[LargeFormat] Any info on the Industar-37?

[Frantisek Vlcek]

Hi,
   All Industars were of Tessar design (or possibly the Elmar
   derivative of Tessar) copy. So it should be a 4 element lens in 3
   groups, the last group consisting of cemented neg and pos elements
   (visible faintly in the diagram in the link). It's a simple design
   from around 1903 I think, but still it can deliver very good
   results. The Apo-Tessar formula (of f/9 max aperture) is said to be
   excellent, corrected for both infinity and closer distances (by
   reversing the lens). Tessar was a breaktrough in lens design at the
   time, because although the Planar design was sharper and invented
   few years before the Tessar, it had big problems with flare and
   veiling (no coating was invented until around 2nd W.W.). The Tessar
   had much better contrast and transmittance as it had only 3 groups
   of (4 in all) elements. Tessar is the simplest lens formula that
   still can give good results in general photography. Better than
   most Anastigmat designs. Be proud of your Industar, it's a valued
   piece of camera history! Original Tessar formula had I think 6.3
   maximum aperture (as if they didn't use different aperture numbers
   anyway!), with further refinements in element spacing and strength
   leading to as far as 2.8 aperture. Although that's really stressing
   the limits, the best performing Tessars are those with the slower
   apertures. As far as 50s, Tessar and their derivatives were used as
   standard lens on most cameras. The better ones of Kodak Ektars are
   of Tessar design or closely derived (the cheaper Ektars are only 3 element triplets,
   though), AFAIK.
   
   BTW, portrait photographers of days gone used to disregard Tessar
   lenses as "too sharp" for portraiture. Certainly it is, Tessar can
   be very contrasty and sharp. Of course modern 6+ element gaussian
   type or other lenses are better, though that's like comparing
   apples and oranges...
   
   wrt supplied resolution - It is strangely bad advertising but all
   the  l/mm  numbers  I have seen advertised for (ex-)USSR lenses are
   imho  wide  open.  It wouldn't make sense otherwise for some lenses
   which  I know are very good in sharpness but get below-average l/mm
   in the manufacturer's chart.

   Oh,  and  the  coverage  is  same  as  that of Tessar, that's about 45-55
   degrees,  with  light  falloff  corresponging  closely  with useful
   coverage,  unlike symmetrical lenses. In fact, the lens is probably
   a  direct  copy  of Carl Zeiss 4.5/300 Tessar, which was frequently
   used for 18x24 cameras in the old days.
   
   btw, my friend once had a big Russian (or Ukrainian) studio
   monorail camera. I will try to get some info from him about it.
   
   If a typo or historical error slipped in my message, I am sorry.
   It's all from memory, I don't have my photo history books close by
   unfortunately. So please correct.

   Good light,
        Frantisek Vlcek