6x17 DIY camera, 70 dollars, widely available lens, prefer Western made

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

I want to build my 617 camera and need an cheapest western lens widely available. I cant pay more than 70 dollars..

Umut

 

[Rick A]

Does your price include shipping? Posting from the USA to Turkey is costly.

 

[Ian Grant]

Does your price include shipping? Posting from the USA to Turkey is costly.

If it gets there 50% of parcels actually arrived when I lived in Turkey using normal post Only one was lost (tracked) stolen at O'Hare in the US, 3 were returned to the sender.

The best bargain is going to be a Tessar (or Tessar type) lens, I guess I or someone else could find you an uncoated 135mm or 150mm Tesar (or Tessar type lens) for $70 or less, I bought a mint (never fitted to a camera or lens board) 1913 120mm f6.8 Dagor last year for £30 ($40) shutter works like new, although uncoated very high contrast like a modern MC lens.

Ian

 

[Rick A]

The reason I posted, I have a Rodenstock 10.5/6.3 Trinar in a Vario shutter I would sell for $20, but postage to Turkey is another $30 from here. I have a second 10.5/4.5 Trinar in a Compur shutter that I need $75 for plus shipping. I also have an Ilex WA 90/8 that covers 5x7 format with a 220 mm image circle, but that one is far out of Umuts price range.

 

[Dan Fromm]

The reason I posted, I have a Rodenstock 10.5/6.3 Trinar in a Vario shutter I would sell for $20, but postage to Turkey is another $30 from here. I have a second 10.5/4.5 Trinar in a Compur shutter that I need $75 for plus shipping. I also have an Ilex WA 90/8 that covers 5x7 format with a 220 mm image circle, but that one is far out of Umuts price range.

Don't be mean. 6x17's diagonal is approximately 180 mm. There's no way a 105/4.5 triplet from a cheap folder will cover.

 

[Rick A]

Don't be mean. 6x17's diagonal is approximately 180 mm. There's no way a 105/4.5 triplet from a cheap folder will cover.

Actually they both cover 170 mm, close.Stopped down they may just cover 6x17.

 

[Ian Grant]

Actually they both cover 170 mm, close.Stopped down they may just cover 6x17.

I have at least 4 105mm lenses and all appear to have image circles that cover 5x4, I have tried them on a camera (visually - not tested with film) - but the reality is that illumination is not the same as the usable image circle as Dan Fromm and I have discussed in previous threads.

It's highly unlikely the 105mm Trinar will be sharp at the edges with 5x4 or 6x17 even stopped down to f16 or f22, I have a later one (coated) in a Compur but the shutter is broken or I'd test it. Emmet Gowin made a series of "circular format" images in the 1970's using an Angulon lens that didn't cover the 10x8 format, and you can see the fall off in sharpness. Now an Angulon would be inherently sharper than a Trinar due to its design.

I'd did a quick experiment (in an image editing program) and Emmet Gowin must have used a 90mm Angulon for the circular images, a 120mm Angulon would have a much larger image circle.

Ian

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Do you have an Angulon 120mm for sell. I have neither paypal nor credit card. I can send rollei 35 s + leica mini+ 20 dollars

 

[Dan Fromm]

https://www.ebay.com/sch/Cameras-Ph...lete=1&LH_Sold=1&rt=nc&_trksid=p2045573.m1684

 

[Rick A]

I have at least 4 105mm lenses and all appear to have image circles that cover 5x4, I have tried them on a camera (visually - not tested with film) - but the reality is that illumination is not the same as the usable image circle as Dan Fromm and I have discussed in previous threads.

It's highly unlikely the 105mm Trinar will be sharp at the edges with 5x4 or 6x17 even stopped down to f16 or f22, I have a later one (coated) in a Compur but the shutter is broken or I'd test it. Emmet Gowin made a series of "circular format" images in the 1970's using an Angulon lens that didn't cover the 10x8 format, and you can see the fall off in sharpness. Now an Angulon would be inherently sharper than a Trinar due to its design.

I'd did a quick experiment (in an image editing program) and Emmet Gowin must have used a 90mm Angulon for the circular images, a 120mm Angulon would have a much larger image circle.

Ian

This is the 10.5/4.5 wide open with a 60x170 mask taped to the GG of my 5x7. Just so you know, this was a bugger to get on my cheapy digisnapper under the focus cloth. The dark areas on the corners are hard shadows, almost no light fall off