Want light fall off on 5X7

sanking · Mar 29, 2007

I have a friend who works in 5X7. She is looking for a lens that has a lot of ligh fall off on the corners, and softeness also. Her goal is to stake out a look that is film camera based and not digital. I know that some old wide angle lenses will do what she wants on 5X7, say a 90mm Angulon or a 5X7 Protar V, because I at one time owned both lenses and that is the look they gave. Is there anything less than 90mm that will cover 5X7 this way?

Are there any lenses in the 200-300mm range that wil also do this on the 5X7 format.

I am looking for both answer, and if someone has a lens of this type to sell, would be interested in talking to you.

Sandy King

JG Motamedi · Mar 29, 2007

An 8" or 9" Petzval would probably fit the bill. It should just cover the format with a fair amount of fall-off in both illumination and sharpness.

athanasius80 · Mar 30, 2007

Here's some results from a 6" magic lantern lens on 5x7. Paper negatives btw,

I wouldn't recommend using a 4x5 sized Rapid Rectilinear, it will be unpleasantly sharp on 5x7. Or at least mine was.

Ole · Mar 30, 2007

The 90mm Angulon might not be such a good candidate - this picture was shot with a 90mm Angulon on 13x18cm film!Dead Link Removed

A 105mm tessar-type lens might be better, or a 135mm f:3.5 Xenar Typ D if you can find one. Or perhaps a 80mm WA Aplanat (or 3 1/4" WA Symmetrical - I'll pop my Perken Son & Rayment Portable Optimus on a 13x18 plate camera and take a look).

For longer than that there are Petzvals, and not much more.

jimgalli · Mar 30, 2007

Sandy, I've got a little cheap single meniscus lens from some old pocket camera mounted in a new Copal 0 shutter that I've been playing with. Sharp in the middle then sort of goes to mush. You can choose your mush by stopping down. I'll try to post something done with it tomorrow. Very similar to what the Japanese were doing in 1917 except with the convenience of a modern shutter. For Sale of course.

BTW GREAT stuff Chris! Right on target.

sanking · Mar 30, 2007

I probably need to clarify that the look my friend is after is soft focus and light fall off on the corners, but sharp in the middle of the field.

Sandy

phfitz · Mar 30, 2007

Hi Sandy,

try the 127/4.7 Ektar for that look on 5x7, it looks exactly like that.

noseoil · Mar 30, 2007

127 ysarex lens from a polaroid 110. You will get a small clip at the corners and soft wide open. stopping down will tighten things, but will not cover completely at infinity. tim

removed account4 · Mar 30, 2007

hi sandy
ithink the meniscus jim g, suggested my be a good one.
i have 2 that i harvested off of folders and box cameras,
but/and i have never used them on 5x7 .. only 4x5 ...
they have a sharpness in the middle and softness / fall off
on the sides/corners.
usually beater folders have this sort of lens on them.
sometimes the shutters work fine, sometimes they are dead + sometimes
there is a funnel to increase the fstop so they are sharp throughout ...

good luck!
john

Ole · Mar 30, 2007

I've just found exactly what you're after...

I described it in (there was a url link here which no longer exists) - anything with cell "5" in the rear is markedly soft and a little swirly. That makes an 7 1/2" or 8 1/2" or around there, depending on the front cell, or a 14" with the rear cell 5 alone.

I hadn't thought to sell it, I've only just got it to play with...

Or - what about a small convertible part of a meniscus casket set? I've got one with 15 and 45cm lenses, about 110mm combined, with barrel and two spacer rings (can be removed for WA and more aberrations). The 15 and 45 lenses are not bad alone, but the combination gives a horrible softness starting just a little from the center. It illuminates 5x7", but the image quality in the corners is zero. Should be a lot of light fall-off too...

sanking · Mar 30, 2007

Ole said:
The 90mm Angulon might not be such a good candidate - this picture was shot with a 90mm Angulon on 13x18cm film!Dead Link Removed

A 105mm tessar-type lens might be better, or a 135mm f:3.5 Xenar Typ D if you can find one. Or perhaps a 80mm WA Aplanat (or 3 1/4" WA Symmetrical - I'll pop my Perken Son & Rayment Portable Optimus on a 13x18 plate camera and take a look).

For longer than that there are Petzvals, and not much more.

Curious. I owned a 90mm Angulon at once time and my recollection is that it had a lot more light fall off on the corners than your print. Maybe I confused the look of the 90 Angulon with that of the 5X7 Protar V.

I assume this was a straight print or scan?

Sandy

sanking · Mar 30, 2007

jimgalli said:
Sandy, I've got a little cheap single meniscus lens from some old pocket camera mounted in a new Copal 0 shutter that I've been playing with. Sharp in the middle then sort of goes to mush. You can choose your mush by stopping down. I'll try to post something done with it tomorrow. Very similar to what the Japanese were doing in 1917 except with the convenience of a modern shutter. For Sale of course.

BTW GREAT stuff Chris! Right on target.

Jim,

PM me with the details such as price and focal length.

Sandy

henrysamson · Mar 30, 2007

Lots of lenses when wide open will be cut off by the lens barrel when wide open. That is why it can be nice to have the corners cut off the ground glass. You can easily see when this is happening and if you DON'T want fall off at the corners stop down until the view through the lens is a circle and not a "pointed oval". Almost any lens of normal focal length for a format can be stopped down to the point where there is only a very small region of fall off. Wide angle lenses suffer from inverse square law fall off since the corners of the film are proportionately much further away from the lens than the center of the film when compared to a normal lens. This happens regardless of aperature . . . thus there are center filters made for them. So, not only the lens is important but also the aperature.

Ole · Mar 30, 2007

sanking said:
I assume this was a straight print or scan?

maybe I shouldn't admit it here, but that's a straight scan of the negative.

I haven't done any attempts to adjust anything at all, since the point of the "exercise" was to see just how bad it would be (not awful), and whether there was any visible difference between a 1939 Angulon and a 1951 one (there was).

That particular one was shot at f:32, which is said to be what is needed for using a 90mm Angulon on 4x5"!. at larger apertures it's softer in the corners and vignetting increases, but it's still not bad enough to be usable as "bad".

The rest of the pictures (and enlarged sections) are here: Dead Link Removed

PHOTOTONE · Mar 30, 2007

It's not difficult to get falloff with lenses intended for smaller format film, usually wider angle types, however if you want to use a "longish" focal length, like for portraiture, then you have to consider lens designs made in the 19th century, the old brass barrel waterhouse stop type lenses, in my opinion. The Petzval formula lenses have a unique look with central sharpness then swirling OOF areas towards the edges. Early photographers would use a plate size that just utilized the central sharp area of the lens, but modern "retro" photographers like to use a larger plate size that shows the swirly under-corrected edges of the len coverage.

Struan Gray · Mar 30, 2007

Another option for a longer lens would be an objective off a telescope or a pair of binoculars. Many are even longer than you want, but children's telescopes and handheld models are often short enough to come into your range. They can be bitingly sharp in the centre (as you would expect), but degrade to coma-ridden swirly mush as you go off axis.

jimgalli · Mar 30, 2007

sanking said:
Jim,

PM me with the details such as price and focal length.

Sandy

Just completed developing 6 negs with that little lens. It certainly has a look all it's own. It focuses at about 4" so it may be wider than what your friend wants. I'll do some scans later and come up with a price. The scans will give a good idea of exactly what to expect.

John Kasaian · Mar 30, 2007

Not that I know anything about this, but I'm guessing a 9" verito might give you what you want. Maybe somebody who has actually used a 9" verito on a 5x7 can report in?

buze · Mar 30, 2007

What about a medium format telephoto, adapted ? You can get a 150mm or more with a very limited image circle..

Also, I hear a 240mm telephoto in shutter (ie Telomar), for 9x12 etc won't cover 4x5 properly... But it will still give a good center and good "portrait" proportions for the format...

Jeremy · Mar 30, 2007

John Kasaian said:
Not that I know anything about this, but I'm guessing a 9" verito might give you what you want. Maybe somebody who has actually used a 9" verito on a 5x7 can report in?

just mounted up my 9" verito on a 5x7 deardorff and it covers to the edges. not sharp all the way across, but there's circle there. i've actually made a headshot with the 9" verito on 8x10 with no fall off

jimgalli · Mar 31, 2007

Sandy, 6 scans made and they are here.

Want light fall off on 5X7

sanking

JG Motamedi

athanasius80

Attachments

Ole

Moderator

jimgalli

sanking

phfitz

noseoil

removed account4

Ole

Moderator

sanking

sanking

henrysamson

Ole

Moderator

PHOTOTONE

Struan Gray

jimgalli

John Kasaian

buze

Jeremy

jimgalli

Want light fall off on 5X7

Attachments

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency