Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Photography General Interest

Photography General Interest Neat Photo stuff NOT particularly about Rangefinders.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Fastest Deckel DKL Lens? f/1.9 OR f/1.8? :confused:
Old 11-03-2018   #1
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Question Fastest Deckel DKL Lens? f/1.9 OR f/1.8? :confused:

Fastest Deckel DKL Lens? —— f/1.9 OR f/1.8?

I'm wondering... I cannot find any information on a DKL or Deckel lens faster than f/1.9, viz. the fastest that I am aware of are:

Steinheil Quinon 1.9/50
Rodenstock Retina-Heligon 1.9/50
Schneider Retina-Xenon 1.9/50

Nevertheless, there are several adapters available having a fastest aperture f/1.8.


E.g.:



Can someone enlighten me, please?
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2018   #2
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
If the adapters came from the same maker, despite the different logo or label, then
maybe it was an engraving mistake ?
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2018   #3
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by xayraa33 View Post
If the adapters came from the same maker, despite the different logo or label, then
maybe it was an engraving mistake ?
Hm... Meanwhile I've seen other DKL adaptors having an f/2 as their fastest aperture. But actually I've found only few with the correct number f/1.9.
Weird. Very weird.
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2018   #4
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
Hm... Meanwhile I've seen other DKL adaptors having an f/2 as their fastest aperture. But actually I've found only few with the correct number f/1.9.
Weird. Very weird.
With the outside f numbers on the adapter you showed is for a leaf shuttered SLR, some of the fastest 50 mil lenses were f2 or f1.9 for those cameras using the DKL mount ( Futura had faster 50s but the camera was not an SLR or using a DKL mount) but I suppose an f1.8 lens could exist, but I am going by the most probable explanation.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2018   #5
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by xayraa33 View Post
With the outside f numbers on the adapter you showed is for a leaf shuttered SLR, some of the fastest 50 mil lenses were f2 or f1.9 for those cameras using the DKL mount ( Futura had faster 50s but the camera was not an SLR or using a DKL mount) but I suppose an f1.8 lens could exist, but I am going by the most probable explanation.
I guess you can answer: is this list here exhaustive?

http://forum.mflenses.com/the-dkl-le...ad-t65951.html
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2018   #6
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
I guess you can answer: is this list here exhaustive?

http://forum.mflenses.com/the-dkl-le...ad-t65951.html
I would surmise it is exhaustive, but never say never.



I though most likely would go with Occam's Razor, if there exists two explanations for an occurrence. And in this case the one that requires the least speculation is usually better.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2018   #7
Sarcophilus Harrisii
Brett Rogers
 
Sarcophilus Harrisii is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,570
I think you’re placing far too much faith in the inclination of the third party manufacturers of such adapters in 2018, to be as concerned about absolute accuracy to the degree you’ve queried, as you are. It was probably simply close enough for them not to care about. And in actual use, neither should you. It’s inconsequential.

Generally, the presence of a shutter in the lenses of this class of SLRs imposes a physical limitation on the maximum aperture they could affordably and practically feature. It also impacted minimum focusing distances the lenses would have, in comparison with many others of similar focal length made for focal plane shutter bodies. If you’re having trouble finding lenses faster than f/1.9 it’s because few (if any) production types actually exist.
Cheers,
Brett
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2018   #8
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post
I think you’re placing far too much faith in the inclination of the third party manufacturers of such adapters in 2018, to be as concerned about absolute accuracy to the degree you’ve queried, as you are. It was probably simply close enough for them not to care about. And in actual use, neither should you. It’s inconsequential.
Dear Brett,
You're correct, perhaps I'm a spoiled brat since the third party adapters that I happen to know are either British or German, from reputable makers with a real address, not from no-name makers in China that have just some ebay-store

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post
Generally, the presence of a shutter in the lenses of this class of SLRs imposes a physical limitation on the maximum aperture they could affordably and practically feature. It also impacted minimum focusing distances the lenses would have, in comparison with many others of similar focal length made for focal plane shutter bodies.
That's true of course —— they have their limits, but these 60 years old Deckel lenses had and still have the benefit of great compactness, let alone compared to the most recent f/1.8 monstrosities for digital cameras

Quote:
If you’re having trouble finding lenses faster than f/1.9 it’s because few (if any) production types actually exist.
I agree, I do *not* expect to find a faster than f/1.9 DKL lens
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2018   #9
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Maybe you can contact those British and German reputable adapter makers, with a real address and ask them the question of why the f1.8 engraving.. and which legendary lens makers of the past made such lenses with that f1.8 aperture and also ask them to ID or name such lenses.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2018   #10
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by xayraa33 View Post
Maybe you can contact those British and German reputable adapter makers, with a real address and ask them the question of why the f1.8 engraving.. and which legendary lens makers of the past made such lenses with that f1.8 aperture and also ask them to ID or name such lenses.
In fact, meanwhile I found some answer, given by an Illinois area code US American firm that also offers DKL-adapters: «All pictures are for illustration purposes only. Actual product may vary slightly due to ongoing improvements in design.»
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2018   #11
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
In fact, meanwhile I found some answer, given by an Illinois area code US American firm that also offers DKL-adapters: «All pictures are for illustration purposes only. Actual product may vary slightly due to ongoing improvements in design.»
Ah, the simplest answer is always the best.

Occam and his razor comes through again
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #12
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
This morning I've been told another possible explanation that has to do with East Asian superstition:

Probably most of these adapters go to customers in Japan.

But: The numbers 4 and 9 are considered particularly unlucky in Japanese: 4, pronounced shi, is a homophone for death (死); 9, when pronounced ku, is a homophone for suffering (苦).

Since it's just impossible to avoid the inauspicious «4» on an aperture scale, they decided to at least avoid the unlucky «[1.]9».

Hence they've replaced the correct but inauspicious number with either «2» or «1.8».

After all, and our scholastic friend William of Ockham would very likely agree: this sounds absolutely not illogical —— after a superstitious fashion of course.
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #13
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
This morning I've been told another possible explanation that has to do with East Asian superstition:

Probably most of these adapters go to customers in Japan.

But: The numbers 4 and 9 are considered particularly unlucky in Japanese: 4, pronounced shi, is a homophone for death (死); 9, when pronounced ku, is a homophone for suffering (苦).

Since it's just impossible to avoid the inauspicious «4» on an aperture scale, they decided to at least avoid the unlucky «[1.]9».

Hence they've replaced the correct but inauspicious number with either «2» or «1.8».

After all, and our scholastic friend William of Ockham would very likely agree: this sounds absolutely not illogical —— after a superstitious fashion of course.
That means any Mitutoyo micrometer or vernier caliper would never have a number 4 or a 9 engraved on those precision instruments.. and all those Japanese cars and motorcycles would be naturally be missing those bad hoodoo digits from their odometers to conform to Japanese superstition
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #14
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by xayraa33 View Post
That means any Mitutoyo micrometer or vernier caliper would never have a number 4 or a 9 engraved on those precision instruments.. and all those Japanese cars and motorcycles would be naturally be missing those bad hoodoo digits from their odometers to conform to Japanese superstition
To an extent, they do exactly that; instantly, I did not find stuff regarding the «9», but this appears to be a good article covering the topic «4», and how they (even Western firms that have East Asian customers!) avoid the number 4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraphobia
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #15
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
To an extent, they do exactly that; instantly, I did not find stuff regarding the «9», but this appears to be a good article covering the topic «4», and how they (even Western firms that have East Asian customers!) avoid the number 4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraphobia
I suspect that you set out to confuse your self with your over analysing your original question to a point of a Mandelbrot set like never ending micro complexity that veers way off from a simple number engraving mistake, which is the most likely explanation.. in great Occam Razor fashion.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #16
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by xayraa33 View Post
I suspect that you set out to confuse your self with your over analysing your original question to a point of a Mandelbrot set like never ending micro complexity that veers way off from a simple number engraving mistake, which is the most likely explanation.. in great Occam Razor fashion.
, regarding the original question: I'm 99.9% sure there was never any real f/1.8 «DECKEL» or «DKL» or «Compur bayonet» lens on the market. But I found this adapter-discrepancy annoying!

BTW: That's really intriguing, there was a bellows unit available for the DKL SLRs:



http://www.der-klinterklater.de/ozubehoer.html
—— I knew that there were the WEP converters (by chance, I have one), but this bellows thing is a huge surprise!
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #17
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
, regarding the original question: I'm 99.9% sure there was never any real f/1.8 «DECKEL» or «DKL» or «Compur bayonet» lens on the market. But I found this adapter-discrepancy annoying!

BTW: That's really intriguing, there was a bellows unit available for the DKL SLRs:
http://www.der-klinterklater.de/ozubehoer.html
—— I knew that there were the WEP converters (by chance, I have one), but this bellows thing is a huge surprise!
Many things in life are annoying but we pick our fights carefully and we don't make mountains out of mole hills and move on to real life concerns.

If you were truly interested to find any answer to your original question then you should have taken up my suggestion and contacted the adapter manufacturer and asked them why the f1.8 engraving on their adapters.

Get the answer from the horse's mouth, anything else and you are wasting time unless.. you get off on Monty Pythonesque silly questions veering off to infinitude.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #18
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by xayraa33 View Post
Many things in life are annoying but we pick our fights carefully and we don't make mountains out of mole hills and move on to real life concerns.

If you were truly interested to find any answer to your original question then you should have taken up my suggestion and contacted the adapter manufacturer and asked them why the f1.8 engraving on their adapters.

Get the answer from the horse's mouth, anything else and you are wasting time unless.. you get off on Monty Pythonesque silly questions veering off to infinitude.
Now it's you who is jumping to conclusions: In fact, I've checked my email correspondence —— and I found messages containing the search term «DKL». In fact, already years ago I had contact with a dealer of these adapters —— the answers he gave me were completely useless (and I was asking my questions in his native language!).

—— Now to start digging for an address of a manufacturer of the adapters in question (and they're basically always in China today?) and then to send them a comprehensible question: that would mean a time consuming but very probably fruitless task!
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #19
mich rassena
Registered User
 
mich rassena is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 245
Most likely the design for the aperture ring has been lifted from one of dozens of similar lens adapters made at the same factory. While a mistake like this is not a sign of quality, its inaccuracy is a matter of trivia. Does the adapter work well? Did you get what you paid for? While I'm sure the $100 German adapters are beautiful works of art, the $10 adapters for my $20 lenses have worked adequately for my purposes.

There are also some nice-looking Chineses-made DKL rear lens caps in silver metal which are a good match for the lens and fit nicely all for less than $10.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #20
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 843
Apologies for hijacking the thread, but here is currently the highest concentration of DKL knowledge on the planet.
Would you know if there is a DKL-M42 adapter? If it can't be done, I'd resort to PK, but I'd prefer M42...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #21
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
Now it's you who is jumping to conclusions: In fact, I've checked my email correspondence —— and I found messages containing the search term «DKL». In fact, already years ago I had contact with a dealer of these adapters —— the answers he gave me were completely useless (and I was asking my questions in his native language!).

—— Now to start digging for an address of a manufacturer of the adapters in question (and they're basically always in China today?) and then to send them a comprehensible question: that would mean a time consuming but very probably fruitless task!
I am not jumping to conclusions, my answer to you is still the same as before, it is likely an error in engraving or silk screening the number.

The simplest explanation is always the best, Mr Occam rarely fails.

So what happened to your claim that these adapters are all from first class hoity toity British and German manufacturers? Now you say they are from China, well.. there you go, just low grade hit or miss Chinese ware that can have a manufacture's defect or two.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #22
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by xayraa33 View Post
I am not jumping to conclusions, my answer to you is still the same as before, it is likely an error in engraving or silk screening the number.

The simplest explanation is always the best, Mr Occam rarely fails.

So what happened to your claim that these adapters are all from first class hoity toity British and German manufacturers? Now you say they are from China, well.. there you go, just low grade hit or miss Chinese ware that can have a manufacture's defect or two.
No such claim was ever imposed. To set the record straight:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
[...] perhaps I'm a spoiled brat since the third party adapters that I happen to know are either British or German, from reputable makers with a real address, not from no-name makers in China that have just some ebay-store
The first part after since —— «third party adapters that I happen to know are either British or German, from reputable makers with a real address» —— was an ...hmmm...? «blanket statement» —— I hope that makes sense, or is it an evil mirror translation?; yes, I failed to explain that this did not include DKL adapters. I do have many adapters, e.g. Periflex, and Novoflex, for many purposes, but I do not have any British or German DKL adapter (if they exist, they're made from unobtanium, I suppose!). Hence the second part —— «not from no-name makers in China that have just some ebay-store» —— now I was actually talking about the DKL adapters that are available (brass, copper, aluminium, whatever).
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #23
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by retinax View Post
Apologies for hijacking the thread, but here is currently the highest concentration of DKL knowledge on the planet.
Would you know if there is a DKL-M42 adapter? If it can't be done, I'd resort to PK, but I'd prefer M42...
Sure, e.g.:

—— eBay item number:223041521861
Brand: Cnscope
Quote:
Lens compatibility: Voigtlander Bessamatic, Voigtlander Ultramatic, Kodak Retina SLR, or Kodak iiis lenses
Camera: M42 mount cameras
Function: with aperture control ring(the aperture marks on the adapter is just for reference, it may different from the actual value in different lens)
Focus: support infinity
Material: aluminium and brass
1x lens mount adapter (brand new and unused)
Directed from factory,welcome wholesaler!!
or

—— eBay item number:272544807844
Brand: FOTOMIX

Quote:
Suitable for:
Lens : Voigtlander Retina DKL; Voigtlander Bessamatic, Voigtlander Ultramatic, Kodak Retina SLR, or Kodak iiis lenses
Camera: M42 mount cameras


Feature:
Function: with aperture control ring(the aperture marks on the adapter is just for reference, it may different from the actual value in different lens)
Focus: support infinity
Material: aluminium and brass


Package includes:
1x lens mount adapter
Hmmmm... Different «Brand», different ebay store —— exactly the same text...
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #24
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
No such claim was ever imposed. To set the record straight:



The first part after since —— «third party adapters that I happen to know are either British or German, from reputable makers with a real address» —— was an ...hmmm...? «blanket statement» —— I hope that makes sense, or is it an evil mirror translation?; yes, I failed to explain that this did not include DKL adapters. I do have many adapters, e.g. Periflex, and Novoflex, for many purposes, but I do not have any British or German DKL adapter (if they exist, they're made from unobtanium, I suppose!). Hence the second part —— «not from no-name makers in China that have just some ebay-store» —— now I was actually talking about the DKL adapters that are available (brass, copper, aluminium, whatever).
Sure you did make that claim, here it is at #8

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post
I think you’re placing far too much faith in the inclination of the third party manufacturers of such adapters in 2018, to be as concerned about absolute accuracy to the degree you’ve queried, as you are. It was probably simply close enough for them not to care about. And in actual use, neither should you. It’s inconsequential.
Dear Brett,
You're correct, perhaps I'm a spoiled brat since the third party adapters that I happen to know are either British or German, from reputable makers with a real address, not from no-name makers in China that have just some ebay-store

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post
Generally, the presence of a shutter in the lenses of this class of SLRs imposes a physical limitation on the maximum aperture they could affordably and practically feature. It also impacted minimum focusing distances the lenses would have, in comparison with many others of similar focal length made for focal plane shutter bodies.
That's true of course —— they have their limits, but these 60 years old Deckel lenses had and still have the benefit of great compactness, let alone compared to the most recent f/1.8 monstrosities for digital cameras

Quote:
If you’re having trouble finding lenses faster than f/1.9 it’s because few (if any) production types actually exist.

It is right there in this paragraph that you wrote:

"You're correct, perhaps I'm a spoiled brat since the third party adapters that I happen to know are either British or German, from reputable makers with a real address, not from no-name makers in China that have just some ebay-store."

You keep contradicting your self.

Again, my answer to your original query is that it is likely an engraving mistake by the manufacturer, end of story.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #25
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by xayraa33 View Post
Sure you did make that claim, here it is at #8

"You're correct, perhaps I'm a spoiled brat since the third party adapters that I happen to know are either British or German, from reputable makers with a real address, not from no-name makers in China that have just some ebay-store."

You keep contradicting your self.
If you enjoy your sophism, fine
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #26
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 843
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
Sure, e.g.:

—— eBay item number:223041521861
Brand: Cnscope

or
—— eBay item number:272544807844
Brand: FOTOMIX

Hmmmm... Different «Brand», different ebay store —— exactly the same text...
Thank you! For some reason I couldn't find one when I searched ebay a while ago. Skopagon needs trying out!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #27
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
If you enjoy your sophism, fine
No Sophism is involved here.

You asked a question and I gave you an answer.

You bringing up convoluted and laughable ideas that the numbers 4 and 9 are bad luck in Japan, therefor a Chinese maker of an obscure lens adapter decided to replace 9 with an 8 etc.

It is you who keeps arguing for the sake of arguing.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #28
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by retinax View Post
Thank you! For some reason I couldn't find one when I searched ebay a while ago. Skopagon needs trying out!
You're welcome! —— I'm glad that I was able to help
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2018   #29
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by retinax View Post
Thank you! For some reason I couldn't find one when I searched ebay a while ago. Skopagon needs trying out!
Dear retinax,
I presume that the Skopagon handles very fine with such an adapter, but according to the source I've mentioned above, apparently in some cases the adapter should be modified a litte bit. If you can read German, here's some additional info:

http://www.der-klinterklater.de/digital.html
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2018   #30
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
Some additional pictures from there:

Adapter un-modified, for most lenses:


Adapter modified for the ZOOMAR:


Adapter modified for the Super-Dynarex 200mm and 350mm:
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2018   #31
markjwyatt
Registered User
 
markjwyatt's Avatar
 
markjwyatt is offline
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Southern California
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
Fastest Deckel DKL Lens? —— f/1.9 OR f/1.8?

I'm wondering... I cannot find any information on a DKL or Deckel lens faster than f/1.9, viz. the fastest that I am aware of are:

Steinheil Quinon 1.9/50
Rodenstock Retina-Heligon 1.9/50
Schneider Retina-Xenon 1.9/50

Nevertheless, there are several adapters available having a fastest aperture f/1.8.


E.g.:



Can someone enlighten me, please?
I have a Deckel adapter from Fotodiox (Deckel to Fuji-X). It goes from f1.9-f22, but the numbers are not calibrated. In fact the adapter does not open my Xenon 50mm f1.9 all the way (they say I can cut the slot a little longer). It does work with my Curtagon 35mm f2.8 perfectly.

I think there were so many Deckel lenses made that there is no really universal standard.

Last edited by markjwyatt : 12-01-2018 at 18:22. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2018   #32
markjwyatt
Registered User
 
markjwyatt's Avatar
 
markjwyatt is offline
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Southern California
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by retinax View Post
Apologies for hijacking the thread, but here is currently the highest concentration of DKL knowledge on the planet.
Would you know if there is a DKL-M42 adapter? If it can't be done, I'd resort to PK, but I'd prefer M42...
I purchased one from China on eaby. It fits on my Practikas (LTL3 and MTL5) and my Fuji 605N, but the Pentax SP's have some interference (as does the Zeiss Icarex 35S TM PRO), and do not work. It does not work well with my Xenon 50mm f1.9 (aperture sticks sometimes), but is fine with my Curtagon 35mm f2.8. It is fairly inexpensive. Interestingly it is inscribed down to f1.8. My Xenon 50mm f1.9 has issues on both this adapter and my Fotodiox Deckel to Fuji-X adapter. I think they are rarer (f1.9s) and perhaps not well tested on adapters. The 50mm f1.9 Xenon seems to work fine on my Retina Reflex IV, but I have limited shooting on it (just finished a repair unrelated to the lens/shutter/mount- need to go and get).

https://www.ebay.com/itm/DKL-M42-Cop...72.m2749.l2649

Last edited by markjwyatt : 12-01-2018 at 18:27. Reason: typos
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 16:36.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.