Re: [Rollei] Why the 6-element lens for 3.5Fs

[Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh >]

Richard

I say it again!  In 1952, I saw a H'blad Ektar apart at Oscar
Heinemann's
shop.  It was FIVE (5) elements.  OH said that it looked just like a
Medalist lens.  Maybe the first Ektars were 4 element Tessars, but
the later ones were not.  There is no need to count F**$^@g reflections
when the lens is apart and you can see the cemented surfaces.

I can supply no more than my eyewitness report.

End of discussion!

Jerry

Richard Knoppow wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" <peterk  >
> To: <rollei  
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 2:39 PM
> Subject: RE: [Rollei] Why the 6-element lens for 3.5Fs
>
> >
> >
> > Was the Tessar for the 'blad any good? Better than the
> Ektar lenses they
> > were using?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: todd [mailto:todd_belcher  ]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 2:22 PM
> > To: rollei  us
> > Subject: Re: [Rollei] Why the 6-element lens for 3.5Fs
> >
> >
> > Richard, I think QG has the 2.8 Tessar in an early
> Hasselblad mount and
> > does not mean the 2.8 Tessar as found in the Rollei TLR.
> >
> > todd
> >
>   That would be interesting. AFAIK, the Hasselblad Ektars
> were Heliar type lenses of the type designed by Fred Altman
> and covered under USP 2,279,384. Altman states that he used
> the extra element to obtain better control of rim rays,
> which is what is needed when making a fast lens.
>   Other examples of this lens are all f/3.5 however.
>   It would be of considerable interest to me to know for
> certain what the construction is. Someone who has one could
> count the reflections and tell whether it is a Heliar or
> something else.
> ---
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk  

------------------------------