View Single Post

Old 01-22-2016   #21
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
 
NIKON KIU's Avatar
 
NIKON KIU is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington DC suburbs
Age: 58
Posts: 1,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by wes loder View Post
Fred, I got an answer from the Montana TV engineer. Their 8.5cm~25cm Zoom is the same version as the one you pictured, and (serial #257965) in the same series. So my lens is not a TV camera lens—or at least not in the same way.
What it is a 35mm Movie camera lens.
The short mount will take a Arriflex adapter, or something similar. Uli Koch put me onto the solution. He has a Type 2 85~250 with the same semi-auto diaphragm and the same chrome ring at the back in Arriflex mount. Looks like the Arriflex adapter slips through the ring and then the ring locks it onto the lens. This explains the depth of the case, assuming the lens would be stored with the adapter on the lens. And it explains the opening in the ring.
Being designed for movie camera work, there would be no need to motorize the controls for rear-of-camera operation, although that still might be a possibility.
As I stated earlier, this lens was never designed for reflex housing mounting. Nor was the Braczko/Lownds lens. Someone did an adaption to a Visoflex III and it worked.
I am attaching a picture Uli sent me of his lens. It is a type 2 with the single focus and zoom control ring. Note the semi-automatic cock and release for the diaphragm and the chrome ring at the back that secures the Arriflex mount to the lens.
The other picture shows a Type 2 mounted on an Arriflex. In this case a remote control for the zoom (but not the focus) has been added, and a rod attached to the diaphragm ring with a hose clamp to allow easy diaphragm changes. I think this answers my question, but I am still doing research, and if I find anything new, I will share it. Thank you for all your suggestions. WES
They made 500 of these?
It's interesting that NK kept making Movie camera lenses after the 13mm f1.9 that saved their company in the late 1940s.



But since the zoom lacks the Cine-Nikkor designation, it must have been produced to fit other applications as well. Or could it be that Cine-Nikkor was dropped in favor of Zoom-Nikkor?

500 sounds like more than(amateur/semi-pro) movie industry could digest.

Kiu
  Reply With Quote