What may have been an intended use of this particular lens?
Originally it did not have aperture slot. The slot was cut out just recently. I thought, that I was buying a magic lantern lens. But I can not imagine, that somebody could enjoy watching projected images of such terrible unsharpness. Even in XIX century. Actually, the lens is sharp, but only in the very small area in the center. Move the subject 1 inch on the ground glass, and you will not be able to set the focus there. Another thing is highly pronounced field curvature. Apart from unsharpness, this will also prevent from getting reasonably sharp projected image from magic lantern.
I do not think, that it was suitable for portraiture as well, unless somebody had the patience to unscrew the front element and install a diaphragm inside. People at that time were not swirl and bokeh admirers and pictorialism came much later (as far as I know).
I made only a couple of images with this lens, and always had to stop it down at least to f11. I don't want to say that I do not like that lens, it gives interesting graphic effects. My another petzval, bigger and heavier Gasc Charconnet does not swirl, but is much sharper.
One more thing, that petzval users may find interesting: when I reversed the rear element, the lens got a little bit sharper, but it refused to focus for objects farther than about 2m and edge effects changed from swirl to diagonal smudges.
Bookmarks