Stock Photomacrographic systems

[ray_parkhurst]

I'd like to compile a list, or have someone point me to one that's already compiled, of the "stock" photomacrographic systems from the past. I know of a few already, but would like to know more. As an example, the one I have the most info on is the Nikon Multiphot, which used the Macro-Nikkor range of lenses. Can folks help me with filling in the list below? I'm making the assumption that most lens manufacturers had their own system, which is probably wrong, but I need a place to start...

Brand / System / Lenses
Nikon / Multiphot / Macro-Nikkor
Canon / / Macrophoto
Zeiss / / Luminar, Mikrotar, Mikroluminar
B&L / / Micro-Tessar
Leitz / / Summar, Photar
Lomo / / Mikroplanar
Polaroid / MP4 / Tominon, Eurygon
Olympus / /
Minolta / /
Pentax / /

[RichardF]

Hi,

This site : http://macrolenses.de/objektive.php?lang will give you a good start.

Richard

[ray_parkhurst]

Thanks Richard. Klaus' site is superb and I've used it for years to reference info on the lenses themselves, but I found little reference to the actual systems. He does refer to the Multiphot in his Macro-Nikkor pages, and based on your encouragement I looked in all the Luminar pages and indeed found that he references the Zeiss Ultraphot system on the 16mm, which I had never linked to before.

So the list expands...

Brand / System / Lenses
Nikon / Multiphot / Macro-Nikkor
Canon / / Macrophoto
Zeiss / Ultraphot / Luminar
Zeiss Jena / / Mikrotar, Mikroluminar
B&L / / Micro-Tessar
Leitz / / Summar, Photar
Lomo / / Mikroplanar
Polaroid / MP4 / Tominon, Eurygon
Olympus / /
Minolta / /
Pentax / /

[Alan Wood]

The Olympus system was the PMT-35, and the lenses were Zuiko Macro.

There are pictures and brief details in the 1987 Olympus Photomicrographic Systems brochure, available here:

http://www.alanwood.net/photography/oly ... cellaneous

Alan Wood

[ray_parkhurst]

Thanks for the link and info Alan! That's exactly the type of system I'm trying to document.

By the way, I have info on the B&L system, which consisted of a B&L stand, Canon FL bellows and accessories, and Micro-Tessar lenses. I can post the scans if anyone is interested. But I thought they had a special name for their system yet can't find it anywhere...

So here is the updated list...

Brand / System / Lenses
Nikon / Multiphot / Macro-Nikkor
Canon / / Macrophoto
Zeiss / Ultraphot / Luminar
Zeiss Jena / / Mikrotar, Mikroluminar
B&L / / Micro-Tessar
Leitz / / Summar, Photar
Lomo / / Mikroplanar
Polaroid / MP4 / Tominon, Eurygon
Olympus / PMT-35RA / OM-Zuiko
Minolta / /
Pentax / /

[g4lab]

The system you refer to was sort of a consolation prize that they offered when they stopped building their own systems and after the usa more or less ceded the optical industry to Japan.

The Bausch system used to consist of a complete system of macro lenses and matching condensors for transmitted light and camera assemblies in 35mm , 4X5 and 5X7 This was easy for them since they had made such cameras in their own factories. They had a longstanding relationship with Zeiss and made micro tessars under license. Probably exchanged lots of parts with the Zeiss factory when there was not a war on.

[ray_parkhurst]

The system you refer to was sort of a consolation prize that they offered when they stopped building their own systems and after the usa more or less ceded the optical industry to Japan.

The Bausch system used to consist of a complete system of macro lenses and matching condensors for transmitted light and camera assemblies in 35mm , 4X5 and 5X7 This was easy for them since they had made such cameras in their own factories. They had a longstanding relationship with Zeiss and made micro tessars under license. Probably exchanged lots of parts with the Zeiss factory when there was not a war on.

Great info. I was surprised B&L would use Canon equipment as basis for their system.

I have a 48mm and a 72mm Micro Tessar and am not at all impressed by them. They are late ones, with the 72mm marked "Macro". They both have central hotspots and generally low contrast. More "collector" lenses than "user"...Ray

[Alan Wood]

The Leitz system was called the Aristophot. I remember drooling over one in the Entomology Department of the Natural History Museum, perhaps 30 years ago.

Zeiss had a system called the Tessovar. I think the Ultraphot was a microscope, not a macro system.

I don't remember Canon, Minolta or Pentax ever having a heavyweight macro system.

Alpa made the Macrostat system, but I don't think it was heavyweight.

Alan Wood

[ChrisR]

Minolta had a 3x - 1x macro:
http://www.mhohner.de/sony-minolta/mzoom.php

Not much WD looking at the macro stand, before you get excited, Ray!

[ray_parkhurst]

Minolta had a 3x - 1x macro:
http://www.mhohner.de/sony-minolta/mzoom.php

Not much WD looking at the macro stand, before you get excited, Ray!

That's a very cool lens that I did not know they made! Also linked to on the page is their 200 Apo Tele Macro, which goes to 1:1. I didn't know Minolta made that lens either. Now that one does have long working distance, in fact too long for my purposes...

[g4lab]

I remember raising a minor drool over the Minolta. I think it was a last or late gasp in the film era (you all remember film don't you ) I don't think they made it for a very long period of time. I recall the marketing was aimed at medical and dental use and maybe ER for forensic evidence recording. It would probably be great for coin work. Also be very difficult to find. I am sure you would be competing with crazed collectors.

I worked with a big Aristophot outfit in the late seventies until we discovered and bought the then new Wild M400. The firms of Wild and Leitz were freshly merged and they had a handmade looking block that allowed you to attach your M400 to your Aristophot stand. The Linhof built very long bellows camera got stuck on top of a lab refrigerator where it looked like an animal with a broken back. It was never used again. The exposure metering on the M400 outfit was so good I stopped bracketing most of the time.

We also had a Polaroid MP-3 but we put a tripod head on it and used to to hold our Nikon F with 55 Micro Nikkor on and used it to make 35 mm slides for presentations using typewriters or PressType (and HC copy film). MP-3 and MP-4 both make great , durable easy to use copy stands. Maybe they are bigger than they need to be to hold most digital cameras.
They make it easy to "shed a lot of light onto the subject".

Many Bausch Micro Tessars are uncoated or single blue coated. A lot of them are so old that they have haze which hammers the contrast. And they are not overflowing with NA either. They really were intended for larger format use.

Minolta had a business relationship with Leitz and had some true macro lenses that had the same focal length as Leitz Photars. I suspected some incest there. Both lines available as 12.5 25, 50 mm focal lenghts at the short end. Both always expensive even used. I have a 12.5 Minolta and a 50 /2.8 Photar (Leica thread, there was also a 50mm, f/4 RMS mount)
The Canon and Minolta macro systems were just shown on bellows but they did not have the big stands that Leitz and Nikon had (at least I never noticed them)

I have tons of literature on this ancient stuff. If you want to scan it and post it I would send it to you.

The UltraPhot was indeed a microscope but you could fit it with Luminars. It was a HUMOUNGOUS sized microscope and could throw a 4X5 image INSIDE The semicircular casting. Big scope. They had a Zoom Luminar to go with it.

The Tessovar was an almost Wild M400. It probably had great optical quality being from Zeiss West Germany. But they never quite beat to death the convenience issue the way Wild did. You just changed film cones to go from 35mm to 6x9 cm to 4X5 inch. The film cones had the correct mag relay lens and told the exposure meter what size was installed.
They high NA of the M400 gives the image a visual snap that I have never seen equalled on any other instrument. Bright sharp and contrasty. Snappy.

There were a variety of these wonderful old systems. American Optical marketed one whose name I will have to remember (somebody and somebody) which was a long 2 1/4 square bellows system. Not as big and heavy. There was a company on Long Island called Brinkmann whom I believe have been long bought out by the Sartorius balance company. They had a lot of German scientific stuff and were a direct Zeiss importer.
I just ran across and saved some literature about a monster Tessovar cousin of a macro system that they had. Never seen a hide nor hair of it neither in any lab nor on fleabay nor anywhere in between. Probably made for them by aus Jena or someone else. Zeiss quality but not the nameplate.

The British optical firms had a few things too but they didn't make it over here much, that I saw. Their venerable old optical firms gradually merged and consolidated. Cook Troughton and Sims, and Vickers and Ealing and Beck all ended up at Ealing Beck. I think they were sucked up by Cambridge Instruments that bought everybody else too. Which reminds me Reichert of Vienna had some stuff too. Don't have any literature on that. I know someone who might. I will inquire.

[Alan Wood]

I have tons of literature on this ancient stuff. If you want to scan it and post it I would send it to you.

Do you have any literature on the Olympus PMT-35? I would love to have something to add to my Olympus macro documentation:
http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/

Alan Wood

[Craig Gerard]

Alan,

Here is a link to a scanned PMT-35TA and PMT-35RA document.
http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/esif ... pmt_35.pdf


Craig

[ray_parkhurst]

Alan,

Here is a link to a scanned PMT-35TA and PMT-35RA document.
http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/esif ... pmt_35.pdf


Craig

Great stuff Craig! Very complete manual. It must have come out fairly late as it used the Auto lenses.

Do you have info on any of the other systems I have listed?

[g4lab]

I don't have much Oly info. I think I have color copies of the pull sheets for the old 20/3.5 and 38/3.5 lenses and not much else.