Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

  1. #21

    Re: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

    Yes, I just remembered seeing this in my Voigtlander catalog of 1938 and forgot all about it. There it is on the last page: WZ-Weichzeichner. Here is the first paragraph in German an a loose English translation care of Google Translate:

    "Warum weiche bilder? Die scharfe und klare Zeichnung der modernen Anastigmate ist unzweifelhaft gegenuber den objektiven alter Konstruktion ein grosser vorteil und fur allgemeine zwecke eine heute selbstverstandliche notwendigkeit. Wenn es sich aber um bildmassige photographie handelt, dann hat diese uberdeutliche wiedergabe selbst der kleinsten einzelheiten auch ihre nachteile. Deshalb legt man bei gewessen arbeiten auch heute auf die weiche zeichnung, die mit einem anastigmaten nicht zu erreichen ist, solchen wert.

    Why soft images? The sharp and clear drawing of the modern Anastigmat is no doubt about the objective to old design a great advantage and for general purposes necessary one day for granted. But if it is dealing with massive picture photography, then this has clear about reproducing even the smallest details of their disadvantages. Therefore, we shall need to turn in work today on the blur that is not served by an Anastigmat, such a value."

    Price in 1938 was RM 45. I believe RM was Reichs Marks. By comparison the Universal Heliar 30 cm f4.5 sold for RM 648.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    473

    Re: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

    I know this is an old thread, but I would like to add one more maker, or supplier. Clement and Gilmer. I have next to me a Clement and Gilmer Paris periscope lens 6 1/2 x 4 4/5 ???? inbuilt lever action iris f16-f44. Would be interested to hear about it if anyone has any info. In the mean time will search through the mire for corrado's book
    Last edited by andrewch59; 15-Dec-2017 at 04:36. Reason: spelling error

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    6,246

    Re: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

    Old threads are often good threads!

    Need a photo!

    It is well known that Gasc et Charconnet (and to a lesser degree, his successors, Laverne and C et G) made Globe versions (improvements!) in many different series. I have the right booklet from the P et P series. I'll try and find the previous thread which has more information.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    473

    Re: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20180108_154619.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	29.3 KB 
ID:	173465Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20180108_154628.jpg 
Views:	9 
Size:	65.0 KB 
ID:	173466Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20180108_154636.jpg 
Views:	9 
Size:	49.2 KB 
ID:	173468

    Hi Steven, apologise for the delay, but trying to utilise the wife's phone, to take pictures is quite a feat!

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    473

    Re: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

    Steven I know it may be off topic, but do you recognise this lens? Lancaster and sons, patent Birm (Birmingham?)
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20180108_154826.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	34.6 KB 
ID:	173469Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20180108_154746.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	58.1 KB 
ID:	173470Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20180108_154811.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	36.3 KB 
ID:	173471

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    6,246

    Re: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

    Your J. Lancaster (against a nice white oak background?) is an early version of their Landscape lens, I think. The most common type lens from Lancaster. It is much liked by a number of people here (especialy, when compared with some of the more expensive versions of the landscape meniscus).

    The patent refers to the very early iris it has. Lancaster claimed to be the biggest photographic manufacturer in the world during the 1890's.

    I don't think the Clement et Gilmer is a true periscope as I can see typical edge discolouration around the front lens. I am not convinced the rear lens isn't a cemented lens either! Perhaps you could check whether the front and rear lenses are the same?

    The combination of a doublet, with a single lens at the rear, was common as a budget "aplanat" around the same period. But not as a MAR or WAR, which this appears to be. I'll try and find some other examples of the design - or, rather, confirm my recollections! A central iris or Waterhouse slot would also confirm it is symmetrical.

    Unfortunately, I can't find a "Periscope" engraved lens in the catalogues. It could be a different branded version of the "Lightning" which is common. Serial numbers range from around 103,000 to 120,000 - supposibly from 1890-1907.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Collinsville, CT USA
    Posts
    2,330

    Re: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

    Attached is the first image I shot with my 5.9” No. 5 R. D. Gray Periscope on my 11x14 Chamonix. S K Grimes amazingly was able to mount it in a No. 3 Copal shutter. Although listed as a f/14 lens, it actually can be opened up to around f/8 which is strictly for focusing only. Same as for f/14. I normally use the lens at f/64. Light fall off in the corners is way less than I had expected. The lens does cover 11x14 with a few mm's of movement possible, but in practice just accurately centering the lens the first challenge. Honestly I have found the lens to be too wide for my taste. On this forum found a 200mm f/6.5 Taylor-Hobson Wide Angle Anastigmat which I also had mounted in a Copal shutter, and find it far more practical and useful a lens in the field, but then every now and then I find myself coming across a scene that is a perfect match for the Periscope.

    Attached image was shot quickly with my iPhone at low res and tones inverted. The actual film negative is a lot, I mean a lot sharper.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Gray.jpg  

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    473

    Re: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

    Congrats Greg looks good!

    Steven, you were right about the periscope, its just two symmetrical elements. The Lancaster was a little more interesting, proving to give quite a sharp image, however, it was soft in the corners on 4x5, so not really useable.
    Thanks for your help, but I'm afraid they will both be dust collectors

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    6,246

    Re: Periscop - rejected soft focus lens?

    The Lancaster is probably the 1/4 plate size. Yes, landscapes have limited sharpness outside of the central area; they suit my photography though!

Similar Threads

  1. Psuedo helical focussing - possible?
    By bglick in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 19-Jan-2012, 02:30
  2. 4x5 Ultra Fine Focusing and Calibration
    By rvhalejr in forum New Products and Services
    Replies: 126
    Last Post: 11-Dec-2009, 18:26
  3. Zeiss Process Lens to Soft Focus Conversion?
    By Doug Pollock in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 18-May-2006, 09:04
  4. Depth of Field Equations, Lens Design Assumptions and Soft Focus Lenses
    By Rory_3532 in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 3-Mar-2004, 18:00

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •