Stop this soft focus crap!!

[Matsushime]

Whenever I see pages and pages of neatly formatted text on an ebay item, I assume it's lifted from somewhere and not created for the auction. Spelling errors and poor formatting more often mean authentic seller-written text and maybe a reasonable deal.

Often businesses will create one good template and then copy/paste and make minor edits for the item offered. It looks professional, it's fast, and hopefully describing the item more clear and complete!

Well, if the price is right, it will sell, right? That's the only real test of price.

Unless the buyer is naive enough to buy it. In that case it would be an anomaly of the test pricing.

I only worry about this because people like me don't know much about the price of gear. I suppose it's another warning to do your research first!

[Jim Galli]

Went and looked at the sale in question.

Wow! That really is a croc of poo. I'd be embarrassed to have posted pages of data about soft focus on a sharp anastigmat sale. That's a $225 lens all day long.

[Petzval Paul]

I'm not really going to bother looking at the stupid ad....seen enough of them. But, what needs to be pointed out, is that a portrait lens is pretty much always a short telephoto. Whether it's soft or sharp isn't such an issue as the focal length. Frankly, I think that a 7" lens is not really a good candidate for a portrait lens on 4"x5." According to the classic formula - length & height - 9" is a classic formula for 4x5, maybe even a bit more if using a Petzval. Nowadays, people use whatever covers, but that's not the way it went back in the day. Check out Abel's portrait lighting book: especially with Petzvals and Struss's, rather long FL's were the norm for portraits. On that auction website it seems that any 12" lens is a "rare 8x10 portrait petzval soft focus ULF lens that SWIRLS!"

[Mark Sawyer]

...But, what needs to be pointed out, is that a portrait lens is pretty much always a short telephoto. Whether it's soft or sharp isn't such an issue as the focal length. Frankly, I think that a 7" lens is not really a good candidate for a portrait lens on 4"x5." According to the classic formula - length & height - 9" is a classic formula for 4x5, maybe even a bit more if using a Petzval...

I can't think of any telephoto portrait lenses.

Different qualifications for being designated a "portrait" lenses have been (at different times) speed, softness, and focal length. I'd always heard the ideal focal length was 50% longer than the plate diagonal, but I've also seen lens manufacturers recommend "the longest focal length your studio will accommodate". Cooke noted in its catalogs that their 12.5, 12.75, and 13 inch lenses would cover 8x10 for studio portraiture, at least suggesting shorter focal lengths might be appropriate. (Personally, I'm good with the plate diagonal or longer...)

[Jim Galli]

A portrait lens is the one that was on the camera on those rare occasions when you overcome your shyness and actually get someone to step in front of the camera.

Oh, and btw length is relative. A 7" lens can be very nice on a 4X5 camera with a splitter that makes 2 half sheet 4X5 portraits.

Did anyone notice the Graflex that just finished on E=bay with a Cooke almost identical to the one we're fussing about - for $76 bucks. Yep, I bought it.

[Hugo Zhang]

Jim,

That is a very sweet deal and I had it on my watch list. I have too many Graflex cameras already. I love my 7 inch Cooke lens with the Graflex. Had lots of fun with them in Tibet.

[ghostcount]

...
That's a $225 lens all day long.

...
Did anyone notice the Graflex that just finished on E=bay with a Cooke almost identical to the one we're fussing about - for $76 bucks. Yep, I bought it.

Congrats!

So next week we'll see it posted for sale for $225?

[Dan Dozer]

Sorry, I guess that I undervalued my old Cooke lenses (2 series III's, one series IIIB, and a series VIIb). Guess I'll have to put all four up for sale in the classifieds. I don't think I'll ever use any of them. Note that I paid less than $75 a piece for them a number of years ago. May be I can sell them all and get enough money for the one in question in this thread!

Are there people out there who like the Cooke's so much that they would want all 4 of them?

(Sorry if I'm jacking this thread - not my intent)

[Hugo Zhang]

Dan,

If you have any series II, not III, I will be interested, especially if they are 14" and longer. I got a IIa 10 1/2 inch for $900 in superb conditions last week and I thought it was a good deal. I would like to see pictures of your Cooke lenses.

[jnantz]

A portrait lens is the one that was on the camera on those rare occasions when you overcome your shyness and actually get someone to step in front of the camera.

that is what i was thinking jim ..
pretty much any lens can be called "a portrait lens" ...
all you have to do is take a portrait with it ...

"portrait lens", "fine art", "fine art photography", " this glass is very special", "this was used to make so and so's prints" &c
its all marketing, hype, bs selling points ...

i have a camera that i use all the time, a portrait camera ( delmar 4x5 box camera ) sold to me by frank zappa's cousin ..
and when i sell it i am going to have THAT on my ebay description, and that "it has a fine meniscus soft focus portrait lens".