Saw Jim Galli's images, now need a Petzval-type lens!

[Mark Fisher]

I want to do some still lifes this winter (no snow, wet and cold in Chicago this year) and, seeing some of Jim's images, I'd like to try a lens with good center sharpness falling off rapidly to the corners. Sort of like my Holga, but sharp in the middle (!). I have a Tachihara so the lensboard is not huge. Nosing around a little, it looks like Petzvals go for a fairly high price. Anyone have some suggestions for a similiar lens that would mount on a Tecnika board and not be horribly expensive? I'd be up for making one out of optical elements if I can find a little instruction.

Thanks -- Mark

 

[celluloidpropaganda]

I think I've seen the words Rapid Rectilinear thrown about here and there on APUG for that style. You might look into one of those, they seemed to be reasonably priced on Ebay.

 

[John Kasaian]

I think many "Magic Lantern" lenses are pretzval (pretzel?) type. Do a search and pick 'em up an eBay for 20-30 bucks. I got a McIntosh and a Darlot that way---my Darlot vignettes on the 5x7 btw---cheap thrills! Lots of fun!

 

[Ole]

Rapid Rectilinears (or Aplanats, depending on country of origin) go for a lot less than Petzval lenses. Mounting one on a Technika board will probably be more expensive than the lens itself...

 

[jonw]

For an inexpensive petzval type lens, try the Rapid Rectilenears in a rengo(sp) shutter. Here is an example, which has greater texture in the rose petals when you view the actual contact print as compared to the one downloaded,

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

I picked up this lens for less than $20 on ebay.

Jon

 

[JG Motamedi]

In general, the Magic Lantern lenses work just fine. These are identical design as the "taking' Petzvals, but without a serial number, waterhouse slot or iris. Hundreds of darlot magic lantern lenses sell on eBay each year, often for very little money. However, for some reason (maybe thanks to Jim) these lenses are getting fashionable and even the Magic Lantern lenses are selling for more than they did. A few weeks ago a Darlot Magic Lantern lens sold for ~$250, an absolutely absurd sum of money.

As mentioned above, RRs are also great, and are in general much cheaper than even the Magic Lantern lenses.

Another problem is lensboard size. For a Petzval, you would want at least an 8" if not 9" lens. Since most are f3.6 to 3.8 you will be hard pressed to fit one on a Technica-type lensboard without a the assistance of a machinist. For this reason, it might be easier to use a RR which are usually a bit slower.

 

[Ole]

Don't equate Petzval lenses with Rapid Rectilinears. They are very different constructions, with very different design targets. The main similarity is that both go rapidly and elegantly soft off-axis...

 

[jimgalli]

Don't equate Petzval lenses with Rapid Rectilinears. They are very different constructions, with very different design targets. The main similarity is that both go rapidly and elegantly soft off-axis...

Here's where I would dis-agree slightly. The RR's were an improvement over the petzval which is going the wrong direction for this discussion. I have found RR's to be too sharp too far into the corners to get much of a soft effect at all. IOW 90% of the pic is acceptably sharp for the sharp crowd but the last 5% in the corners is "weak". Not really a desireable effect in either camp. So I guess I'm saying the RR's don't go soft fast enough or elegantly enough for the dreamy effect I'm looking for. A possible exception might be some of the very early RR's that were Extra Rapid. A short focal length with an f4.5 aperture like some of the early Voigtlander portrait RR's might be forced to act more like a Petzval. But most RR's and especially the cheap ones are f8.

 

[MattCarey]

Hundreds of darlot magic lantern lenses sell on eBay each year, often for very little money. However, for some reason (maybe thanks to Jim) these lenses are getting fashionable and even the Magic Lantern lenses are selling for more than they did.

I once was outbid by two Ape-Huggers for a Magic Lantern lens. Tell me that Jim wasn't the inspiration...

Matt

 

[Ole]

Here's where I would dis-agree slightly. ... A possible exception might be some of the very early RR's that were Extra Rapid. A short focal length with an f4.5 aperture like some of the early Voigtlander portrait RR's might be forced to act more like a Petzval. But most RR's and especially the cheap ones are f8.

I agree - but it also depends on your definition of "coverage". Try a 115mm wide-angle Aplanat on 5x7" - or a 340mm wa-configured aplanat on the same film size.

My point is, I guess, that Aplana / Rapid Rectilinear is not one lens but a whole family of more or less similar lenses. An hour with my casket set showed me things I would never have guessed, nor dreamed of in my worst nightmares.

 

[JG Motamedi]

I once was outbid by two Ape-Huggers for a Magic Lantern lens...

Ape-Huggers? Primatology and portraiture?

 

[MattCarey]

Ape-Huggers? Primatology and portraiture?

From a recent threat in how to pronounce APUG. Someone noted that his wife referred to us as Ape-Huggers.

Matt

 

[JG Motamedi]

From a recent threat in how to pronounce APUG. Someone noted that his wife referred to us as Ape-Huggers.

Matt

Hmm. Sorry I missed that one.

 

[MattCarey]

Hmm. Sorry I missed that one.

No, I should be apologizing for the obscure comment.

Matt

 

[Mongo]

If you decide you want to try a Rapid Rectilinear, look for an old Kodak Autographic 3a folder. The cameras are almost valueless (unless you want to take the time to modify one for use as a panoramic 120 shooter...there is definately fun to be had in that modification), but sometimes they come with nice RR lenses. Note that many of these cameras came with a simple meniscus lens that mounted behind the shutter...no glass in front means it's a meniscus.

If you're buying through eBay it's worth finding someone who doesn't want to rip you off for shipping...shipping is often more expensive than the closing bids on these cameras. Also note that at least some of these cameras came with a Tessar lens...probably not what you're looking for and in my experience the Tessar versions sell for more than the RR versions.

Since the 3a cameras shot 3 1/4" x 5 1/2" and had some rise/fall movement on the front standard, the lenses cover 4x5 just fine. (I should say, they cover 4x5 just fine in my experience...I bought three of these cameras and each came with a different RR lens that covered fine.) The RR lenses that I got on my cameras are slightly long for 4x5 (160-175mm range).

The lenses are in shutters that generally only shoot at one speed (even though they're marked with different speeds...time has taken its toll on the shutters so all of the speeds fire at the same speed), but the B and T settings on my shutters have worked properly and the single speed that the shutters have settled on are very consistant. I don't think it would be worth paying to have someone repair one of these shutters, but some day I might disassemble one to see if there's anything I can do to restore it to working condition.

I've not paid more that USD$20 including shipping for any of these cameras, and in all three cases the lenses were in excellent condition. They definately don't give the other-worldly effect of a Petzval, but they have a nice sharpness fall-off to them that can be very effective with the right subject. Besides, for $20, it's hard to go wrong!

My next foray will be to pick up one of the 3a cameras with a meniscus lens. I can't imagine what a simple meniscus lens will provide on the negative, but it should be fun to find out.

Be well.
Dave

 

[Mark Fisher]

Thanks for all the thoughtful comments. From what I can gather the questions are what can fit on a Tecnika board and have enough bellows draw (the autographic option sounds like fun too!). I can do some basic machining to make/modify a board if I want to. I'm going to try to find an appropriate Petzval. I also have a book about making primitive lenses (Primitive Photography?) that might also be interesting.

Thanks again -- Mark

 

[jacobus]

A very simple and cheap solution - provided you have a spare shutter - is to get an achromatic close-up lens and to fix it behind the shutter. These lenses are quite "sharp" in the center - that's the reason why they were/are used by astronomers - and show a fast resolution fall-off towards the edge.

If you have the nerve to, you could put a "sink-style" stop into the front of the shutter for having a DIY IMAGON. For that you'll additionally need a tightly fitting plastic lens cap with . Punch a center hole punched into the center, plus two rings of smaller holes. This can easily be done with punch pliers. By opening/closing the shutter's iris you are able to control the amount of luminosity or softness you like to add or to reduce.
Uli

 

[BrianShaw]

The lenses are in shutters that generally only shoot at one speed (even though they're marked with different speeds...time has taken its toll on the shutters so all of the speeds fire at the same speed), but the B and T settings on my shutters have worked properly and the single speed that the shutters have settled on are very consistant. I don't think it would be worth paying to have someone repair one of these shutters, but some day I might disassemble one to see if there's anything I can do to restore it to working condition.

I totally concur with Dave's opinion/findings. A long time ago someone gave me one of these old Kodaks and recently I took the B&L RR lens and mounted to on a Cambo board to use on my 4x5. Before doing that I opened the shutter and cleaned/lubed it. My shutter is the Kodak BTI (one-speed) shutter. There's not much in them -- three levers, a few springs, and two shutter leaves. A very easy job.

I also built an air release using a baby nose sucker bulb and some distributor vacuum hose. It looks odd, but works.

So far I've only shot a couple of Polaroids with it. Interesting effect from this old lens. I'm not sure what the exact shutter speed is -- probably about 1/25. The only thing to remember is that the aperture scale is US stop, not F/stop. Knowing that US16 = f/16 it's easy to figure the rest from there.

When time permits I plan on using the lens... but time is not currently permitting!

 

[sanderx1]

My point is, I guess, that Aplana / Rapid Rectilinear is not one lens but a whole family of more or less similar lenses. An hour with my casket set showed me things I would never have guessed, nor dreamed of in my worst nightmares.

Rapid rectililinear is most certainly not one lens - its a family of lens or rather a lens design. Dead Link Removed is a very good take on it.

It would be interesting to see what is possible given modern glass types.

 

[fparnold]

I will quickly defer to the experts here, but in the book "Primitive Photography", there is a section on making lenses from common parts. The included designs are from Charles Chevalier "Photographie a verres combines", for an assymetric doublet which is an alternative to the petzval, a Steinhel Periskop (doublet), and a Sutton Triplet. While none of these are precisely what you want, a quick order from Edmund Scientific and some hardware store parts would get you started more quickly than outwaiting an auction.

Also, FWIW, if you go to http://www.winlens.de, there is a free version of a lens design program and a lens library that includes Petzvals, tessars, etc. I haven't tried it, but may later this week. I've been curious about building an 8" protar out of modern glass.

 

[sanderx1]

Also, FWIW, if you go to http://www.winlens.de, there is a free version of a lens design program and a lens library that includes Petzvals, tessars, etc. I haven't tried it, but may later this week. I've been curious about building an 8" protar out of modern glass.

It does require some knowledge of optics, just having a lens library doesn't help get around that. However, learning that much optics (essentially whatever you most likely got already in high school plus a tiny bit more) should be fairly easy. You don't need to be able to calculate the Seidel abberations yourself just understand what they are.

But ... the complexity of what you need to be able to do on your own scales with teh complexity of teh undertaking. There isn't a tessar wizard where you can just dial in the focal length, coverage and max aperture and get a lens design in response.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

This Voigtlander Petzval came cheap, and I knew it was a keeper, so I splurged on a proper flange and set of waterhouse stops (f:5.6-22 plus a blank) from S.K. Grimes, and they did a great job with it. It just came back yesterday. It seems to be around 10", f:4.5. The focusing pinion was missing, so I had them fix it in place with screws so the back of the lens protrudes through the lensboard as far as it can go without obstructing the slot for the stops. Adam had a Sinar standard to check everything out before drilling the screw holes.

Here it is on my 8x10" Sinar P. The lens doesn't cover at infinity, but looks good for portraits. I'll be using it with my front-mounted Luc-style leaf shutter.

 

[smieglitz]

David,

What was the cost to have stops for this lens cut? I have a similar lens and a few others that lack stops. Are the stops blackened brass, anodized alminum, or???

Joe

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

David,

What was the cost to have stops for this lens cut? I have a similar lens and a few others that lack stops. Are the stops blackened brass, anodized alminum, or???

Joe

Here's a description--

http://skgrimes.com/thisweek/2-27-04/index.htm

My set was $150. They're really beautifully made

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Got a chance to test this lens out this morning.

Here's a Polaroid on type 809. Exposure is about 1/5 sec at f:5.6 with natural window light. The camera is tilted downward, and I'm using some rear rise, front fall, and rear tilt, and there's some falloff toward the bottom, but no vignetting at this subject distance, even though the lens clearly doesn't cover at infinity. Detail is from the full scan at 300 dpi--string to the nose gets the focus right every time (however it doesn't prevent me from doing dumb things like forgetting to pull out the envelope after loading the neg, like I did on the first shot).