Soft Focus Portrait Lens

Ole · Apr 17, 2005

David A. Goldfarb said:
You just never know what you'll find among the skookum dolls and the chamber pots.

So what about the E. Suter Aplanat B No.6? If my memory and guess is anywhere near good, that should be a portrait lens for ULF: No.3 covers 8x10", although Aplanats of that age gives very soft corners. A No. 6 is for "Imperial" platesize, which was something like 40x50cm, or 16x20". Assumins a FL similar to the plate diagonal, that's a 640mm lens with perhaps 40° usable coverage for reasonable sharpness. That's still a 465mm image circle...

No, I don't need another ULF lens. At least not until I have a ULF camera

MattCarey · Apr 20, 2005

In case anyone is looking, here is a listing on eBay
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30076&item=7509743156&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW

c.d.ewen · Apr 21, 2005

Ole said:
So what about the E. Suter Aplanat B No.6? If my memory and guess is anywhere near good, that should be a portrait lens for ULF: No.3 covers 8x10", although Aplanats of that age gives very soft corners. A No. 6 is for "Imperial" platesize, which was something like 40x50cm, or 16x20". Assumins a FL similar to the plate diagonal, that's a 640mm lens with perhaps 40° usable coverage for reasonable sharpness. That's still a 465mm image circle...

No, I don't need another ULF lens. At least not until I have a ULF camera

Ole: a situation easily ignored by the true addict. I bought the No 6 Suter.

After reading your post, I reached into the closet and pulled out a Suter Aplanat B No 5. I put it on an 8x10 and raised it up so that the center of the lens was about 3.5 inches above the center of the GG - no vignetting. Looks like I'd better get busy and finish the repairs to that old 11x14 Seneca. Heck, maybe it's time to go nuts and get that 20x24.

Coincidentally, I had come across a Suter Aplanat B No 4 recently. It was attached to a no-name camera, for which the dealer was asking an outrageous price. Too bad.

David A. Goldfarb · Apr 22, 2005

So, since you are now the foremost collector of Suter Aplanats, having two of them, what makes it an interesting lens?

Ole · Apr 22, 2005

The main attractions of the Suter Aplanats are that A) Suter was one of the top lensmakers at that time, B) Aplanats were easy to make with HUGE coverage, and C) they're cheap compared to the quality.

Suter's "numbering" system also helps, No.1 is for 9x12cm, 2 for 13x18, 3 for 18x24, 4 for 24x30, and so on. Most German / Swiss manufacturers of that time used the same or similar numberings. Some of the others were better at putting the focal length on the lens, but the "numbered" lenses tend to be cheaper since noone knows they cover ULF

David A. Goldfarb · Apr 22, 2005

Thanks, Ole! That's interesting.

c.d.ewen · Apr 22, 2005

David A. Goldfarb said:
So, since you are now the foremost collector of Suter Aplanats, having two of them, what makes it an interesting lens?

Well, Ole gave a far better answer than I could. I'm attracted by the mystery of an old lens. Having picked up the No 5 for about $10, the No 6 was irresistable, albeit more expensive. I have the habit of 'adopting' unwanted lenses, e.g., ebay Item number: 7506798496 "Small Brass lens - Producer unknown (like Heliar) ". You never know what you'll get for $3.25. I'm usually impressed by the craftsmanship evident in these 100 yr old treasures.

BTW, I knew a Jeff Goldfarb 30 yrs ago. He lived in Greenwich Village back then. Any relation? (Private email reply if you'd like: cdewen@spamcop.net).

Denis P. · Apr 23, 2005

c.d.ewen said:
I have the habit of 'adopting' unwanted lenses, e.g., ebay Item number: 7506798496 "Small Brass lens - Producer unknown (like Heliar) ". You never know what you'll get for $3.25. I'm usually impressed by the craftsmanship evident in these 100 yr old treasures.

C.D., seems like we're watching the same stuff
And no, I did not manage to get anything yet - the prices seem to go too high for me. But I was interested in that one you mentioned above ...

BTW, I'm looking for shorter FL lenses (i.e. 5-8 in.), "old style" brass - Petzval design and similar, to be used on my Pacemaker Speed Graphic (2x3 size, i.e. 6x9 cm).
I'm trying to achieve a certain 19th Century look, with sharp center and fuzzy edges... So far, I had no luck with ebay, but then I resorted to DIY solutions.
Some results can be seen HERE.

So, if anyone has VERY old lens with such character (sharp center, rapid sharpness loss towards the edges, like very old "portrait" lenses), focal length 130 - 200mm, I might be interested... cheap ones preferred

Denis

Ole · Apr 23, 2005

Denis P. said:
So, if anyone has VERY old lens with such character (sharp center, rapid sharpness loss towards the edges, like very old "portrait" lenses), focal length 130 - 200mm, I might be interested... cheap ones preferred

Denis

I think I might have something that might fit - I'll check. I think it's a 5" "Universal-Aplanat", which should match your description!

c.d.ewen · Apr 23, 2005

Denis:

>C.D., seems like we're watching the same stuff

Ha! Just what the world needs: another bottomfeeder!

I'm trying to achieve a certain 19th Century look, with sharp center and fuzzy edges... So far, I had no luck with ebay, but then I resorted to DIY solutions.

Two suggestions:

Find a copy of Alan Greene's "Primitive Photography" (ISBN: 0240804619). He discusses DIY cameras, etc., and some of his DIY lenses seem to result in the look you're after.

Vintage consumer-grade cameras, e.g., 75 yr old folders, often had optional special-purpose lens attachments. Here's an ebay example: 7509987380. They'll usually be marked as to their purpose: Portrait, Telephoto, etc. I'll confess to having a number of these (at a dollar apiece, who can resist?). Of course, like so many projects, I haven't gotten around to using them, so I can't say whether or not they'll do what you want. Like many of us, I don't seem to find the time to play with all of my toys.

Ole · Apr 23, 2005

Ole said:
I think I might have something that might fit - I'll check. I think it's a 5" "Universal-Aplanat", which should match your description!

I've checked - it's an unmarked lens of unknown origin, seems to be about 5", f:8. Iris works fine, seems to be a 1+1 construction (2 airspaced elements), at least I can only find two reflections in each "cell"!

Projected image is slightly smaller than from a 150mm lens, coverage too (I compared with a 135/3.4 Xenar Type D).

In my mail today was a Lancaster & Son Rectigraph 12x10" - beautiful lens! And a Rodenstock "Hemi-Anastigmat 300mm", and a Hugo Meyer Aristoplan F:7,2 No5 F=270mm with an image circle of about 50cm...

I'll have to get an ULF camera next!

Denis P. · Apr 23, 2005

Ole, how does the image from that lens look? At least from what you can see on the ground glass...
I've got enough sharp lenses to use - I'm looking for lenses with particular "character" - undercorrected, I guess.
Like I said above, ideal candidate would be something that projects sharp center, with rapid degradation in sharpness towards the edges.

Denis

removed account4 · Apr 23, 2005

Ole said:
I think I might have something that might fit - I'll check. I think it's a 5" "Universal-Aplanat", which should match your description!

hi ole -

how do the aplanats compare with rapid rectalinaer lenses - imagewise that is ? i know rr lenses tend to be sharp in the center ans softer towards the edges ( used for portrait and landscape-work), and from what i have read they were often used as a convertable lens ... ( the verito being based on the rr design )

the aplanats similar?

Denis P. · Apr 23, 2005

jnanian said:
hi ole -

how do the aplanats compare with rapid rectalinaer lenses - imagewise that is ? i know rr lenses tend to be sharp in the center ans softer towards the edges ( used for portrait and landscape-work), and from what i have read they were often used as a convertable lens ... ( the verito being based on the rr design )

the aplanats similar?

The RRs and Aplanats are very similar design, from what I was able to find on the Web... RR was a design by Dallmeyer in 1866, and Aplanat was "invented" at approximately same time by Steinheil in Germany.
See: Dead Link Removed

Denis

Ole · Apr 23, 2005

Denis is right. "Rapid Rectilinear" seems very similar to "Aplanat", especially since most aplanats are from German-speaking countries and most RR's are from English-speaking countries...

Ole said:
Projected image is slightly smaller than from a 150mm lens, coverage too (I compared with a 135/3.4 Xenar Type D).

Not only awful spelling, but I seem to have had a brief attack of dysnumericity: The Xenar Typ D I compared with is a 15cm f:3.5!

I haven't even seen the inage on a ground glass yet - just projected the image of a bright sunny day on the wall of a darkish room... That's always my first check of any new lens. While no as good as a full camera test, it will at least show whether the lens forms an image, the approximate focal length, and give an idea of brightness and image circle.

I'll put some of the barrel lenses on the 18x24cm plate camera tomorrow for a closer look.

TerryThomasAtlanta · Jul 27, 2005

I also like SF lenes. Have been looking for a 150mm SF for my RB-67 for some time now.

But I'm also interested in diffusion and SF filters and have been picking them up used in local camera shops and on Ebay.

Since y'all have an interest in lenses which are designed to be SF what is your opinion of modifying a "normal" sharp lens with diffusers &/or filters?

Terry Thomas
Atlanta, Georgia USA

TerryThomasAtlanta · Jul 27, 2005

On diffusion during enlargements - years ago when I printed & processed my own color enlargemets with a 4x5 Omega enlarger and CC gels in a drawer I stumbled on this technique:

I stretched a piece of panty hose fabric in a wooden stretcher hoop.

With experimentation I found my piece of fabric ate up about 1 f stop.

If I made an enlargement with the fabric/hoop for 100% of the time the image had too much light moving from the shadows to the hightlight areas.

I ended up using the fabric/hoop for half the exposure time.
For example if the "normal" undiffused exposure time was 10 seconds I would set the timer to 5 seconds. First I'd make an exposure with no diffusion for 5 seconds then I'd make two 5 second exposures thru the fabric/hoop. Also during the time the image was being diffused I'd move the fabric/hoop in small circles so any imperfections or pattern in the fabric would be blended together.

Just wondering... can I accomplish a similar effect in Photoshop CS? Hmmm.....

Terry Thomas
Atlanta, Georgia USA

Soft Focus Portrait Lens

Ole

Moderator

MattCarey

c.d.ewen

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Ole

Moderator

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

c.d.ewen

Denis P.

Ole

Moderator

c.d.ewen

Ole

Moderator

Denis P.

removed account4

Denis P.

Ole

Moderator

TerryThomasAtlanta

TerryThomasAtlanta

Soft Focus Portrait Lens

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency