[LargeFormat] Any info on the Industar-37?
Frantisek Vlcek
largeformat@f32.net
Sun Jan 27 18:40:08 2002
Hi,
All Industars were of Tessar design (or possibly the Elmar
derivative of Tessar) copy. So it should be a 4 element lens in 3
groups, the last group consisting of cemented neg and pos elements
(visible faintly in the diagram in the link). It's a simple design
from around 1903 I think, but still it can deliver very good
results. The Apo-Tessar formula (of f/9 max aperture) is said to be
excellent, corrected for both infinity and closer distances (by
reversing the lens). Tessar was a breaktrough in lens design at the
time, because although the Planar design was sharper and invented
few years before the Tessar, it had big problems with flare and
veiling (no coating was invented until around 2nd W.W.). The Tessar
had much better contrast and transmittance as it had only 3 groups
of (4 in all) elements. Tessar is the simplest lens formula that
still can give good results in general photography. Better than
most Anastigmat designs. Be proud of your Industar, it's a valued
piece of camera history! Original Tessar formula had I think 6.3
maximum aperture (as if they didn't use different aperture numbers
anyway!), with further refinements in element spacing and strength
leading to as far as 2.8 aperture. Although that's really stressing
the limits, the best performing Tessars are those with the slower
apertures. As far as 50s, Tessar and their derivatives were used as
standard lens on most cameras. The better ones of Kodak Ektars are
of Tessar design or closely derived (the cheaper Ektars are only 3 element triplets,
though), AFAIK.
BTW, portrait photographers of days gone used to disregard Tessar
lenses as "too sharp" for portraiture. Certainly it is, Tessar can
be very contrasty and sharp. Of course modern 6+ element gaussian
type or other lenses are better, though that's like comparing
apples and oranges...
wrt supplied resolution - It is strangely bad advertising but all
the l/mm numbers I have seen advertised for (ex-)USSR lenses are
imho wide open. It wouldn't make sense otherwise for some lenses
which I know are very good in sharpness but get below-average l/mm
in the manufacturer's chart.
Oh, and the coverage is same as that of Tessar, that's about 45-55
degrees, with light falloff corresponging closely with useful
coverage, unlike symmetrical lenses. In fact, the lens is probably
a direct copy of Carl Zeiss 4.5/300 Tessar, which was frequently
used for 18x24 cameras in the old days.
btw, my friend once had a big Russian (or Ukrainian) studio
monorail camera. I will try to get some info from him about it.
If a typo or historical error slipped in my message, I am sorry.
It's all from memory, I don't have my photo history books close by
unfortunately. So please correct.
Good light,
Frantisek Vlcek