Well, one of them anyway, or is there a grailier one?
Harrison & Schnitzer American Globe
Well, one of them anyway, or is there a grailier one?
Harrison & Schnitzer American Globe
Last edited by Richard K.; 10-Dec-2009 at 15:59. Reason: Added information
When I was 16 I thought my father the stupidest man in the world; when I reached 21, I was astounded by how much he had learned in just 5 years!
-appropriated from Mark Twain
I own a liesegang globe lens. While I have seen several CC Harrison & Schnitzer ones, I haven't seen another liesegang one.
However, I'm sure either one would get the job done
If you want to spend a lot of money for an F30 landscape lens....
Obviously my knowledge of lenses is somewhat limited but how would this lens compare with a more recent lens? Is this an interesting lens more for historical value or does it perform as well?
My knowledge is totally limited but I've developed a large interest in historical lenses and photographers. So, I think that the lens is interesting mainly for its historical value (made in 1862). I imagine that as well as being slow, it would suffer from a lot of spherical aberration..Originally Posted by welly
When I was 16 I thought my father the stupidest man in the world; when I reached 21, I was astounded by how much he had learned in just 5 years!
-appropriated from Mark Twain
This "might" be the holy grail for wet-plate photographers that want to take wide view outside scenics using accurate period optics.
If "holy grail" means something I'd do anything or pay anything for, and sell all my other lenses for, nah. It was a first somewhat flat, somewhat sharp wide angle design. It was well liked at a time that there weren't other choices. 5 years later there were. I do my wetplate landscapes with other period designs (at f12 or so) that are cheap because they are not tagged "holy grail" by others.
As to the question regarding the image quality:
The abberations are quite well corrected (Consider that this lens is used at small apertures). The biggest issue with the design is that it was prone to "flare" (A brighter circular area in the middle of the image) because of internal reflections.
Historically interesting - Yes. A good user - No. Mainstream optical development in the 19th Century - No. About the same league as the Sutton Water lens - but much more common. Even in 1892, Trail Taylor talks about it as though it was an historical oddity with flare and ghosting problems in use.
You can see my page on the Harrison Globe Lens here:
http://www.antiquecameras.net/harrisonglobelens.html
Dan
Antique & Classic Camera Blog
www.antiquecameras.net/blog.html
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks