# CARL ZEISS JENA 13.5CM F4.5 - TESSAR BARREL LENS NR 87892



## kianw (May 14, 2015)

Hi  - I am a member of a voluntary organisation which has just had a large collection of vintage and newer camera's and accessories donated to us by an enthusiast. We intend to sell the goods in order to raise funds for a Community Interest Company (Make It Workshop) but am having trouble finding out anything about the above lens. The only item that I could find similar on the net (including auction house's) was: 
Carl Zeiss Jena 13.5cm f4.5 Proj.-Tessar Barrel Lens 1269230 eBay

I do not think that the one we have is a projector lens but is more likely for an old large format box camera.
The one I have has a metal body and brass top and the aperture ring still turns smoothly.

I  believe that only you real enthusiasts will know exactly what it was for and it's true value and look forward to your comments, be them good or bad. (remember, I'm still in the early stages of a large learning curve about photography).

Look forward to hearing your comments

Many thanks - Kevin


----------



## timor (May 14, 2015)

Well, it looks like large format lens, so called barreled lens of great vintage. Barrel is made of brass. It doesn't look like this lens could be mounted in shutter so it was probably used with Packard shutter.
Funny thing is, that you say the only similar thing you found on the net is on the link you post. Well, it is the same lens and the same (exactly) picture you post on this forum. This is curious...


----------



## Derrel (May 14, 2015)

No, the two lenses are different...the one linked to is in the 1,239,699-1,365,582 serial # range, which for Zeiss Jena was made in 1931, and that is a Proj-Tessar, or projection lens; the one shown in brass is a much lower serial number and is not a "Proj-Tessar"...so low I do not see it listed. The Tessar was premiered around 1902...that lens looks OLD.

Serial Numbers


----------



## timor (May 14, 2015)

Derrel said:


> No, the two lenses are different...


My apologies, I got something wrong with my search. The OP picture search returned as one from e-Bay:
carl zeiss jena tessar 13.5 cm - Google Search

OP lens has actually changeable aperture so it is taking lens I think.


----------



## Derrel (May 14, 2015)

Kevin, looking more closely I can see an almost obscured 0 at the end, making that 878,920, which from the serial numbers on the above page, is between the 1927 and the 1928 numbers...there is a noticeable gap, a stretch of missing numbers in between the last of the 1927 numbers and the start of the 1928 numbers. Lens and camera serial numbers are NOT always well-kept or freely available data...

I can tell you one thing though: do NOT try to clean up the lens...leave it with its ORIGINAL finish! DO not polish the barrel or clean the thing up. And yes, I agree with Timor...the lens has a variable iris in it...it is not a projection lens, but is a "taking" lens, designed for use on a camera, yes.


----------



## Dave442 (May 14, 2015)

Nice old lens. I did run across a Flickr post with a similar lens (dated a bit earlier at 1912).

This is the link to the photo from the set with the most information:
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 13.5cm f 4.5 Type IV2 1912 Flickr - Photo Sharing 

In the link above, I especially liked the the link at the bottom of the page to the Carl Zeiss lens and camera catalog of 1907 (link below). This catalog mentions 1907 as when the Tessar lens line added the f/3.5 and f/4.5 to the initial f/6.5 lens of 1902). While this is a 1907 catalog, it does have some interesting information on photography. 
Camera Eccentric Info

This lens looks to fall more into collector status than a lens a 4x5 camera user may want to try and work with so it would be good to keep it original as Derrel mentioned.


----------



## timor (May 15, 2015)

Dave442 said:


> this is a 1907 catalog, it does have some interesting information on photography.
> Camera Eccentric Info


This is a great link ! Fantastic language, joy to read and really interesting insights in history of photography. Thank you, Dave !
However, after reading few pages, exactly on page 10, clearly Zeiss is mentioning  projection lenses *with* iris.


----------



## Derrel (May 15, 2015)

timor said:
			
		

> This is a great link ! Fantastic language, joy to read and really interesting insights in history of photography. Thank you, Dave !
> However, after reading few pages, exactly on page 10, clearly Zeiss is mentioning  projection lenses *with* iris.



*Yes--great link!* I spent a few minutes reading over some of it--fascinating! Oddly,according to the Zeiss catalog, the standard photographic lens used diaphragm leaves in the 1907 era were made of vulcanite--but as it mentions, for projection lenses, Zeiss would use STEEL diaphragm leaves if a user requested them, since projection uses were NOT suitable for vulcanite! Fascinating stuff indeed. I was a projectionist in the early 1980's and our lenses were for 1940's and early 1950's projectors, but none of the lenses had diaphragms in them....however, 1907 is a loooong way away from the 1940's and 1950's in terms of technology; maybe having a projection lens with an iris allowed better matching of screen brightness to the screen and distance, and even the specific carbon arc brightness of different projectors.

I looked through the 4x5 and also the page 42 listings for smaller cameras; the 13.5cm length is not listed in 1907...and based on serial number, I think again, it probably falls into the late 1920's era. Since it's a 13.5 cm lens, and it's in a "standard mount", which is for cameras with variable extension (bellows, typically), it's probably capable of covering at least 6 inches on the diagonal (based on the catalog) and it would have been somebody's "semi-wide-angle" view camera lens, back in the day. A 13.5 cm is between about a 33mm and a 40 mm wide-angle in 35mm 24x36 equivalent, depending on what side of the frame you look at and what aspect the print ends up being.


----------



## kianw (May 16, 2015)

Thanks to you all - will try and spend some time over the next couple of days looking and trying to understand the info you have provided - thanks again


----------



## ak_ (Aug 4, 2015)

I wonder how much it went for? The Tessar seems to lack an aperture ring.


----------

