Petzval Lens - Any idea where it might come from?

[TomAlf94]

Hey guys!

This is my first thread over here - how exciting!

So I recently came across this petzval lens on an auction site. After a bid battle (I was the only bid) I snatched it at a really nice deal. There are no markings on the outside. As far as I know, and according to the seller, I'm its third owner. He also bought it at an auction and the seller then mentioned it was dated probably around 1890. It is in very nice shape, has some minor tiny wipe scratches and tiny dots that apparently can't be removed. Only major thing is a big scratch, but I don't mind that much. No fungus, and tiny tiny separation. Imo amazingly nice optical condition. According to the markings on the side of the front element, its 6 inches, and the previos seller metered it at f4. It only has an "N" engraved. Here are some reference pics:



I fashioned a couple of push-in caps with velvet for more LF-spice.

I now seek your guidance and knowledge on the topic: do you guys know where it might come from, who manufactured it, or something relevant about the history of this specific petzval? I believe it would be nice to know some of the background of this lens, as I intend to care for it moving forward.

Thanks a lot for ur time and info! I don't have a LF camera just yet but once I do, I'll let you in some pics I take with it.

Greetings from Costa Rica!

P.S.: If you have advice on how to trip the non-existent shutter or play around light for it's very wide aperture, do share it with me!

[peter brooks]

No-one has replied to you, so I'll give it a go...

I'm no expert but the lack of an aperture control makes me think that it is a lens from a magic lantern - an early form of projector in other words. Others will know better, I'm sure.

You can (kind of) see what format it will cover by holding it near to a wall opposite a bright window. Move it away from the wall until you can see an image. Be aware that the size illuminated may be larger than the intended coverage (the size that the lens is optimised for).

You don't show a flange or ring that it will mount in to, so presumably you don't have one. Once you have a camera mounting the lens onto a lens board will be your next challenge! There are numerous ideas on this forum - if the lens isn't too heavy you could thread it into some softish wooden material (fibreboard etc), or there is the solution in this post.

As you say, the lens doesn't have a shutter. There are a few options, with plenty of info on this forum and on the internet. If you use a shutter you will have to use the lens with the mounting ring as far back as you can get it, so that the body of the lens doesn't interfere with the shutter mechanism. It would be worth checking these distances before purchasing any shutter. Have a look at Packard shutters (which are still made), and Sinar shutters (manufactured to fit on the Sinar camera system but possibly adaptable to fit other cameras). Both these shutter options are pretty expensive.

The other option is paper negatives - using the photographic paper used for printing and enlarging. It is very slow (rated ISO 3 or 6), so you can forget the shutter and use the 'top hat' technique of just removing your lens cap, timing the shot, and replacing the lens cap. See the long thread on Paper negatives. I'd say it's a great way to use your lens - paper is cheap, the developing is easy, and shooting is very relaxed... You are not going to capture any fast movement though!

As you say, your lens doesn't seem to have any means to alter the aperture. Probably not a problem if you used paper negs but you could need quite a fast shutter speed if you use film under bright conditions. Do the calculations!

The lack of an aperture control means you will have a shallow depth of field. Some very early lenses had simple removeable aperture rings (like a washer) placed at the front of the lens with a retaining mechanism. While probably not ideal optically you could play around with that idea - soft items like cardboard, foam etc would be the way to go. Paper negs would be a cheap way to experiment with this.

Welcome to the LF world anyway! You have maybe not chosen the simplest point of entry (that would be a camera with a lens in a shutter!) but I'm sure that you are going to have plenty of fun. This forum is a huge resource!

[Steven Tribe]

This is probably from the early 20th century. The parallel cut lines provide friction to retain the plain tube with the optics. These projectors were typically sold with up to three different focal lengths in three tubes with the same external diameter in order to illuminate different sized screens in different sized rooms or halls.
I think the “N” is to show which end of the Petzval lens should be nearest the projector - usually there is an arrow stamped to indicate the right direction. The N could be abbreviation for a word meaning “inside” in a European language (Russian?).
There were many makers of these projectors and as they sold these normally with the adjustable brass lens housing already mounted on the Body of the projector - which always had a large colorful badge showing the maker - they didn’t bother to mark the lens with other than the focal length.
The smaller sizes ( which this is, I think) were often used for early film projection, so coverage may be quite small.

[TomAlf94]

Hey you guys!

Peter, thanks for that amazing thread on a mounting solution! It's been a headache tbh, one I gladly take in exchange for some beautiful images. I still haven't tried that experiment on coverage, but the previous owner did have some sample images where it seemed to cover 4x5 with nice vignetting.

So far, the hat technique seems the most appropriate and simple one when it comes to shuttering the lens. I have thought of paper negatives or paper positives even. Harman has some positives ranging from ISO 3 to 5, depending on the UV situation. I've also thought about using CatLabs' 80 film, maybe at 25 ISO. We will have to wait and see.

DoF sounds scary exciting. Already ordering some loupe to try and keep focus as controlled as posible. I believe these are all characteristics of a very specific image result and image quality and I have to take that into account. I'm not gonna demand to this little projector the sharpness I expect from multi-coated lenses. Although I am ordering 135mm fujinon: there's no way I'm missing on those LF details.

Thanks for your welcome. Got some news! I'm on a waiting list for a camera already

Peter,

Thanks for that analysis. Seems you both agree on it being a projection lens. How are these different from, say, a portrait Darlot?
The N mark would make sense, cause it's on the side facing the film! As far as Russian or other than Spanish or English, wouldn't know how to abbreviate inside

Thanks also for the time frame and guesstimate dating. Let's see if other members and join in your theory! Glad to hear them all!

Muchas gracias for all your time and advice guys! I'll keep you posted!

Pura vida!