Commissionned new lenses, foolish ?

[Jan Van Hove]

Ronald, I agree that ULFers need to organize, and it's one of the reasons for starting this discussion...
(And for the business opportunity, i'm making my market research as we speak... )

Bob, thanks for the info...

Carl, Dagors and Artars are the usual way to go, i agree, but they are not necessairly cheap to remount to shutter, and you have to buy a new shutter anyway...

What I had in mind was not neccessairly fast LF 4x5 lenses but longer, large coverage lenses, but if we can spark enough interest from a lens manufacturer, we might be able to get a few designs made...

I might just write to schneider, cooke and rodenstock...

Keep bringing in your suggestions, i'm taking notes...

Cheers,

Pj

[John D Gerndt]

One option not discussed is to “remanufacture” a lens already in existence. I once spoke to a firm that recoats lenses about fixing up a Heliar I owned. It was not worth it for that lens but it would be worth it for a 19 inch Dagor. I believe one of this sort was sold to the “veiwcamerclub” on Epay not too long ago for close to $2K.

About that club who seem to be buying up these rare items…a not for profit organization that does the same might be a fine idea…

Cheers,

[wfwhitaker]

I wouldn't read Ebay user ID's too literally.

[Oren Grad]

We all have our fastasy wish lists - I'd like to have a 270 Apo-Sironar-S, for example.

Based on what I see happening in the market I will hazard a guess as to what would be entailed - I hope Bob Salomon will respond if I'm way off base.

Assuming a lens design based on readily available glass types and which does not stretch the envelope of manufacturing technology, I would guess that you should expect to pay $3,000-$5,000 for a custom-manufactured lens in shutter, ASSUMING that you can place an order for at least 50 pieces.

That's the hard part. Although cost is a significant issue for most of us, I do expect you could find 50 LF photographers who are so passionate about having their ideal lens that they would do whatever it took to come up with the money. But I think the odds are that they would want 50 different lenses.

It's actually pretty remarkable that both Cooke and Schneider have been willing to take on the market risk of fronting the cost to set up production for their recent special offerings. With the triple convertible, Cooke hedged its bet by offering a versatile specification that would have wide appeal to 8x10 users, with the added feature of a design that gave people a reason to buy two sets if they could afford it - you get more focal lengths that way. The gamble paid off - they've sold out the initial run. I don't know about the PS945 - the fact that it hasn't sold out yet may or may not be a good sign, though Cooke obviously was sufficiently encouraged to give it another try with the convertible. We'll see how Schneider does with the XXLs.

[F. Arnold]

Presuming that you have some in your area, you should probably chat with your local amateur astronomers. They may know someone who would grind you a not too difficult design, which would then go to SK Grimes for mounting. I've often thought that having a modern WF Ektar design, or coated convertible Protar made with modern glass would be interesting.

Personally, when I let my mind wander down those corridors, I picture a 12" - 15" f7.7 Ektar, with the dialyte design of the 203 (which is probably my favorite lens in LF).

[Dan Fromm]

Fred, your dream is spelled Apo Ronar.

[Richard K.]

Patrick;

Didn't Doug Busch do something like this back in the eighties? Rodenstock designed (I may be wrong!), ground in Taiwan (may be wrong again!), mounted in Ilex shutters in Rochester. Huge lenses with tons of coverage....Busch has a web site where he may be reached:

http://www.superlarge.com/

He may be able to provide good first-hand information on such an enterprise...

Richard

[e]

Why not just get 50 to 100 ulf type photogs together to recommission the wonderful f 9 Computars from Kowa in Japan. Have them make them in 210/240/270/300mm configurations and design a new batch of 450/600/750mm to complete the series. Have each photog commit in full to 4 to 5 lenses each paid in full. Eliminate the wholesaler/retailer to save money and experience ULF heaven. The 210 to 300 will go just fine in Copal shutters with no redesign. If the need to develop only 1 new long focal length design arises because of monetary concerns do the 750mm to fill a market gap at a reasonable price. I'm game for this. www.deleon-ulf.com

[Jan Van Hove]

Emile, You might be on to something...

I Think that it's the attitute we need to keep to keep our hobby alive, with film companies slowly closing down and lens manufacturers not seeing the ULF (and LF) community as a whortwile market, we need to take marketing and design in our own hands and create a ULFers association, guild, or whatever, that will negociate with companies in order to get special batches of films, lenses, etc...

I have a few months of not so busy time ahead of me, I might just start something...

Cheers !

PJ VH

[Michael Mutmansky]

Emile,

You are on the right track in my opinon, but I wouldn't do a direct copy of the Computar lenses. I believe they ultimately were designed optimized at 1:1 (symmetrical), which causes field curvature at infinity that requires small apertures to help compensate.

If a Computar lens were designed for infinity focus, then we would have a great wide lens, and also possibly gain a few stops in useable aperture range, too. That would equate to a win/win opportunity.

Since the Computar lenses are currently convertable, it would make an almost perfect starting point. My 240mm converts to 422, and the other focal lengths convert similarly. If a lens system were made that used the 240 and 300 lenses as the basis, with the addition of null cells for the converted conditon, you would have four lenses with only minor tinkering required to get the formulas optimized for infinity.

there is a discussion about the Schineider lenses here:

http://www.apug.org/forums/showthread.php?t=9494

where some of these issues have been discussed.

While I think there is great potential for a very small optics company, I don't see any of the usual suspects doing what we have discussed. There are many optics companies out there that could grind the optics for a project like this, and I do hope someone with the optics knowledge will jump into the market with offerings like we have discussed.

I'd additionally love some wide angle lenses for 8x10 that have similar characteristics to what has been discussed in this thread, maybe 180mm with room for movement, and a 150mm or so that covers, with a little room. We simply don't need the sharpness or bulk and weight of the Schneider XL lenses, we need a lens like the old Pantogonal or other similar lenses.

I'm not holding my breath, though.

---Michael