cooke apochromatic process 25" is good for what?

[Randy Moe]

I have access to a Cooke apochromatic process 25" series IX. I don't own it and it is not for sale. What are good uses for such a lens? I shoot my own Horseman 8X10 and have access to a Levy process camera and a Fotar 10 X 10 vertical enlarger. There will be more old lenses to try. The owner may be interested in it's worth, but so far he sells nothing. It look pretty clean to me. My longest lens is a Rodenstock APO-Ronar 480mm f:9. Is there anything to gain or learn in mounting the Cooke up? Obviously I am new to 8 X 10.

I do like shooting portraits with 4 X 5 and a 300mm. Perhaps I will need a the 25" to be happy at 8 X 10.

Random plinking welcome!

 

[removed-user-1]

I wonder how big the image circle is on that lens? I used to run a process camera in a print shop, and we could expose film up to either 16" or 20" wide (can't remember which, it's been 18 years). That camera used a Nikkor 480mm f/9 Apo. I'd assume a ~625mm process lens would have serious coverage and could possibly be used on a camera larger than an 8x10.

 

[johnielvis]

good for close up portraits on the 8x10, dude--you need a shutter or cap off-strobe-cap on....I use 24" apo ronar for 11x14 (and the 600 fuji compacdt too)....if you got the bellows on your camera it'll work pretty nice....also probably good for use at infinity like other process lenses seem to be adequate for--you gotta try that out though...

 

[Discoman]

Isn't the rule of thumb that a process lens has a coverage area two times the diagonal of the film used?
I seem to recall that factoid being mentioned in a large format book.
If you have the coverage, then you could guess on the size of film it was intended for.
That way, you could use plenty of movements with it as well.

 

[Dan Fromm]

"Isn't the rule of thumb that a process lens has a coverage area two times the diagonal of the film used?"

Nope. Most process lenses have relatively small coverage. Published coverages are usually at 1:1, and are twice the coverage at infinity. For Apo-Nikkors' coverage, see http://www.galerie-photo.com/apo-process-nikkors-en.html

In addition, the angle covered is smaller for long lenses than for short ones.

That said, there are wide-angle process lenses, e.g., G-Clarons, G-Claron WA, Apo-Gerogons, ... These typically cover at most 70 degrees.

The Cooke Ser. IX should cover 8x10 at infinity, but no more. It is certainly worth trying as a portrait lens on 8x10. Randy, what will you use for a shutter with it?

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I have access to a Cooke apochromatic process 25" series IX. I don't own it and it is not for sale. What are good uses for such a lens? I shoot my own Horseman 8X10 and have access to a Levy process camera and a Fotar 10 X 10 vertical enlarger. There will be more old lenses to try. The owner may be interested in it's worth, but so far he sells nothing. It look pretty clean to me. My longest lens is a Rodenstock APO-Ronar 480mm f:9. Is there anything to gain or learn in mounting the Cooke up? Obviously I am new to 8 X 10.

I do like shooting portraits with 4 X 5 and a 300mm. Perhaps I will need a the 25" to be happy at 8 X 10.

Random plinking welcome!

Portraits with a 25" lens will require 35"+ of bellows draw, depending on how close you like to work. If you have sufficient bellows, go for it!

 

[Len Middleton]

Do bear in mind that 8x10 portraits and 4x5 are different, in that a life size head shot that fills the frame on 8x10 will be close to 1:1 in magnification. Not so in 4x5...

If your 300mm lens covers 8x10, then you might want to see how that might look on 8x10, provided of course you remain at the correct position / distance from the sitter.

 

[graywolf]

A tight head shot on 8x10 would be 1:1 magnifications. However the subject distance would be about the same. But it does give you the bellows draw needed. For a 600mm lens you would need 1200mm of bellows draw, and the subject distance would be, of course, 2.4 meters. Now you know why they did not do tight head shots on 8x10 or 11x14; but used a reducing back, usually the 4x5 back. After enlargers became generally available more options were available, but then they also used smaller cameras.

 

[Randy Moe]

Hey guys, thanks for all your replies. Johnielvis, obviously I am thinking ULF, perhaps Harman DPP 16x20.

I thought I had an email trigger here, so I missed these replies until now.

I have a lot of experimenting to do...

I got some crazy ideas after reading the last View Camera magazine. The wild west 20x24 portrait camera.

 

[Randy Moe]

I just bought a Packard 6x6 80mm bulb on the auction site, like new. I also have a 3 1/2 almost 90mm Packard very used with a weak 120 volt solenoid.

I am pretty good with a lens cap...

"Isn't the rule of thumb that a process lens has a coverage area two times the diagonal of the film used?"

Nope. Most process lenses have relatively small coverage. Published coverages are usually at 1:1, and are twice the coverage at infinity. For Apo-Nikkors' coverage, see http://www.galerie-photo.com/apo-process-nikkors-en.html

In addition, the angle covered is smaller for long lenses than for short ones.

That said, there are wide-angle process lenses, e.g., G-Clarons, G-Claron WA, Apo-Gerogons, ... These typically cover at most 70 degrees.

The Cooke Ser. IX should cover 8x10 at infinity, but no more. It is certainly worth trying as a portrait lens on 8x10. Randy, what will you use for a shutter with it?

 

[Randy Moe]

I have enough Horseman frames and bellows to easily do 35"

Thanks!

Portraits with a 25" lens will require 35"+ of bellows draw, depending on how close you like to work. If you have sufficient bellows, go for it!

 

[johnielvis]

Hey guys, thanks for all your replies. Johnielvis, obviously I am thinking ULF, perhaps Harman DPP 16x20.

I thought I had an email trigger here, so I missed these replies until now.

I have a lot of experimenting to do...

I got some crazy ideas after reading the last View Camera magazine. The wild west 20x24 portrait camera.

I thought the dpp from harmon was 8x10 largest---they SHOULD make it in bigger formats though--it'd work best for the super sized stuff and home made obscuras...of course you can tape together sheet of it and make that work too for larger--

or you can shoot regular paper and reversal process it---you get the same speed as dpp..you just need to do the reversal step and 2 development stages

your 35 inches of bellows with a 25" lens should get you .4 magnification max...so that's a view field of slightly smaller (film edges from film holder) than 20x25....that will be at a subject distance of 7'-3 1/2".....should look magnifique when you nail the focus--use strobes to freeze....bellows factor!!! remember the bellows factor--you lose almost exactly one stop at that extension...so f22 is realy f32.....like that...with these big formats, you're always with the bellows factors!

 

[Randy Moe]

Check B&H, they list Harmon DPP up to 50" x 50'. I have some 5x7 FB I will be shooting soon. Just got a 6'x2' sink, my darkroom is taking over. I have old Norman and Novatron's, 7 heads working. I have have light! Most likely I will convert my Levy Process camera to 11X14, right now the previous owner has it set up for single sheet 8x10. It does almost 35" bellows. I will make a lens board extension. Perhaps later I can add a 16x20 rear extension. I am not getting any younger, the time to do stupid things is now!

 

[johnielvis]

WHOA...you're right--i don't know why I had it in my head that only 8x10 was the biggest size..I see there's 11x14 size too.....wow--I gotta get out more and keep up on things thanks....this changes things now...