


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 Wink

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


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 2:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
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


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 4:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
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


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 4:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I never see a ENNA Reflex-Ultralith in my life. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
I never see a ENNA Reflex-Ultralith in my life. Wink


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 Wink

S


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
calvin83 wrote:
I never see a ENNA Reflex-Ultralith in my life. Wink


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 Wink

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. Wink

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.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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. Wink

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 Wink

Mystery solved!

S


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 1:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laugh 1 Happy Cat


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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.




PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
[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


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 3:08 pm    Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm Reply with quote
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


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 3:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2024 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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


PostPosted: Tue Jan 02, 2024 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
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:



PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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


PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 6:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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 Wink I'll keep mine though ... just for fun!

S


PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:19 pm    Post subject: Re: Braun Reflex-Ultralit 2.8/50mm Reply with quote
NM - see msg above

Last edited by BrianSVP on Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:20 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Seems I'll have to dismantle it Wink

S
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2