OT: lenses (Was: Front Panels - PDP8 and PDP 11

COURYHOUSE at aol.com COURYHOUSE at aol.com
Fri Mar 11 01:32:31 CST 2016

I saved one  hassie  from my photo era before the  computer  business  and 
after USAF  I was a commercial photog.  I  used   ELM's  for fashon   work  
and   had  a couple of   cms  and a SWC wideangle  fixed lens  one....  I 
kept    one  c  w/  80m mm   and a 150 mm   and a few  backs ....    things   
used to be worth a lot  but  not  so  anymore...   I  may take  my  c  over 
to the  university to add to our SMECC museums  tools of the journalist   
display  we have there...  Better  used there than sitting in my  desk drawer 
at the office...I  have a kodak/nikon  AP  early  digital camera I need to 
take over there too.
Pretty  funny  the reason I  got  a computer in '79  which led  to me   
getting into the computer  biz  was  to keep a database of    photos and 
transparencies  I  had  for stock photo use.  The  lure of  getting back into  
electronics and the new era  of affordable small computers  lured me  in !
Ed# _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)  
In a message dated 3/11/2016 12:07:46 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
healyzh at aracnet.com writes:

>  On Mar 10, 2016, at 10:05 PM, COURYHOUSE at aol.com wrote:
>  I  wonder if the tele tessar was a true  tessar    design  or  just a  
> of  'the name' ? I have  seen   snipits in google referring to it being a 
>  telephoto...  with a true  tessar formula  lens  IS  NOT.

I think it’s based on the Tessar, but is something different from  what’s 
in the Hasselblad manual.  The cross-section is definitely  different.  
There are apparently at least two Tele-Tessar designs, with  different numbers 
of elements.

> ok  the  norm    for the hassleblad was a80 mm  f  2.8 planar...
> in  the rolliflex   the tessar was the entry level lens... the   planar  
> upgrade.
> my  first   'real' camera was a 1933 rolliflex  with a   f3.5  tessar.   
> bad  at  all  but a little  soft  wide open.
> I still have  this  camera. and the  low  shutter   speeds are a little  
> slow   but OTW   rest is   fine..
> In  HD   I  bought an argus  c3   from my  geometry  teacher  for   $8   
> used it a  lot   more  shots  per  roll and  would  operate  eye level  
> had a  pretty  good   split image rangefinder.. the   lens  was  decent  
> when I  went in USAF  sold    the  C#  to  my  brother but  kept the 
>  rolliflex  (  wish I had   saved both! as  the  argus  shot  some of  my 
>  press  work)  adn  when in USAF   got a  SLR.  

I’ve not been able to justify the cost of a Planar Rolleiflex, though  I’d 
really love one with a nice f/2.8 Planar lens.  Both of mine have the  75mm 
f/3.5 Tessar.  The older of my two is from 1936, the newer from  about 
1958.  For me the Rollei is more of a small lightweight travel  camera, or 
shooting for fun, than a serious camera.  Sort of a “getting  back to my roots” 
sort of thing, as I started with a Yashica 44LM  TLR.

What I really need to do is spend the money and get my  Hasselblad’s 80mm 
f/2.8 Planar C CLA’d, as the shutter on it isn’t accurate  (or fast) at any 
speed. :-(  It’s my "serious work" Medium Format  camera.


More information about the cctalk mailing list