Beach Blossom Bokeh! Another of my infamous Bokeh Blogs. Eidoscope, Petzval, Imagon!

jimgalli · May 1, 2006

Peach Blossom Bokeh! Another of my infamous Bokeh Blogs. Eidoscope, Petzval, Imagon!

You know the drill by now. I left the images large enough to actually see some of the nuances I hope. It is here.

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/Eidoscope_Petzval_Imagon/PeachBlossomBokeh.html

If you have an ordinary cheap CP with windows XP and Internet Explorer like the rest of the masses, try holding your cursor at the bottom right hand corner after IE resizes it to tiny. In a second an icon with 4 arrows pointing out will show up. Click it and IE. will resize to full size with scroll bars.

Tell me your thoughts.

Lachlan Young · May 1, 2006

jimgalli said:
You know the drill by now. I left the images large enough to actually see some of the nuances I hope. It is here.

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/Eidoscope_Petzval_Imagon/PeachBlossomBokeh.html

If you have an ordinary cheap CP with windows XP and Internet Explorer like the rest of the masses, try holding your cursor at the bottom right hand corner after IE resizes it to tiny. In a second an icon with 4 arrows pointing out will show up. Click it and IE. will resize to full size with scroll bars.

Tell me your thoughts.

Very nice 'look' to those pictures with those lenses - Eidoscope owners will now be rubbing their hands with glee.

Lachlan

jimgalli · May 1, 2006

Lachlan Young said:
Eidoscope owners will now be rubbing their hands with glee.

Lachlan

Hmmm. Trashy lenses those. (I still lack a couple of sizes and don't wish to drive the prices up just yet.)

Jeremy · May 1, 2006

I think the Eidoscope at f/6.7 (somewhere between f/5.6 and f/8 I think) or so would probably be my favorite. The bloom wide open was a little too much for this image (IMHO), but at f/11 it lost a lot of character that was present when wide open.

jimgalli · May 1, 2006

Jeremy, You're exactly right of course. With the Eidoscope, all the action is between f4.5 and f8. For portraits I almost always land at f6 or very close.

David A. Goldfarb · May 1, 2006

I also like the Eidoscope shot. For most of these big lenses, I'm somewhere around f:5.6-6.3.

rrankin · May 1, 2006

Hmmm, shouldn't a 10 1/2 inch at f11 have more depth of field than a 14 1/2 inch lens at f11? Even after allowing the subject distance to vary, from f-calc it looks like the difference should be no more 4-5 mm in favor of the Hermagis but it looks far more different than that to me.

My fave is the Hermagis at f11, but agree f8 would probably be the winner.

A few weeks ago, a set of Imagon cells popped up on Ebay one night at what looked like quite a decent Buy It Now price. I agonized for a few minutes before passing, but your shots make me glad that I did. I reckon the Air Force uses those things and thats where a lot of those Area 54 and Roswell theories came from... I don't need expensive lenses to take bad pictures - I do fine all by my little lonesome self!

Cheers,
Richard

MattCarey · May 1, 2006

Jim,

having problems finding anyone in Tonopah you haven't taken a portait of yet?

I like the images from the older lenses. The Petzval at f11 seems to have a 3D character, even on my screen.

The Imagon reminds me of the picture that Ralph took--I keep forgetting his trick.

Matt

jimgalli · May 1, 2006

rrankin said:
Hmmm, shouldn't a 10 1/2 inch at f11 have more depth of field than a 14 1/2 inch lens at f11? Even after allowing the subject distance to vary, from f-calc it looks like the difference should be no more 4-5 mm in favor of the Hermagis but it looks far more different than that to me.
Cheers,
Richard

Richard, the Petzval gains depth at f11 but the field is still curved. I even kicked in more movements to try to get a bit more in initial focus with the petzval but it is very shallow in it's little sharp center. Both the Eidoscope and the Imagon are actually sharp wide open. You see both sharp elements plus the blur of the aberation both at the same time. My focus point was the 2 flowers upper right quadrant in each case. The more I look at the Imagon, the more I think I might have some fun with it.

Matt, Tonopah is a bottomless pit of characters missing front teeth that would be fun to photograph. I just need to quit my day job and play full time.

Dave Wooten · May 2, 2006

Nice presentation! Can t wait for "The Orange Blossom Special"!

Charles Webb · May 2, 2006

All of the images are extremely interesting to me. I find merit in each image and appreciate your taking the time and effort to share them with us. I really enjoy your work Jim! This demonstration is wonderful.

Charlie.................................

Whiteymorange · May 2, 2006

Charles Webb said:
All of the images are extremely interesting to me. I find merit in each image and appreciate your taking the time and effort to share them with us. I really enjoy your work Jim! This demonstration is wonderful.

Charlie.................................

Ya! What he said!

Whitey

Russ Young · May 5, 2006

Jim- thanks so much for taking the trouble to shoot & post these for us. You're dead on about Eidoscope- really superb- the bokeh, the modeling, the roundness, the tones. I think the set-up is too hard on the Imagon, though. They are not meant to be used without the sieves nor as close-up lenses. The 250mm Imagon was also only designed to cover 5x7 at a portrait distance. How about a head & shoulders set of comparisons WITH a sieve in the Imagon, on 5x7??? Pretty please...
Russ

wfwhitaker · May 5, 2006

Peach blossom or Beach blossom? Or are you alluding to another recent purchase?....

jimgalli · May 5, 2006

wfwhitaker said:
Peach blossom or Beach blossom? Or are you alluding to another recent purchase?....

First, Thanks Russ and everyone else for the nice words. The Imagon definitely needs my attention. Far more than it got in this little series.

LOL Will, no it was a typo that I couldn't get fixed.

Beach blossom. Now there's an idea. 16" Beach Multifocal VS 15.5" Velostigmat, Vss. 11X14 Series Ic B&L Tessar, Vss. only God knows? 18" Hyperion maybe. I need to quit my day job and play with this stuff full time.

wfwhitaker · May 5, 2006

16" Kodak Portrait falls into that range rather nicely....

Dorothy Blum Cooper · May 6, 2006

What Charles and Whitey said.

frohm · Mar 15, 2009

jimgalli said:
First, Thanks Russ and everyone else for the nice words. The Imagon definitely needs my attention. Far more than it got in this little series.

LOL Will, no it was a typo that I couldn't get fixed.

Beach blossom. Now there's an idea. 16" Beach Multifocal VS 15.5" Velostigmat, Vss. 11X14 Series Ic B&L Tessar, Vss. only God knows? 18" Hyperion maybe. I need to quit my day job and play with this stuff full time.

Hi Jim, do you know this light weight Eidoscope? Would you tell about this version? See please Ebay:
http://cgi.ebay.at/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=280322891622

raucousimages · Mar 15, 2009

I added f-stop scales to my Imagon and use it at 8-11 with good results. It gives just a bit of diffusion.

Beach Blossom Bokeh! Another of my infamous Bokeh Blogs. Eidoscope, Petzval, Imagon!

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency