Anastigmat, Protar, Protar V11a, Planar, Tessar, Sonnars, Hologon, Topogon, Biogon(s) Pre-1890 type designs Non -Anastigmats.

Transcription

1 Carl Zeiss, 32, Wagnergasse, Jena, Germany. ((1847) also: 29/II Dorotheen strasse 29, Berlin, Germany. (1901) and 29, Margaret St, Regent St, London W (1901) The founder, Carl Zeiss ( ) was born in Weimar, the son of a cabinet maker and ivory carver. He graduated from school in 1834, qualified to be apprenticed to the Grand Dukes Instrument maker, Dr Koerner, and attended academic courses as well as working as apprentice. Next he travelled from Jan to Oct to study in Stuttgart, Darmstadt, Vienna, and Berlin to broaden his experience. Back at home, he studied chemistry and higher mathematics. By May 1845, he felt well enough qualified to apply to the County Administration at Weimar for permission to found "An establishment for the production of advanced mechanical devices", hoping for a relationship with the University to advance designs. Money was tight with capital of 100 Thalers (possibly 100) only, but in Nov. 1846, he opened at 7, Neugasse. It remained a small business for years, as it took some 20 years for the University relationship to be productive, and he often grew weary of the trial and error methods traditionally used in the trade. Much of the production was of microscopes- often relatively simple ones by modern standards, such as dissection viewers. Then in 1863, a young lecturer Ernst Abbe ( ) joined the University to teach physics and astronomy. Zeiss approached him in 1866 for cooperation in the design of improved systems and this lead to new ideas, eg in the Abbe refractometer (1869), a comparator and a spectrometer. Abbe felt that in lenses the need was for new types of glass with other dispersion propertiesnot totally novel as others had used natural minerals for the purpose. But Abbe in 1882 induced a young glass chemist Otto Schott ( , from Witten, Ruhr area) to Jena to help with developing new glass types including Barium, Zinc, Phosphate and Borate: and by 1884, the Jenaer Glaswerke Schott und Genossen was formed. The partners were actually Zeiss, Abbe, Otto Schott and his son, Dr Roderich Schott, and by 1886, they were able to offer a price list of some 46 glass types- and Zeiss issued his 10,000th microscope. The glasses lead immediately to improved microscope lenses made to Abbe designs, and Zeiss expanded from some 42 employees in 1876 to 300 in 1888, at the time of his death. His son did not continue in the firm, and Abbe became the sole owner. The new glasses were also used in improved versions of the classic photographic lenses, as in the Euryscopes of Voigtlaender and the new Aplanats of Steinheil, and others in the industry thought there were other uses possible. It does seem that Abbe discussed these with Steinheil who had made more progress in correction of astigmatism than others, but did not really find the solution. And Abbe also replanned the firm he now owned. Especially for a University man, industrial conditions then seemed harsh, with a hour day, 6 day week, no vacations, and no health or old age security, and he felt they were unreasonable since much of the success of a company was due to the employees: and they should share in the benefits. Abbe therefore decided to convert the company into a foundation in 1889, as the basis of a continuing corporate structure, the profits to be shared among the employees in more limited hours, paid leave and assistance with health and pensions, as well as outside assistance to science. This was a recipe for success and the payroll grew steadily to reach 2,300 employees by 1914, as new products such as spectrometers, prismatic binoculars, telescopes, opthalmic lenses- and photographic equipment- came into the product list. It was in the 1880's that Abbe became interested in the problems of photographic lenses and in 1888, he persuaded the mathematical physicist Dr Paul Rudolph ( ) to join him in their design. The new glasses and the working environment proved very effective and in a few years, Rudolph really began the use of most of the modern lens design types. However the very first attempt was at an Triplet Apochromat and was a unsuccessful one. (These are therefore an almost prototypic lens, especially as two types existed. Eder suggests they just existed commercially and one seems to have been auctioned in London at No44.) Subsequently, Rudolph alone produced a series of some 5 or more 'anastigmat' designs using Barium flint and light crown glasses. (Jahrbuch fur Photographie, 1891, p225, also 1893; Patent DRP 56,109 03/04/1890). And then developed into several symmetrical anastigmats and lenses such as the Unar, Planar and Tessar by 1902, as well as early telephoto units.) This lead to Zeiss interests in making camera lenses, their mounts, irises, shutters, and finally cameras, with the purchase of Zeiss Palmos in 1902 and the formation of I.C.A. in There must have been both elation at the success and sometimes problems in managing it. And Abbe and Schott both combined to give the Jenaer Glas business to the foundation, apparently in 1919 in the case of Schott.

2 Zeiss seem to have made binoculars in small numbers of non-prismatic types. But the design of prismatic binoculars by Abbe in1893 gave higher powers than the older Galilean types ("almost useless in war") and these were licensed by Bausch & Lomb, and widely sold by both firms- in the UK from The lack of these was noted in South Africa by the British Army as the Boers seemed better supplied there than they were. By 1914, they had tried to catch up, and all armies used prismatics in original form or as copies. The sheer physical expansion of buildings and employees meant construction and training, and these could not occur overnight. Zeiss always paid real interest in training, via apprenticeships but these take time. Thus they licensed others to make the new lens designs and Zeiss Anastigmats can be found made by them todaylook for Voigtlaender (Germany, to 1895), Suter ( Switzerland), Ross (UK), Fritsch v. Prokesch (Austria), Koristka (Italy and Bausch and Lomb (USA). About half of the original anastigmats were made under license up to These do not seem to have prevented Zeiss also supplying these markets as opportunity occurred, as N&G used original Zeiss lenses and Mr W.Hume advertised them. (Brit.Jnl.Alman. 1896; N&G advert. ibid, 1901, p147) The licensing may have been valuable to Zeiss in a way now forgotten- they were not really photographers, and the licensees may have made valuable inputs on mount design and the types of products wanted. These licenses were of variable life, partly as the companies designed their own competing products but also as the first World War made business relations impossible. Remember, it was fought with unique loss of life and ferocity, and left emotions which poisoned business for a generation or more. There seem after the War to be cases of English firms boycotting purchases of German lenses, and of Hollywood looking askance at the new f1.4 Biotar for this reason. There must have been problems, none very serious, in such a rapid expansion. (a) Rudolph tried to introduce a new iris calibration system, or perhaps two, which did not prove popular and was dropped. One version used an iris calibrated in mm diameter- which really needs a set of Tables for use. It may have allowed a standard mount to be supplied with various optics, as with a 'Projection Aplanat' mounted in one, where the value of the iris seems slight. (b) The trade name "Anastigmat" came to be used by others, possibly since it was an 'old' word in ordinary use and not defenceable. (c) The rate of design innovation may have puzzled customers, as f4.5 lenses were introduced as the Anasigmat, Planar, Unar and finally Tessar within a limited period. (d) The shutter making side seems to have lead to the Deckel/Compur works at Munich rather than in-house long-term manufacture. (e) And there seems to have been an attempt to found a business in London in 1909 at Bittacy Hill, for the manufacture or assembly of lenses, perhaps to come within "Imperial Preference" on sales of Empire made goods- which must have ended with the outbreak of war. (f) There seems to have been a problem, perhaps shortlived, with the French patents on some of the lenses as the 1901 Catalogue describes the Planar, Unar and Protar VII as not being for trade sale in France. But overall, it was extremely successful. While World War I must have made them busy with orders for binoculars, aerial lenses and gunsights, perhaps using the new "Erfle" eyepiece (1917) by H.Erfle ( ), peace brought the problems of the depression. In 1926, Zeiss lead the amalgamation of the camera making firms Ernemann, Contessa-Nettel and Goerz with I.C.A. to form Zeiss Ikon. This ended competition with Goerz over optical glass as the Goerz/Sendlingen plant went over to other products, and gave access to the novel Ernostar lens designs- and Carl Zeiss had a secure in-house market for lenses. Over a few years, the group, often as a result of designs by Dr Heinz Kuppenbender, introduced new cameras such as the Ikonta, Super Ikonta, Ikoflex, Movikon, and the 35mm series of Contax, Nettax, Tenax and Contaflex. Several new designers provided important new types of lens- Merte from the 1920's with the Biotar, Richter with the Topogon, and Bertele with the Sonnars are the best known, but this was a design team with unusual strength in numbers as well as ability.the commercial results were impressive, as sales flourished even in the bitter years of the recession, and by 1939, the payroll was 14,000 for Carl Zeiss + Schott and Zeiss Ikon was in addition. (By then, Zeiss had taken over the shutter making firm of A.C.Gauthier of Prontorwerk/Calmbach though this was late in the 1930's and made less impact prewar.) Inevitably, the Zeiss group was involved in supplies in World War II, and a number of items are listed, some specially designed such as night vision lenses. And Zeiss personnel seem to have had a role in the overall management of the German optical industry at war. This was a double edged situation, as commercialization of some innovations was delayed, including anti-reflexion coating and probably the Biometar lens design. Also the idea of a 35mm reflex, possibly with some of the retrofocus lens designs, had to be put on ice for the duration of the war. In fact, at the end of the war, the first troops into Jena were British, and found few Germans at work in the plant, most of the personnel working being recruited from other countries during the

3 war. The British were soon replaced by US forces, who began the rehabilitation of the plant, but the Yalta Conference made this area part of the Russian Zone. Before the Russians came, the US authorities moved some 126 leading personnel (85 from Zeiss, 41 from Schott) and some hardware to the West. This included the famous Zeiss lens collection as well as some plans, drawings and records. But the Russians blocked further removals of machinery. The Russians seem to have got the plant running in some sense, especially to make the "Contax lens" programme, probably both in the original bayonet form and in M39 versions originating in the war, and then suddenly moved the whole package to Russia. Machinery was moved out by knocking holes in the walls of the plant and more personnel were given 2 hours to pack for the journey. (This was the origin of the lens programmes for the Kiev and Fed for years.) All the remaining men at Jena could do was to fill in the holes in the walls and try to work with machinery rejected for the moves. And then the East German Communist Government nationalized the firm. This was the beginning of 45 years of difficulty and separation. In Jena, conditions were difficult, with poor access to scientific information, materials, currency and commercial decisions, with poor working conditions. Equally, "Zeiss" was made a centre for much of the innovative technology of the East, being involved later with computers and machine tools in fields far from their usual subjects. Much of this was commercially totally non-viable by Western standards but needed by a regime unable to trade freely with the West. Thus it is impressive that Jena did make quality photographic lenses over this period, and achieved world status as a supplier eg of aerial cameras and process lenses. And to many, the words "Zeiss, Jena" retained some of the old magic, even though standards were more variable and finishes less brilliant.this was especially true when the West banned the sale of goods with certain of the revered trade names and abbreviations such as "CZJ Bm" had to suffice. Business between Jena and the new Western Zeiss company did exist but was described as "very difficult", and in the West a new trade name "Opton" was developed to distinguish the products, especially when sold in the Comecon area. In contrast, the Zeiss move to the West involved a fresh start on a new site. They were offered one at Munich, probably the old Steinheil business, but chose Heidenheim where an old cigar factory was taken over, and and Oberkochen, there was an old gunsight works. This was due to a preference for small country towns and the more peaceful way of life there. They established satellite works at Aalen, Nattheim and Goettingen and there is a impression relations with Steinheil may have continued for some time. They say many friends and customers helped, even at a very difficult time. And slowly some of the old personnel caught up with the move. Some came when the Russians allowed them to leave Kiev or wherever they had worked to on-stream the plant after the move, others through the frontier from Jena till some 1,600 had come. In terms of quality of design and manufacture, Zeiss Opton set the very highest standards, which has been shown by the long term performance of the products. And novel designs were many- look at the lens programmes for Hasselblad, Arriflex, Contarex, Contax and Linhof. There are many cases where a single outfit purchased such as a Linhof with Biogon, Planar and Sonnar has by now given a lifetimes' service and still has a competitive performance today. And as in 1890, they have licensed designs abroad for use on the Contax cameras made there, though rather surprisingly they have not continued in supplying large format lenses for 5x4 and 10x8in use, even though the Zeiss-Voigtlaender large format business was active and highly regarded. By the 1970's, the Carl Zeiss Foundation employed 28,000 persons, having taken over the Voigtlaender business as a way of expanding lens production and the shutter works of Deckel/Compur at Munich. Subsequently, exchange rates made business very difficult, and contraction was needed, Voigtlaender being sold and the Compur production moved to the Prontor works at Calmbach. But this is long after the cut-off point of the Vademacum in 1960, a time when Zeiss was still actively expanding and with excellent prospects for the future. A very valuable article was by W. Woeltche the Head of the Mathematics Dept, Photo Optics Division in B.J.P. 25/01/1980 p76, and it will be referred to a number of times, as Woeltche loc. cit. It seems to have followed from a Conference for the Press at Oberkochen Two Tables of lens serial numbers and dates are at the end of the section. The more detailed seems to originate with Mr G. Gilbert "Collecting Photographica" and has been quoted by Mr J. McKeown in his Price Guide and by Mr P.-H. Pont in Chiffres Clef. The shorter was supplied to a friend by Zeiss in Both versions end rather suddenly in After the war, Jena seem to have continued with the same series, at

4 about 3 million, while Oberkochen made a fresh start (at No1,000 or some such perhaps.) Thus a lens at No1,000,000 might be about 1930 from Jena or 1950 from Oberkochen. It is usually possible to tell which from the coating, mount and feel of the item. Examples of many serial numbers are quoted in the text. Zeiss Landmark lenses are many: Anastigmat, Protar, Protar V11a, Planar, Tessar, Sonnars, Hologon, Topogon, Biogon(s) are examples, and there are many other "possibles". The firm has been so fertile in producing new designs that it is a "must" for collectors, and listing the products would be a major task, still only superficially carried out here. However this may be a useful beginning. Pre-1890 type designs Non-Anastigmats. These are exceptionally rare, and will not be anastigmats. In fact, only one item has been noted during the preparation of the text. A graphic account is in Eder's book of some of the earliest Zeiss lenses coming to him for an opinion. The set did include a triple lens. Apochromatic Triplet f6.3. This was not an anastigmat and seems to have had limited sales from 1888, or possibly even not been sold normally. The designers were E.Abbe and P.Rudolph. The design showed problems with correction of oblique rays and was abandoned. Two versions are said to have been tried: (a) symmetrical and (b) disymmetrical (Layout Zei001). They may have sold as low power macro lenses for photomicrography. Thus one list gives an apochromat microscope lens (1886) by Abbe and Rudolph. It is significant that one of these seems to have been sent to Eder as " a triple lens f6.3 for 90degrees" in 30/05/1890 for examination: he (possibly loosely?) classes all of the set sent to him as "anastigmats". The others were, slightly paraphrasing a partly unclear passage: Anastigmat f6.3/85 a lens with a 2+3 layout, which may have been a Series 11? Anastigmat f10 This was a double lens system for wide angle and process work. It was possibly a Series 1V? Anastigmat for 110 This was a lens with a 2+2 layout, and was probably a Series V(?) Thus the conclusion must be that some Triplets did escapefrom the factory and may still exist. One possibility is that as suggested above, they enjoyed sales for some specialized uses. And there is a hint in Eder's text that the lenses he saw were not quite those issued. Subsequently, it was noted that one Triplet Apochromat Patent lens 310mm No44 with flange did sell at a Christies' auction so (a) they do exist and (b) the Zeiss numbering begins at unity or very near it! Note that Dr Schroeder of Ross may have anticipated this line of development with his own triplet as well as Concentric, and one result may have been the licence to Ross of the Anastigmats developed later by Zeiss. The next non-anastigmat is probably a more prosaic item and is likely to be later. It was possible to see a "Aplanat fur Projection" f mm. This was a Zeiss lens in a brass mount with an iris calibrated in mm (28-3mm). It must be a rare lens and non-anastigmatic but may not be photographic. It was seen at Nr 1,02x, DRP 84,996. The Patent No seems later than expected and the lens may be a period item. But it is unusual as a non-anastigmat Zeiss lens and it is certainly not a normal photographic lens as the correction is really sharp in the centre but only over a 10-15cm radius, and then falls off markedly. This would be a reasonable performance for a projection lens but not really acceptable for normal camera work. It also raises questions over the serial numbering sequence then in use- perhaps the projection lens was numbered in a different series with a later start date.

5 Fig Zeiss Projection Aplanat f6.7/20cm No1024. There is also a reference to a RR by Zeiss on an 1889 Express Detective Stereo by Nadar as alternative to a Steinheil RR lens. [It is more likely that Zeiss had agreed the contract in 1889 but could not tell Nadar just what the new lens he was to get would be. So Nadar and the customer was happily surprised to actually get a Series III anastigmat or some such.] Anastigmats from Zeiss quote some basic references in their catalogue, including German. Pats. No 56,109 of 03/04/1890 to Zeiss; Brit. Pat.No 6,028 of 24/05/1890 to Rudolph, and the Brit Jnl. Photo. 1890, p443. These certainly were the start in 1889 of the Anastigmat era in a real sense. While the external curves are symmetrical, Rudolph designed them deliberately with the two halves unlike in the internal curves, to allow the correction of the overall design even though the external curves were the same. Equally they were very much in the contemporary mould in external appearance and specification so the customer could replace an f8 RR with a Series 111 f7.2 anastigmat and get an f18 Series V to replace his f16 WAR without feeling that things had changed superficially very much. There was also an f4.5 Series 1 to replace the Portrait RR and a Series 1V f12.5 to replace a MAR. Thus the Anastigmats must be viewed as a very well thought out product range to displace the RR's, and they were issued over the years Doubtless the licensees introduced products slightly differently in time, and not all the versions may have been made by all of them, though Ross and Bausch and Lomb certainly made a good range. The layouts of the different series show rather little individuality, except that some have a three glass rear component and Eder says these are in the designs of f9 or faster- though this is not actually quite in line with experience. They were listed in a price list by 1890 and a catalogue was issued in May 1891, with a supplement in It is unlikely that Zeiss made any "unnumbered" lenses as some other makers did at the start of their production runs. They were an experienced and meticulous maker and seem to have numbered and doubtless recorded every possible item. But unnumbered lenses do occur. They are probably spurious items resulting from the union of unrelated items where the missing parts were the ones with the number. One example seen was a barrel with two Series VI type cells- with no number. This was probably a Zeiss barrel (from a Protar VIIa) fitted with two cells from a Goerz/Ross Dagor type, where the cells are not engraved. Another was superficially a perfect early Series III which proved to cover only 55 angle- here two unknown anastigmat cells were probably fitted to a "too-long" barrel from another lens, which limited the angle covered. Incidentally, it is likely that these resulted from screwing odd components together where-ever they fitted rather than from fraudulent intentions but are worth noting.

6 Actually, it does not seem to be known how Zeiss numbered the earliest Anastigmat lenses- possibly starting from No100 perhaps, but certainly No1,51x has been seen and is an Anastigmat and note the Triple Apochromate which suggests they started from 1 or near it. Eder says they initially were not easy to sell in Germany, but were popular abroad in England, Russia and France. This may now determine where they can be found. Experience bears this out, with more French-made Krauss versions at auctions than German, due to their use on Jumelles. Ross also made quite a lot but they seem to figure less at auction. [The design of the anastigmat depended on using one cell to correct the other. There was opposite gradation of the refractive indices in the two cells, the positive glass in one case having a higher and in the other a lower refractive index. The front, which was used to correct spherical aberration, was made of the old glasses (a crown positive and a highly refractive flint negative): and the rear for anastigmatic correction, was made of the new glasses with a crown positive of high refraction glass and a flint negative of low refraction glass. (Eder merely says Barita flint and light crown) The separate components are not useable alone. The rear components are the strongly positive ones, the fronts being from about 2x greater focal length in the early f7.2 lenses through some 3x in the f6.3 to others where the front seems to be very long indeed, as in the f8, f9, f18 lenses. This ratio of front to back focus can be a very easy way to note redesigns, as the first and second f7.2 change from being a 2:1 ratio to being of almost zero power front type.where a fifth glass was added it was to correct higher order spherical aberrations and these were possibly the faster or older lenses. Two crowns of high refraction with a central flint of very low refraction were used. (An example of the design process is given in Kingslake's "Lens Design Fundementals", p276.] Anastigmats 1890 Series III Anastigmat Protar f7.2 Layout glasses* (Zei oo4) To cover about 75? This was made in in in 9 foci. One of the first group to be issued and today is one of the easier to find. It should be an attractive lens, really sharp and contrasty and covering a good angle,but some of the early ones do need to be stopped down a bit for critical use. In designing it, Rudolph was probably aiming to match the Aplanat which had been the traditional lens of the day, and which provided f7 to focus, but where owners would have expected to stop down to perhaps f16 for critical work, and here the Anastigmat would have shown a real benefit. A 315mm lens covered 10x8in with at least 3in of decentration possible and the image was fully usable at the extreme corner. But note* that by todays standards, there does seem to be some field curvature on an early lens of 2+3 glasses, but a later one was very much flatter field, and there seems to be a real difference here. The later seems to use a much revised design. Thus it may be wise for use to look for one with just 2 glasses in the rear component. Another point is that these early examples if small do tend to be in plain barrel mounts with disc stops and unusual stop markings which may need to be converted for use today. Three examples noted were Nos 1,51x (early type), 5,793, and 19,51x, as well as lenses by Ross from London. Thus it seems to be one of the easier ones to find.

7 Fig Set of f7.2/315mm Anastigmats by (l) Zeiss No1511; Ross No482; and Zeiss No19,515 (the two Zeiss lenses differ in external curvatures!). Series IV Anastigmat Protar f12.5 Layout (Zei 005) To cover 100. This was made in in in 10 focal lengths. It was one of the first group to be issued, with similar attractive qualities of sharpness and contrast, and with a wider angle of cover. It was probably designed to replace the portable RR's which had sold at f11 or f12 as a lighter alternative for landscape work, and this was not as important a market slot as the f7.2, which replaced the normal Aplanat or RR. Thus it has been noted in the UK as a Ross-made version at No703, but no original Zeiss lens has been seen, and it probably is relatively uncommon. At the time, it may have been judged too slow so that Zeiss replaced it with later Anastigmat lenses of f8 and f9, as being easier to sell when most work was focused on a ground glass screen. Series V Anastigmat Protar f18/f glasses (Layout Zei 006_ To cover up to 110 These were made in focal lengths of 40, 62, 86, 112,141, 182, 212, 265, 315, 360, 390mm for use at up to 110 as a normal wide angle camera lens. It was also made in 460, 632, 947 and up to 1664mm for use as a process lens, when it covered only 90.(The difference in angle covered may be due to the mount.) This became the classic wide angle. It is slow and dim to focus, but the image is crisp and contrasty, and the lens is freer from ghosting and flare than than any of the other old lenses tested- and some modern ones! This resulted in it being one of the longest lived lens designs, selling new from 1890 to about 1950, when supplied by Bausch & Lomb. Initially, it was made under license by all the licensees- or most of them!- and in some countries the maximum aperture seems to have been quietly adjusted to f16, while still under Zeiss supervision. The difference was probably not significant. It was often supplied with rotating disc stops in the smaller sizes, eg up to 182mm, as these were easier to make and more accurate, especially if a pair was used for stereo work. It was typically made in 15 sizes, and very large sizes could be made to special order. These were for process use, and initially this would have been very welcome. But they are scarce today, and it is probably that they were fairly short lived as other process lenses overtook them, even by By then, Zeiss for one were offering the Planar in "differing focus and dimensions (ie apertures?) for reproductions". Typical lenses seen today and the angles covered are as follows: Focal length Covers at f18 Covers at f32 Diameter mm cm cm mm 86 9x12 or 1/4plate 12x15 or 1/2plate 220

8 112 12x15cm or 1/2plate 13x18cm or 5x7in 280mm x18cm or 5x7in 16x21 or 1/1plate 360mm x6.5in x26 or 10x8in 24x30 or 9.5x11.75in 540 Actually, 86mm is the most useful today, and the shortest actually found often. It can be useful on 5x4in, though any of this series can be a nice find. They are small and may need careful searching through a box of lenses however. In the old days it was the famous wide angle lens and for example was used on the shallow Kodak Wide Angle camera, where a f18/86mm Protar was fitted to 1/1plate (6.5x8.5in) cameras. This underlines that it was seldom possible with ordinary cameras to use the whole image, but rather the best illuminated centre was employed. On 5x4in, the 86mm covers generously, and a 62mm could almost be used. One of these was noted with a mm iris and a focusing mount at No9779x, probably off a Kodak wide angle camera. It mounted neatly on a MPP MicroTechnical and the focusing mount acted both to focus and to give a trifle of useful extension like the cone mounts used on these cameras for w/a lenses. This could also be useful on a Linhof Technika. With time, the range of foci shrank, first with the process sizes going, though they were listed up to 37.5in in a Kodak Catalogue for Normally, it was in. It is likely that the moderate cost of this small lens kept it on sale in a few sizes. It was seldom in price lists, but in 1914, Ross was selling their type at f16/3.25in for 3.2 when a 3in WAR was 3.00 and a 6in f4.5 Tessar in a Compound was 6.75 or a 6in/f4.5 Ross Homocentric in a was 8.9 which makes it seem very good value if you actually had the 3,2 to spare, which was then an appreciable sum. Thus a proportion are found on cameras where they do not seem to have been used as wide angles, but rather as normal angle lenses for their pure quality, as when a 13x18cm camera noted at auction was fitted with an f18/212mm Protar No27,80x. References: DRPatent 56,109/1890; some have DRPatent 84,983 on the mount also. also DRP 193,439, and Brit Pat. 6028/1890. British Jnl. Photog. 1890, 443. Zeiss Price List 1890, Catalogue 1890, p443. DRP 84,996 This covered a compact focusing mount and iris diaphragm. Fig Zeiss Anastigmat Ser V f18/212mm, ie before the use of the T.N. Protar.

9 Fig Zeiss Protar Anastigmat f18/86mm No97,795 (Note Protar name in use, cf. Fig002/038 above). Anastigmats 1891 Series 1 Anastigmat Protar f mm (9 f.l.) (Layout Zei 002) 2+3 A portrait lens. No angle of coverage has been noted but it was probably appreciably narrower than for the other original anstigmats. (Layout Zei002). It seems to be relatively uncommon, and may have found it hard to displace Portrait RR's in sales due to a higher cost and the lack of a need for the same overall sharpness in this market. It also was replaced by other lenses such as the Planar, Unar and Tessar, so it was probably only sold for a few years, possibly It certainly had gone by 1901 and the catalogue notes it was replaced by other and better lenses. (This comment also applied then to the Series II, III,and IV anastigmats.) Series 11 Anastigmat Protar f mm (12 f.l.) (Layout Zei 003) 2+3 To cover Like the others, this is a fine lens but the angle covered is noticeably less than some. A 170mm lens might just cover 1/1 plate but certainly not 10x8. In comparison a Series V would cover in emergency and a 180mm Dagor might. But the suggested 150mm for 1/4plate is very conservative and would give excellent results and allow for some movement. (In fact, a 170mm lens covered most of a 10x8in, equivalent to 90, but a very small stop would be required at the corners. It would be good on 5x7in). The example seen was an original Zeiss lens and it was noted that it was not marked with a Series number indicating that these lenses do need to be recognised by the apertures. It was seen at Zeiss No 21,73x. It also was displaced by other lenses, probably mainly by the Doppel Protars VIa and VIIa, though the Series IIa was the logical replacement. This seems to be the least illustrated of the series, and may have been a compromise too near other makers anastigmat lenses in speed for success. (Layout Zei003) This seems to have been the favourite Zeiss lens and they backed it in comparison with the Dagor in a trial reported in the Photographic News 15/09/1893, p586. It was carried out by Dr Miethe, Dr Neuhauss, and Dr Stolze and the angles they considered sharply covered were : Stop Dagor Anastigmat II Goerz Ser111 Protar Zeiss f f f22 above This showed the Goerz Dagor Double Anastigmat won, but the Zeiss Protar anastigmat was certainly a fine lens since these distinguished workers probably set really high standards of sharpness. At least one of these Series II lenses seems to have been used in early movie photography as a f6.3/85mm is in Mr Ariel's list as on a 1896 Darras.

10 Note During 1891 Rudolph designed a single landscape lens using a combination of 3 glasses. At f14.5 this was anastigmatically corrected, flat field and free from spherical aberrations. It was not sold until the launch of the Satz Anastigmat V1, an f7.7 which was made up of a pair of f14.5 components, essentially like the Dagor. The centre glass had a refraction between those of the outers, and "had one converging and one diverging surface". [Goerz secured a prior patent in 1892 and it became their Dagor.] It is possible that Abbe and Rudolph were keen to keep the anastigmat as simple optically as the predecessors (ie 2+2 glasses as in the RR) and were trying to avoid the use of more complex 6-glass designs. Series IIIa Anastigmat Protar f glasses (Layout Zei 007) To cover 97 This was made in: 75, 95, 120, 150, 172, 196, 230, 272, 317, 407, 505, 600, 690, 820mm where the first 4 were normally suplied with rotating stops as better adapted especially for matching exposure with a stereo pair. Later the range shrank to mm in The series IIIa was suggested for stereo and hand cameras, and had the typical advantages of giving crisp and contrasty pictures and in addition was relarively small and light. It also could be sold as a useful wide angle lens, although this does not seem to have been stressed as much as with the Series V. But it is made use of in suggesting a 95mm lens for 6x9cm or a 120mm for 9x12cm. Today, it may seem rather near the Series II and IIa in aperture, but Zeiss seem to have sold them in parallel for a period before deleting the Series IIa. Thus Series IIIa was one of the last of the unsymmetrical Protars to be in production. One reason may be price. It was probably inherently cheaper to make a 4 glass Series IIIa than a 5 glass Series IIa and in addition the customer could choose a shorter focal length and reduce the cost still more. Thus for 1/4plate, a Series IIa in 136mm with 5 glasses cost 95 Marks while a Series IIIa option would be 120mm at 65 Marks or a 150mm at 75 Marks. Incidentally, it was sold as "Reg'd No 41,715/1899" which may be a patent or register design. An example was on a "Block Notes" body No141x VP size as f9/175mm No62,25x. It seems to be one of the least easy to find today. No example has been seen so far although it has been noted on Stereo cameras. It was fitted by Ernemann, Boulade, Huttig, and Palmos but in 1901, the f8 seems to have been the preferred item. Typical sizes useful today might be: Focus Film size Film size Diameter of Image with stopped down mm at f9 at f12.5 the lens stoppped down (mm) 95mm 8x8cm 8x10cm mm 8x10cm 9x12cm 240mm 150mm 9x12cm 12x15cm 300mm Anastigmat 1893 Series IIa Anastigmat Protar f glasses (Layout Zei 008) To cover 75 or 80 This was made in focal lengths of 90, 110, 136, 167, 205, 244, 295, 350, 433mm. This was one of the last of the Anastigmats to be introduced, and the 3-glass rear component was used to allow improved spherical correction with a critically flat field. In fact, it has the typical advantages of sharpness and contrast with a really good angle covered. Customers would have compared this anastigmat with an RR, and found real advantages in a lens of similar size and without too great an increase in cost compared with either an RR or a Series V. But it must have always lived in the shadow of Symmetrical Anastigmats such as the Series VI and similar lenses, where the main reason that the Series IIa sold was probably that it was about half the price. Today it does not seem to be easy to find, but does occur. Curiously, both those seen were 110mm, and this may be due to its use on several Stereo cameras, where the moderate size, cost and weight resulted in their use. One very attractive version noted was in an aluminium mount with a copper or bronze iris ring at No34,14x, and a stereo camera by Billieni of Nancy is shown with lenses like these by FBB as Fig E'. This option of an alloy mount was offered by Zeiss in 1901 for most if not all lenses, but no other example has been seen of this type. Later alloy was used more freely for lens cells. The focal length used can be seen from this Table, derived from the Zeiss one. Focus Film size Film size Image mm overed at covered at diameter f8.0 f12.5 mm

11 110 6x8cm 9x x12 12x x15 13x Note on Collecting From the collecting point of view, one problem is that these lenses are marked 'Anastigmat' and later as Protar but do not have a 'series number'. Thus they do need to be individually recognized by their aperture. This may be less easy than it seems at first sight. For one thing, there is a problem of confusion by the customer today which may well have existed originally. (It is only too easy here to forget which types are needed and which are already owned! ) Also they are often physically small and easy to overlook in a collection of lenses. Originally they set a new standard of performance but rapidly faced stiff competition from the Goerz Dagor, which was an f7.7 lens covering some 80 at the time. (While several specifications of Dagor existed, they were nothing like as wide a range as the Anastigmat). And Rudolph quickly found new and better designs. As a result the range of anastigmats contracted fairly quickly and by 1901 only 11a, 111a and V were listed though 1 was still available to special order in a was deleted by 1910, leaving 111a (noted in 1911 on the Blocknotes) and especially V as the longest to survive. Thus they will seem quite old items today. This means that collecting a set is quite a challenge today. It is a great help that they were made under licence. But not all may have been made by all the licencees, and certainly their focal length choices varied. Series V was offered in an f16 version by the licensees with Zeiss cooperation during the license period since the adverts. do refer to it as Zeiss, and this may have been a cosmetic change for countries used to that aperture system. And Series V continued up into the 1950's, though no longer with signs of Zeiss participation in the case of Ross. Bausch and Lomb used the Zeiss Trade names and may have continued as licensees. Quite a high proportion of the early lenses will be from licensees. Remember that in 1901, 100,000 lenses had been made, about 44,000 being the current Zeiss number. By then, Zeiss would be making an increasing proportion, so that the first few would be above 56% from licensees, although this is apparently the overall percentage. In use, these are still really desireable, the simple structures making for high contrast and freedom from flare and at small apertures they are fully sharp. There may have been support from camera makers, as their designs may have been built round lenses of a traditional weight, size and price, so that a radically new product could have caused real problems for them. On the other hand, Dr Kingslake says that the anastigmat was regarded as "not as good as hoped" and that "in spite of several redesigns" the series was replaced. There must be small print here, though redesigns are not mentioned in the 1901 Zeiss catalogue. One aspect may be the later lenses with "a" suffix. But it seems a different example may be the Series 111 f mm lens. Mr Burford of Collectors Cameras allowed us to examine an early example before sale and Zeiss No1,51x to DRP56,109 proved to differ in surface curves from a later example of the same specification, Zeiss No19,51x which was also to DRP56,109 but additionally marked DRP 84,996. The reflexions in the rear component also differed as did the ratio of the foci of the components as mentioned above. The later lens seemed to be a 2 glass cell while the early one seemed to be 3 glass. An early Ross version Ross No48x seemed identical to the early Zeiss lens and for most collectors, the licensees lenses are accepted as valid versions of the originals, although the "real Zeiss" probably fetches a premium. In 1926, Frerk mentions that two Protars were still available new in 1926, the Series V f18 and probably the Series 111a at f9. He stresses the amount of movement available with the f9 and says it is not really replaced by any other lens, and confirms the value of the Series V for wide-angle work. They were then 2+2 designs. The Series 111a was suggested in 20cm for 13x18cm but was said to cover a 30cm dia. at small stops, or 90. Incidentally the serial number No115x was early, but Zeiss probably did begin at 1 or near it from consideration of the No44 on the Triplet Apochromat above. The Trade Name Anastigmat was widely adopted by non-licensed makers even though Zeiss in 1901 noted that it had previously been "seldom used". The lenses so labelled were not by Zeiss, used different designs and in some cases could claim little comparison with the real thing. Since it was a pre-existing word, it would be non-registrable as a Trade Name, and Zeiss had to adopt a new one, "Protar", in 1900 and successfully defended this. Few original Zeiss anastigmats seem to actually carry this T.N. as a result of the date, which was after some had ceased production, but Protar is still a correct way to refer to them. Protar was used on the early symmetrical anastigmats as well which can now cause some confusion, but all the later types such as Planar, Unar and Tessar were given registered unique names.

12 Fig 33 Anastigmat Lenses by Zeiss and Zeiss-Ross. Exposure: Q9 type lens of unknown make 6in overall, with 10.5in rear cell. Back Row 433mm f8.0 Zeiss; 272mm f8.0 W/A Zeiss ; 315mm f7.2 Zeiss; 315mm f7.2 Zeiss + caps and Wh stops, No151x; 315mm f7.2 Zeiss-Ross. Middle Row 140mm f18 Zeiss + box; 120mm f9 Zeiss-Ross; 120mm f8.0 Zeiss-Ross 110mm f8.0 Zeiss in alloy; 98mm f12 Zeiss-Ross; 141mm f16 Zeiss-Ross; 170mm f6.3 Zeiss. Front Row 112mm f18 Zeiss with disc stops; 212mm f18 Zeiss with mm iris scale; 112mm f18 Zeiss with no iris,ex-mod; 110mm f18 Zeiss mm iris scale; 85mm f18 Zeiss, mm iris; 141mm f18 Zeiss Ross with disc iris; 112mm f16 Zeiss-Ross; 86mm f16 Ross (No22948x). In a different field, Rudolph and Abbe studied the design of anamorphic lenses in 1897 using cylindrical lenses. Symmetrical Anastigmats Although the external curves of the above lenses look symmetrical, the layout shows they are in fact something like an old+new achromat combined and the inner curves are not symmetrical. In contrast, the Goerz Dagor was strictly symmetrical with identical glasses and curves in both components and a very fine lens. Zeiss offered symmetrical anastigmats early on and made several series. (Rudolph/Zeiss Brit Pat 4,692/1893, on the OrthoProtar). In fact, they seem to have made versions of all the main types of Symmetrical Anastigmats, normally associated with the Dagor of Goerz (as Series V1), Kollinear of Voigtlaender (1909 TypeV11) and Holos of Watson (as the Ortho Protar). This may suggest cross licensing or that Zeiss's patenting of the Anastigmat gave them some rights to all types- which is possible. However Zeiss seems to have decided that the Zeiss Series V11 Protar was the best: and that quite different types were the way ahead as in fact was the case. One suggestion is that Rudolph followed up the design of the Anastigmat with the design of a 3-glass meniscus anastigmat working at f14.5 and that these were used in pairs to produce the Series V1 in This would explain why when von Hoegh approached Zeiss with the idea of the Dagor, Zeiss were able to say they were not interested, since in fact they already had designed the half lens; and why they were able to Patent it in the UK. (Brit.Pat 4,692/1893). But the real priority seems to have been to v.hoegh and Goerz for the use of a symmetrical pair. [Note According to Eder, the first application for a job by v. Hoegh lead to an offer of employment, but this was cancelled after Bamberg, his former superviser, said he was not suitable as being weak in mathematics. He did contact Zeiss again, fruitlessly, and then, when he still had only sketches of his ideas, he called on Goerz, and promised to do the calculation of the real lens in a few weeks. The first Goerz Doppel Anastigmat was ready in Nov 1892, and the patent application was 20/12/1892, granted 05/05/1893. This casts a rather different light on his refusal by Zeiss, which is often described as rather blunter than it actually was.] Two lenses which must be mentioned are the IV and VI and the OrthoProtar but both are still shrouded in some mystery and these notes are very preliminary. One reason may be that they were not sold in the UK. Convertible Protar Series 1V (sic) This was introduced in 1908, at f12.5 for 60 coverage for the single cells. Pairs were at f6.3 or f7.0. It used new Jena glass, and may be one of the reports of the Ortho Protar- or Amatar. It is not an 'original anastigmat' as it is separable, but may be a replacement or printers error for Series V1. (It seems to be in the 1903 Encyclopedia Brit.) Conrady quotes Von Rohr as using G1= , G2= , G3= external glass). A Protar IV was noted at auction at No101,37x on a Universal Palmos No802x for 18x13cm. The front cell was 350mm, ie. about an 8in lens unit. Satz Anastigmat Series V1 (Sold from 1893) f12.5 or f mm (Layout Zei009) One catalogue calls the Zeiss lens "Double Protar V1 (Single and double) in mm single at f12.5, mm, double,at f6.3, f7.0.the slower version will be for unlike cells to get 3 foci. Satz anastigmat series V1a f mm.. V1 was a single component and V1a was a double component lens. Note that Zeiss in the UK were selling mixed sets with different foci cells, and single components freely while Goerz tended only to sell pairs of identical components in Dagors. Lummer says "sales from 1891" and that it was replaced by the 4+4 Protar V11a. It may be that Goerz agreed to short term production or that an error in Patent cover existed (it did in France) and was rectified.

13 This was rather a short lived product and essentially a Goerz Dagor type Q9 lens, so there would have been a patent overlap. Lummer in c.1897 discussesseries VIA as a current product, but it is not in the 1901 catalogue however. Ross versions of Q9 type are common, but are marked 'Goerz', so they probably licensed direct from Goerz, which may have been uncomfortable as they also made Zeiss lenses. It may be best called 'Double Protar Series VI': Lummer fairly says 'Convertible Anastigmat Series VIa' and refers to the single meniscus as derivable from the Series VII by simplification. [Lummer gives the date of design of the Series VII as (Brit. Pat 19,509,1894; Brit. Jnl. Photog. 1894, p829; Eder Jahrbuch der Photographie 1895, p283.) and says the middle two glasses in a VII can be replaced by a single glass. (This at first produces a Orthoprotar/Holos type.) Or the order of the + and - glasses can be reversed, (to produce the Series VI/Dagor type). This reads rather as if Lummer was making a synopsis of the Patent and Dr von Rohr's account of it. Significantly, he says the "achromatic single objective" with flat field, spherical and anastigmatic correction and of this type was constructed by Zeiss even before the single objective, at the end of 1891 as Anastigmat-Satzlinse, Series VI. And quotes Brit. Pat. 4692/1893 as validly covering the type. In comparison von Hoegh's Patent was No23,378/1892, D.R.P. 74,437; see Brit. Jnl.Photo. 1893, p485; or Photographische Mitteilungen Berlin, One conclusion is that just as Voigtlaender could persuade Steinheil to share the Orthostigmat patent since they could demonstrate it was well known to them when the patent was granted to Steinheil, Zeiss could have made problems over the granting of the Goerz Series III patent and agreed to forego this if they had some use of the design. Note that Lummer's account explains how they could arrive at both the OrthoProtar and Series VI in one intellectual move as it were. Possibly the agreement was for Zeiss to market the Series VIa until the Protar VIIa was available for sale. Lummer goes on to discuss the double anastigmat Series VIa with two cells. (Zei009) and says that there is no problem in using different foci in the cells as they are each fully corrected. Thus 2 or 3 different cells can be sold as a Satz Anastigmat for 3 or 5 foci. But a lot of this is guess work!] The dating of this product is complicated since Zeiss returned to the layout later in a 1908 series called the Amatar. And the Series V1 seems to have been re-listed after the issue of the Tessar f3.5, probably near to the Amatar (below) but was not so named. The only possible example seen had no identifying engraving, merely "Carl Zeiss Jena D.R.P." and an iris engraved in mm from 23-3mm, corresponding to f7.7/177mm. Zeiss Amatar F in.(1908) (Designers Rudolph and Wandersleb,1906 D.R.Pat. 196,734), Layout Zei 010 This was designed to cover 85. Dagor Q9 layout was used here again in the 1910 period in the Amatar but only symmetrical pairs were used. It was an excellent lens but is not very common and is normally found on small (6x9cm) plate cameras though ones seen were a 150mm at No124,75x and a 165mm f6.8 at Nr198,01x (c.1912). However it was listed in focal lengths in in UK, with the suggestion "use 6in for 5x4, but 3.25in will cover at small stops". The 165mm above illuminated 10x8 when focused at 15ft but corner sharpness was limited and the image here hard to focus as if suffering from astigmatism. In fact the image matched a 168mm Dagor quite well, with a suggestion that the Amatar was slightly the sharper in the centre at f6.8 but may have fallen off rather more towards the edge. However the front curves do seem to differ and be slightly flatter in the Amatar. Later use of two 150mm lenses seemed to show similarities rather than differences. A 10in version has been noted as for sale secondhand in a B&J list. The use of single components was recommended, eg 6in gives 2x 10in cells. (Layout Zei010). For what it is worth, the drawing suggests that Amatar was a rather slimmer design than Dagor but this may be the result of artistic license. It may have been covered by Brit Pat. 26,317/1910 for a Q9 with improved astigmatism correction due to the use of new glass types. The example seen at No198,01x was in Compound shutter- and rather high priced in 1998 as these lenses always seem to be! It is a scarce and sought-after lens today! The fitting of the cells to the shutter was an unusual size and may be one reserved for the product so the shutter is an important part of the item to evaluate on purchase. Frerk remembered it in 1926, though it was not made then, and quotes 21cm for 13x18cm. Here the individual cells are 36cm.

14 Fig Zeiss Amatar f6.8/165mm No198,010 in dialset Compur (defective). Zeiss 'Amatar' f4.5 Series 1X This is a mystery, offered in Houghton's list in 1914 for the Ensign Box Reflex, as a 6in for 1/4plate. (BJA, 1914, p339). It just may be a misprint eg. for a Triotar, although only the f6.3 seems to be officially available by then. Protar Apochromat This was noted as an f6.3/142mm lens at No73,32x in brass, and may be an early process version to be replaced by the ApoTessar and ApoPlanar. Ortho Protar-This is also a rather obscure lens, possibly as it was not sold in the UK. It was forseen in the original patent (Brit Pat 4,692/1893). It was probably f8.0 max.the layout was to be used later in the Conrady-Watson Holos, and then in the Angulon by Tronnier (c.1930). Possibly it was the second Series V1/V1a above. Conrady quotes Gleichen as giving the glasses for OrthoProtar as G1= , G2= , G3= (external when paired). It was dated as a 1910 item, and the confusion may be due to two types being concealed in one number. A double Protar was offered from Rudolph described a (last?) one in 1910, at f8.0. The use of an "Ortho Protar" layout seems to have been shortlived. Probably all the 3+3 symmetrical anastigmat types were somewhat neglected by Zeiss due to the success of the next lenses, but the simpler types must have been cheaper to make and led to pressure from management to try to seek a version which was up to the Zeiss standards of correction. This might be especially true as the complicated patent position ended. In contrast, a competitor (T.R.Dallmeyer) described the Series V11a below as the best corrected lens issued up to 1900, which was more the type of product that Zeiss would have wished to make. And there could be no question of the patent cover of the Sries VIIa. Series VII/VIIa Anastigmat Protar Series (Double Protar) (1894) f6.3 To cover (Rudolph/Zeiss Brit. Pat. No 19,509/1894) (Layout Zei011, 012) (a) Single Protar Series VII was made in: 100,135, 170, 183, 224, 285, 350, 412, 480, 590, 690, 782, 862, 1000mm. The 3 smallest lenses were at f11, and covered 75, all the others were at f12.5 and covered 85. They were a meniscus of 4 cemented glasses, mounted concave towards the subject. It was suggested to use 170mm for 9x12, though 135 or even 100mm would cover if needed. These have maximum diameters of image of 260, 210, and 150mm respectively. The limitation suggested is probably due to the need to avoid distortion as they suggest 285mm for use on 5.1x7in for use in architecture with results free from noticeable distortion. Single Protar VII cells do show some shift of focus as they are stopped down, and care is needed:

15 but it is not as severe as some makes. Single components should be mounted at the rear of the barrel for the field to be flat and if original will have a neat screw-in ring at the front of the barrel to protect the unused threads which would normally have held the other component. Check on purchase that these are genuinely original as too often a 'single Protar' is just a case where one component has been lost, stolen or strayed. Conrady quotes suitable glasses as having Nd in G1= , G2= , G3= , G4= (external glass in a pair). Coverages in 1929 were given as: 7in 18cm 6.5x4.75in plate 11.5in 29cm 8.5x6.5in 14in 35cm 10x8in A Protar was dismantled by soaking in Xylene for about 14 days, and this showed two points. One that the front (outer) glass was well oversize at 37mm dia compared with 34mm for the other glasses. The other was that the inner has a chamfer ground on it but otherwise the 34mm diameters form a true cylinder without a waist as on other makes. (b) Double Protar Series VIIa was chosen from the above as pairs, or more cells with a common thread and barrel. These seem to be coverages for symmetrical Protar VIIa pairs at f given in 1929: 4in 7 + 7in cells 3.5x2.5in plate 5in in 4.25x3.25in 6.75in in 6.5x4.75in 9.5in in 8.5x6.75in Series V11a f6.3,etc mm (27 f.l.) normal form. (Layout Zei011) Use 13in. for 10x8in. (c) Protar Sets Set Ao: for 1/4plate, 7.5,9.1,9.8in components (for 4.7in and up) Set A: for 7x5, 9.8,11.8,13.8in components (for 6.2in and up) Set B: for 9x7 19.7,16.9,13.8,11.8in components(for 7.3in and up) Some sets had a Series V anastigmat as an extra for extreme wide angle work. Colour filters could also be added. For preference, lenses of roughly equal size were used for convenience in mounting, an example being a Protar set C with cells of 224, 285, 350mm which combined gave 143, 156, 179mm double Protars. A common choice for a simple 'double' was just mm giving 143mm. Zeiss offered at least 30 double Protars by combining singles but two which are very common are the one above, used for 1/4plate and 5x7in. Another was the set D used for 1/1plate. It used cells of 285, 350, 412, 480mm and combined these gave 179, 192, 216, 232, 254mm and a good choice of foci for a 1/1plate or 10x8in camera. Normally Protar VIIa covered 80 but the 3 smallest and the 3 largest sizes covered only 70. The maximum aperture was f6.3 when two like cells were in use, but fell to f7.0 or f7.7 when unlike cells were used. Thus some were mounted in shutters or mounts with sets if stop scales; or iris scales calibrated in mm and a Table to read off the speeds. These pairs were free from distortion, and also free from focus shift as they were stopped down. The Series V11 is made of 4-glasses, and was effectively an original anastigmat (eg. Series 1V) compressed into a single cemented component and still fully corrected-( which a single component of a Dagor is not.) But Zeiss admitted to a trifle of distortion with the single Protar- the double is free of this. (The external curves of the "original" are the same inside and out so that it is feasible to actually reverse one pair and cement them to the others.) Thus Zeiss sold both single components, Series V11, and Double Protars Series V11a which had a pair with two components. And they were free to sell pairs in which the components were different (as in Zei012) so that the user got 3 foci from one pair as A+B, A,or B. This is the classic Protar and is implied if no further detail is given. It continued as a minority product into the late 1930's at least on the Zeiss Ikon Juwel plate camera, their most costly product. And it is still very good to use today. (Thus R.C.Taylor in B.J.A. 03/03/1978 says the sharpness compares well with a modern convertible Symmar though the contrast is lower.) An early one seems to be No24,35x + 24,77x in a brass barrel. Note the cells were individually numbered and the numbers will be near but not necessarily in sequence in original lenses. Depending on the pairing of the cells, it could be f6.3, f7.0 or f7.7 maximum aperture. It was suggested to

16 chose 20.5cm for 13x18cm plates, with two 35cm cells. Unlike pairs are needed for 3-focus and these are slower in aperture. Double Protars were made by most of the Licensees eg. Ross and B+L. They were and should still be a highly valued item. Protars were made at least to 1940, at least by the ex-licencees. Rather often, they seem to be found with two identical cells such as No406,19x where two successive serial numbers are allotted to the pair of 22cm cells in a dialset Compur- but this is certainly not universal. An early brass example seen has the iris marked in "mm" rather than f-stops. Later sets at about Nr 27822x and 24844x are 35cm+29cm to give a 7.5in approx pair for 5x7, and 29cm+22cm to give a 5.75in approx. pair for 9x12cm. The range of versions may have been contracting by then (1920's) and these gave 3 well chosen foci. In the UK N&G were active agents, many of their cameras having a 3 focus pair, such as 224/284mm and they had a specialist mounting with the front cell screwed into a bayonet adapter to the front of their own shutter so it could be easily removed and replaced: this was a standard, and it is now possible to build up a set of cells to interchange. Prices today are often surprisingly modest for many Protar VII's as they are little understood today, but in fact they are excellent lenses, sharp, contrasty and free from distortion. They give good covering power, though this is rather less than the Dagor. Fig Zeiss Protar VIIa set for 10x8in, with 48cm 172,09x + 407,947, and 41cm 410,925.

17 Fig Zeiss Protar Series VII 224mm and 285mm cells in bayonets for Newman-Sinclair shutter. Fig Zeiss Protar VIIa 35+29cm for 19.0cm Nos278,222+2,781,10x set refitted to Compur 2 shutter. When purchasing the Series VIIA double Protar it is worth noting that it does lose out to Dagor slightly on covering power, and slightly on contrast. But they should be extremely sharp, eg with Protar VII closed down as far as f64 though there was a slight loss of sharpness at f128. And there can be a hint of change of focus on stopping down, the sharpest point moving slightly nearer the camera though the sharp zone seems to remain equally distributed beyond and in front of the point focused. (This was studied with a 24.5in Ross-Zeiss Protar VII and could well be masked with a smaller lens. But it is something Mr A. Adams comments on.) And

18 it must have been a problem centering the 4 glasses to the accuracy required. Some problems with failure of the balsaming have been encountered in these lenses, though perhaps these are few in view of their complex design but this is certainly something to look for on purchasing. [Certainly there are fewer problems with them than with some other 4+4 designs, where practically every sample seen has balsam flaws.] Another question from experience has been old lens cells remounted in more modern shutters. Unless very well done this can lead to problems with alignment of the axes and it would be wise to buy only on approval here. But this can apply to other lenses as well. At least one of these Protar VIIa sets was noted in a very elaborately engraved full brass shutter made by Zeiss using a 9+14in pair, each of which was marked 'Zeiss patent' so they just may be Ross cells in a Zeiss shutter. But it was certainly a case where a much higher price would be obtained. A surprising note in Photography 15/6/1909 says the 4-glass Series V11 was to be replaced by a 3-glass OrthoProtar type Protar at f12.5,single and f6.3 double, and as sets. It seems either to have been a misunderstanding or there was a change of plan. The optical layout was shown which makes confusion less likely, and possibly the intention was to use it for some applications only. (Layout Zei013, Zei014). The cause was probably a search for a lower cost product. (d) Protar Telepositive f3.0 use: This was an exotic fast f3.0 (or possibly also f4.0) version of the single Protar, for use as a tele positive component, and it was corrected over a narrow angle only. It was not listed as an actual Protar in the 1901 catalogue, although the layout is the same. It was made about 1900 as 135, 225, and 375mm for use with Telephotographic tube mounts III, IV, V respectively. 135mm for: T/T mount III 27?, 45, 58mm focus (3.0x or 2.3x manification resp.) 225mm for T/T mount IV 75, 100mm focus (3.0x or 2.3x magnification respectively). 375mm for T/T mount V 125mm focus (no data) Thus a 135 would go up to 405mm and a 225 to 675mm with the more powerful. Here the telenegative should be mounted with the engraved side away from the positive lens. (It would be away from it with a Doppel Anastigmat.) These are shown in the 1901 Catalogue and also see Marriage's book. The Layout is Zei015;Zei016, where the latter shows the components but without the spacing). It was noted at auction in a TeleTubus III below as a f3/135mm positive No88,88x teamed with a -58mm negative, ie about 310mm overall. The Telepositive could also be used as a rapid studio lens for small pictures, where the covering power was sufficient for portrait heads. Thus a 225mm covered CdeV and a 375mm covered Cabinet- this suggest a fairly narrow angle. [It may have given other designers ideas since there were several later lenses with some resemblance to the Protar VII design but with greater aperture.] Other Anastigmats Rudolph seems to have then looked for other anastigmat designs, probably with a view to simpler ones as the Protar VII must have been inherently costly to make. It was also inherently slow, in a world where lenses were becoming faster. The Zeiss Anastigmat f4.5 Series I does not seem to have sold well and in England, Dallmeyer was selling an f3.5 Stigmatic from 1895 and this would have begun to sell in the portrait lens market. Thus a Zeiss of that speed would be welcome. Planar Anastigmat Series 1a f3.6-f5.0 (Layout Zei 017, also Zei 018?) To cover References: D.R.P. 92,313 of 14/11/1896. On sale in Sweden from Nov The Planar was made in 18 or 19 foci from mm and the apertures varied with the focus as follows: f4.5 20, 35, 40,50, 75, 100mm; also 370, 423mm f3.6 40, 60, 83, 110mm. f , 160mm. f mm. f , 610mm. The exact foci vary in the lists seen in different adverts.and 40 and 610mm seem to be the unusual ones. But there seems a gap above from 160 to 370mm which may not be correct. These might indicate a maximum size of weight and or glass blank. In the layout above, note that the lenses seen correspond to Zei 017 with a concave surface to the inside of the outer glasses, not to Zei 018 with flat inner surfaces, though this could be a revised design. Planar was sold from August 1897, and used a 6 glass/4 component Gauss layout, the inner or outer

19 component being divided into two glasses of nearly equal refractive index but different dispersion- in practice it was always the inner which was divided. The drawing shows G1, G2, G5, G6 as crowns, G3, G4 as flints (Woeltche, loc cit.). The result was an objective with a critically flat field, good spherical corrections, and excellent colour correction. It is slightly soft at full aperture, due to coma, but this is attractive for portraits and clears up on stopping down, when it is really sharp and the contrast also increases. Although Planar is not very far from symmetrical, it is not truly symmetrical and as a result the individual cells are not really useable separately, although this is said to be just possible when stopped right down. This meant it sold for action pictures, (eg on the Sigriste focal plane camera), movie work in the sizes up to about 75mm, studio portraits at f4.5-f6.0, and groups, where it would be closed to about f8-f12.5, as well as copying and process work. It was expensive, at nearly twice the price of a Series IIa Protar, and the amount of glass makes it heavy in larger sizes. The angle covered is not restrictive, but seems limited after the Protar series. And for the first time, Zeiss were making a lens with 8 air-glass surfaces rather than 2 or 4, and there is the increased flare that can go with the increase. There was a tendency to ghosting near the image plane, though this was not noted in use and may not be serious. And the overall contrast is less good, so that the Zeiss catalogue suggests the use of a developer restrainer as possibly useful. This meant that the "old" Planar slipped from the lists about 1914, and apparently later was sold only in small sizes as a microscope lens. It was overtaken first by the Unar and then by the Tessar, lower cost designs of similar aperture, and even in 1901, Zeiss was suggesting Unar or Protar IIa to VIIa for interiors or landscapes and keeping Planar as a special item for portraits, movies or where process quality was needed. In the longer term, it proved to be a major basis for optical design, and its history is well described by Woeltche (Proc. Opt. Soc. Amer. 1980, S.P.I.E. Vol 237, 31/05/1980). All these were engraved "Planar" (a trade name for the first time?) so there should be no problem in identification, but also note the engraving "Series 1a", as it replaced the old Series I. Some data are: Focus Plate size Plate size Image Diameter mm at full aperture stopped down at small stops 100/f4.0 6x6cm 8.5x8.5cm (3.3x3.3in) 12.7cm 110/f3.6 6x9m 9x10cm 15.4cm 160 9x12cm (1/4plate) 12x17cm (1/2plate) 22cm x21cm (1/1plate) 21x26cm 10x8in 36cm As indicated above, ghosting was not a problem in use, but a deep shade would be wise. As it was closed down, sharpness became very good, and contrast improved markedly, so that negatives printed easily. Possibly the most useful sizes are (from experience) 160mm, which suited 5x4in nicely, and 300mm for 10x8in, as the suggested 423mm size must be heavy and seems even harder to find. Planar is a valuable item, and not an easy lens to find.

20 Fig Zeiss Two early types: Planar f3.8/160mm No68,88x and Unar f4.7/145mm No66,55x. Fig Zeiss Planar f4.5/5cm No117,722 refitted to rimset Compur. Apo Planar f6.3. This seems to have a reduced aperture of f10 in longer sizes, eg. 800mm. This lens was listed in the general catalogue for 1901, and its existence was indicated with a warning of extra cost. But the term APO was not used then- it was merely 'reduced secondary spectrum.' It was noted in 1903 for groups and general work, also for 3-colour and astro photography. It can be confused with Series 1a, in focal lengths but seems slower and was a distinct product. Woeltche quotes these as having a secondary spectrum of less than 0.5% of the focal length, using KzF 2 Schott glass for the inner divergent glasses.