Finally, got my hands on the Petzval :)

[highpeak]

Well, after extensive study here and on the internet, finally snatched a pair of old brass lens from the "bay", they look fine and after bit of cleaning, the glass just shine! Here are the picture of the lenses and the pictures taken with those lens.

The first one has no name or mark anywhere, maybe it was wore off. It has about 6" focal length and barely cover 4X5 with a little dark corners. I think it's a projection lens.

Pictures taken using this lens.

The second one is interesting, it has a chrome barrel with brass rack focus, has a waterhouse stop slit, about 7" focal length, covers 4X5. It has some very faint words on it, says James or Lames, portrait No.1

can any body help me to identify this one? thanks, forgot to mention, the rear glass is neutral, the faint reflection of front element has a blue tint, it has 4 pieces of glasses in three groups, front group is cemented, rear two glass has a small air space. OK, here is the picture of it.

and the pictures taken using this lens

I think it showed character of a Petzval type lens, but there is no swirl of the background like the first one.

I will make a set of waterhouse stop for it to see what happens when stopped down. I tried my luck with one set on ebay, but outbid by 1 buck.

Thanks,

Alex W.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

The first one, if it doesn't have a slot for waterhouse stops, is for sure a projection lens. Lots of those were made..projecting lantern slides (3 1/4 x 4 1/4 glass slides). One could rent slides to show at church functions, or for talks on just about any subject.. The Powerpoint of the early 20th century. It's true your images don't have that swirly outside "bokeh" common to Petzval type lenses. Perhaps you need a bigger negative, to use more of the circle projected by the lens?

 

[Mark Sawyer]

The swirly effect is sometimes hard to catch; I think it depends largely on the light and background pattern as much as the lens. Busy back-lit backgrounds (think sky-through-a-thicket-of-tree-branches) seems to do it.

I think these lenses have the potential to do some lovely work, regardless of those elusive swirlies. And there's something about using century-old optics that kinda puts you in your place in the universe...

 

[highpeak]

Hi, Phototone, I don't have a camera can hold bigger negative than 4X5 yet, but I am on my way there What I will do is to take few more pictures focus at infinity, that will give me a good idea what I am dealing with here, and also, like Mark mentioned, I could get more of the "swirl" that way.

The second lens could be a Burk and James, Chicago. Dose any one here has any info about it? Like what kind of design it is? I searched but didn't get anything useful.

Thanks again,

Alex W.

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Alex, the great thing about this addiction is it makes you wonder what the other brass lenses will do! Then you start bidding on them! These old lenses have a great signature look all their own. It is amazing what they look like stopped down. Great glass and you can still get a good deal on them. Way to go.


Jim

 

[highpeak]

Jim, you are right, I just got another one.

Does anyone know the focal length of the Burk and James portrait No.1 lens? my test showed it around 7", but if someone here can tell me the exact number will be a good help, because I am going to make some waterhouse stop for it.

Thanks,

Alex W.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

A #1 lens would have been intended for 4x5, maybe even 3x4 (1/4 plate). 7" sounds about right.

 

[Frank R]

I did the same thing last year. I bought seven lenses; only three turned out to be petzvals when I disassembled them. Check yours to see if they are the real thing. The second one, with the air gap, sounds right. That air gap is usually maintained by a thin metal ring.

 

[highpeak]

They all have air gap, Frank, the first one has a bigger gap than the second one. I will make a board to put them on camera to do some serious testing.

Scott, Thanks, based on 7" FL, I made some waterhouse stops for it. Again, will do some testing to see how far I am off.

Alex W.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

I've been wanting to dabble in the Petzval pool, but they keep getting snatched. I'm thinking now of just flat out making one, cant be that hard, probably fairly easy to get the optical diagrams and don't suppose the glass was all that exotic compared to now. Maybe I'll get one of those Ukranian optic firms to do me a small run, maybe have Mr Galli donate a prime specimen to take measurements off of. Mount it in a decent modern shutter, Any one in?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

sounds interesting. I won't put cash behind the idea just yet, but it could be interesting. One characteristic of the old Petzvals that was definitely an influence on the image quality was the flint glass they used. I don't think anyone makes flint glass anymore, and I don't know if the precise formula for making it is still known. This is not to say you can't get close with modern optical glass.

 

[Ole]

The glasses are still standard, and can be found in the current Schott catalogue!

But the curvatures are not, so you can't assemble one from off-the-shelf components. You would have to have the lenses ground to order, which means $$$ (or €€€)...

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Ole- I was not aware that flint glass was still made - leaded glass of course, but for how much longer who knows?

 

[Ole]

I truly don't know, but at least it's still in the Schott catalogue.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

interesting. good to know.

 

[Ole]

Just in case of curiosity: http://www.schott.com/advanced_optics/english/our_products/materials/data_tools/index.html is the latest updated Schott catalogue.

 

[highpeak]

I've been wanting to dabble in the Petzval pool, but they keep getting snatched. I'm thinking now of just flat out making one, cant be that hard, probably fairly easy to get the optical diagrams and don't suppose the glass was all that exotic compared to now. Maybe I'll get one of those Ukranian optic firms to do me a small run, maybe have Mr Galli donate a prime specimen to take measurements off of. Mount it in a decent modern shutter, Any one in?

I thought about it also, I am very interested in this idea, let's see if it's doable.

 

[tdeming]

I did the same thing last year. I bought seven lenses; only three turned out to be petzvals when I disassembled them. Check yours to see if they are the real thing. The second one, with the air gap, sounds right. That air gap is usually maintained by a thin metal ring.

It's also worthwhile seeing if they are assembled correctly!

I received a petzval where the order of the rear elements had been reversed (although I think this might have been done on purpose. This lens was a Voigtlander and I've read somewhere that Dallmeyer petzval's reversed the rear elements for better corrections -perhaps someone more knowledgable can weigh in?)

I also received a 36 cm Voigtlander Heliar where the center element had been reversed, making it impossible to focus when wide-open. Took me a while to figure that one out. Good thing for old lens diagrams!

Since these lenses have been around a long time, I'm sure many have been disassembled then reassembled countless times.

cheers

Tim

 

[Brian Bullen]

tdeming, as far as I know you are right about the Dallmeyer petzvals having the rear elements reversed. I have two examples, a patent portrait 3d and a 3 1/4" projection lens, and both have the negative meniscus in the back instead of the middle.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Which is why I thought that we should use one of Jim Galli's fine samples as a guide, we could take basic curvature plots from them. Really, asking an advanced optics firm to calulate a Peztval type lens Must be fairly easy, its not a 14mm-28mm f:2.8 aspheric zoom here folks, its a fairly Simple design. At this point we could design in perhaps a small shift to that rear element, nothing fancy, but a slight shift to that element would allow for subtle adjustment of the amount of spherical aberration, giving those of us who want wild the choice over mild. I'm thinking an 11 inch for 4x5 and maybe a 19 inch for 8x10, same design.

 

[highpeak]

Since these lenses have been around a long time, I'm sure many have been disassembled then reassembled countless times.

cheers

Tim

Yeah, I did it few times with my lens, the best result is when the lens correctly assembled. I am lucky that I made some marks on the elements before disassembled it. Otherwise I can't put it back together with the "right order"

Alex W.

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

I am not so certain of ease in making a Petzval lens. Besides the curvature of the optics, there is the air spacing of the end two elements. When I was reading in Kingslake on this, it seemed that a very high precision was necessary to get that gap correct. I have a Bousch & Lomb Petzval design in addition to my HB&H, though unfortunately the metal ring to maintain the air gap is missing; probably removed at some point in the past, then lost long before I got this lens. It would be nice to get the Bousch & Lomb working, but I have no idea on proper air gap measurement.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

 

[noseoil]

Just wanted to add to the petzval thing. My most recent uplload to the gallery has the first shot from my "new" lens from Jim Galli. tim

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)