Ilex Oscillo-Paragon 75mm f1.9

[VaryaV]

I found one of these lenses with the shutter attachments www.ebay.com/itm/Ilex-Oscillo-Paragon-3-75mm-f1-9-Shutter-Large-Format-EXC-/130791271346 in a box of stuff my dad left me when he passed away. I mounted it to an aluminum lensboard to fit the Crown Graphic. Over the weekend I shot 12 pictures. The miniscule DoF produced some very exciting images and I'm anxious to put it to full use... ( I have to say I loved the bokeh it produced, not the usual stuff you see) However, the shutter is extremely stiff and I have to force it to move it. Which also pushes the camera out of focus during the process. I realize it's an electronic shutter but I've been able to operate it fine manually. I just need to loosen it up a bit and not sure if a drop of oil or WD40 is the solution. Any ideas?

I obtained a whole box of giveaway projector lenses and a nikon microflex from the research dept recently too I want to take apart and use if I can get the hang of gadget mounting on lensboards!

 

[paul_c5x4]

WD40, No.

A few drops of lighter fluid should free things up a little. Follow this with the tiniest amount of watch oil - Use a dress maker's pin to apply the oil.

Failing that, send it off to a well known repairer for a CLA.

 

[ntenny]

What kind of coverage do you get with it? I had the impression these lenses were rather narrow coverage.

There are non-electronic versions of the same Acme #3 shutter; as far as I know the dimensions of the oscilloscope shutters are identical, so you should be able to transplant the lens cells. The cheapest way to get a shutter is probably to buy it with a bad lens in it.

The electronic version has a preview lever, IIRC---I assume that's what you're using to open and close? Those aren't really intended to be used during exposure, and I don't think cleaning the shutter will make it work easily enough for your purposes. It might be easier to use the old reliable lens-cap shutter.

-NT

 

[Dan Fromm]

OP, are you sure your Oscillo-Paragon is in an electronic shutter? I ask because the lens you posted a link to is in an Ilex Universal #3, i.e., a press or self-cocking shutter. If yours is like that, the shutter needs an overhaul.

If you have a complete Microflex outfit, don't dismantle it for parts, sell it.

What will you for a shutter with projection lenses on a Crown?

 

[shutterfinger]

Ilex shutters use hard rubber shutter blades. Naphtha, the main ingredient in Lighter Fluid will Dissolve the shutter bladesinto a gooey fused together mess or in laymens terms Destroy Your Shutter.

 

[paul_c5x4]

Ah, did not know that. Had rather assumed that Ilex would use thin metal stock like other manufacturers. In which case, my advice to the OP would be:

Send it to an expert for a CLA

 

[VaryaV]

What kind of coverage do you get with it? I had the impression these lenses were rather narrow coverage.

There are non-electronic versions of the same Acme #3 shutter; as far as I know the dimensions of the oscilloscope shutters are identical, so you should be able to transplant the lens cells. The cheapest way to get a shutter is probably to buy it with a bad lens in it.

The electronic version has a preview lever, IIRC---I assume that's what you're using to open and close? Those aren't really intended to be used during exposure, and I don't think cleaning the shutter will make it work easily enough for your purposes. It might be easier to use the old reliable lens-cap shutter.

-NT

Hi Nathan - I get full coverage, however, I failed to mention I had to remove the back mag lens as it wouldn't fit through the opening.

OP, are you sure your Oscillo-Paragon is in an electronic shutter? I ask because the lens you posted a link to is in an Ilex Universal #3, i.e., a press or self-cocking shutter. If yours is like that, the shutter needs an overhaul.

If you have a complete Microflex outfit, don't dismantle it for parts, sell it.

What will you for a shutter with projection lenses on a Crown?

Hi Dan - No, this one does not have an electronic shutter, I made an error in my assumption. The one I have is identical to the pic I posted. It's a self-cocking shutter. I thought the shutter might be gunked up from years of sitting in a box and thought I might be able to loosen it up with usage, if that is unsuccessful I will be sending it off for CLA.

Regarding the Microflex, I already have 3 scope adapters. It is missing the power cord and the control box and I think ebay wants somewhere between 75-150 (don't remember) unless it does something special the others don't do I would rather get the glass out and use it for other cool purposes. Regarding the projector lenses... it's amazing what I can do with a lens cap.


Tonight I have to prune the apple trees in the little orchard but as soon as I am done I will scan the images and post in this thread. I think they're quite nice.

 

[ntenny]

Hi Dan - No, this one does not have an electronic shutter, I made an error in my assumption. The one I have is identical to the pic I posted. It's a self-cocking shutter. I thought the shutter might be gunked up from years of sitting in a box and thought I might be able to loosen it up with usage, if that is unsuccessful I will be sending it off for CLA.

Keep an eye open, though---another shutter, either empty or with a trashed lens in it, might be cheaper than a CLA. (SK Grimes charges US$100 for a shutter CLA without any major surgery, and there are a few examples on eBay at this writing in that same price range or a little above, with lenses. Search for "ilex #3" or "acme #3".)

-NT

 

[VaryaV]

Thanks Nathan. It might be worth it if I can find one uber cheap.

Dan - I just thought of something.... Last week I bought a Polaroid back 'just in case' the Type 55 kickstarter project is a success and the film is reborn. With that in mind...... the microflex comes with the LF adapter that fits into the arm, as well as my Graphloc back. My other mounts don't have one included... So you might be right there after all..... How cool would that be!!!!

 

[shutterfinger]

I charge $75 for a CLA and have serviced a few Ilex/Acme shutters.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I charge $75 for a CLA and have serviced a few Ilex/Acme shutters.

Souldn't you at least be a subscriber if you are soliciting work here? This isn't the first time either.

 

[mopar_guy]

Souldn't you at least be a subscriber if you are soliciting work here? This isn't the first time either.

Why would anyone have a problem with this?

 

[VaryaV]

2 test contact prints:

Crown Graphic/ilex oscillo-paragon 75mm f1.9
1/10 - f11
D100 (64) hot stored film expired/pyrocat-HD 1+1+300 50m semi-stand
Foma 542 11/Meritol Se30 1+10 3m
KRST 1+4 15s

Of course the scans don't do justice, these are stunning in hand.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Hmm. Like the shots in your gallery. Dark. Close-up.

Dark is a matter of taste. Not to mine, but you're the person you have to satisfy. Close-up is the reason you can get away with using the lens on 4x5.

 

[VaryaV]

Yes, there is an artistic movement in France and Germany based on dark images of which I am part of, dark images create mood and emotion. But definitely a matter of personal taste.

This lens is gorgeous and I've gotten so much great feedback from others elsewhere, that it is definitely going to get utilized as part of my package. Thanks for your comments they have been very helpful.

 

[ntenny]

It's hard to judge on-screen because of varying monitor gamma, but as I'm seeing them, I think the high contrast works well with the dark "average". Close up is of course a big advantage in coverage, and if you're shooting at close range you can put that to use with all sorts of weird lenses. You might need to front-mount or get something with a focal-plane shutter, though.

-NT

 

[shutterfinger]

Oscilloscope lens were made/used for photographing wave shapes on oscilloscope screens. Most scopes, as they are colloquially called, have a 5 inch round CRT and usually medium green trace. The photos were reduced to 1/4 x 1/2 inch and inserted into schematic diagrams at various test points.

 

[wombat2go]

I used various oscilloscope cameras from 1968 in electronics R&D.
Usually the photos were taken as records after all the fun was over, however I do remember the test labs being littered with Polaroid while chasing elusive problems, and the smell remains with me.
When analog storage oscilloscopes came along, it was much easier to take oscilloscope photos.

In the 1980's, 2 companies - Hioki and Yokagawa- introduced high speed memory recorders which were hybrid analog/digital. They had sampling rates in the sub microsecond range and killed the need for oscilloscope cameras.

I am restoring a Tektronix 466, some parts are difficult/impossible to obtain, so I am machining some bits to get it functional.
It is going OK so far.

I just purchased an old complete oscilloscope camera with a Polaroid back ( I don't recognize the camera) but it has the Ilex 75mm f/1.9 in a classical shutter. Due to arrive next week.

Here is a link ( maybe I posted before) on "crudely" adapting a Pentax K-01 to a vintage analog oscilloscope for calibration of my old Graflex shutters. It works very well.
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/62-do-yourself/238268-k-01-oscilloscope-adaptor.html

 

[Whiteymorange]

I played around with one of these oscillo-paragon 75mm lenses about two years ago and found the limited range frustrating. I did, however, discover that they can be separated and the front or back elements used on an 8x10. That was more fun.

 

[ntenny]

I played around with one of these oscillo-paragon 75mm lenses about two years ago and found the limited range frustrating. I did, however, discover that they can be separated and the front or back elements used on an 8x10. That was more fun.

Oh, that's cool. So they're not Tessar types as the "Paragon" name might suggest---do you have any guesses about what the lens design is? Were the separate elements any good?

-NT

 

[Dan Fromm]

Oh, that's cool. So they're not Tessar types as the "Paragon" name might suggest---do you have any guesses about what the lens design is? Were the separate elements any good?

-NT

Nathan, Paragon is a trade name, not a design type.

By an odd coincidence that won't bear close examination, I have a pair of 3"/1.9 OscilloParagon cells on my desk. I use them as magnifiers. By the reflections, a 6/4 double Gauss type.

 

[Whiteymorange]

Oh, that's cool. So they're not Tessar types as the "Paragon" name might suggest---do you have any guesses about what the lens design is? Were the separate elements any good?

-NT

Both elements had a similar look, with a relatively sharp center and then a rapid transition to mush as you got out of center. They were similar to what I get with a magnifying glass but a little better defined in the center 20%. The focal length, as I recall, was over 16" for the front and more for the rear, but I don't have any real record of that, just my (faulty) memory.

 

[ntenny]

I have to say, long focal lengths and a quick transition to mush off-axis don't make a combination for which I feel any pressing need. I think the only camera I have with that much extension is an 8x10 anyway.

Trade names, design names, it's as bad as wine categorizations. Sigh.

-NT