maurits
22-Aug-2013, 07:21
I found the lens pictured below a few days ago. It is a large(ish) Voigtlander Petzval lens that, according to Dan's list of serial numbers, can be dated to 1863.
The lens is 28 cm tall (11") and the hood is 15 cm across (6"). The glass elements measure 10.6 cm (4 1/8") at the front and 11.5 cm (4 1/2") at the rear. These measurements were made with the elements mounted in the brass encasings. Given are the actual diameters of the glass as light passes through the lens.
Mounted on my Century its focal length appears to be 16 inches. Measured from the ground glass to the Waterhouse slot when focused at infinity. Back focus is 12 inches. I am estimating the speed of the lens at f3.7 or f3.8.
I have looked through several threads about Voigtlander Petzvals, but I am still unsure what I have found. Data and catalogs provided by Steven Tribe and Dan Colucci tell me that it is either a #6 or a #7 portrait lens. In a book Steven refers to #6 is a 14" lens and #7 a 17 1/2" lens. Mine is 16". In the book the diameter of the front lens for both #6 and #7 is 10.6 cm, as is mine. So that does not help me either.
There are no markings on the barrel, except for a tiny 7 at the bottom near the flange thread. This marking is invisible when the lens is mounted on a camera. But on the circumference of the brass glass encasings, someone wrote what looks like a 6 with a pencil.
In Dan's 1864 catalog pages I can find no #6 or #7, only smaller lenses. In his 1890 catalog I can see a #6B and a #7B. One is 11" and the other one is 14". So that does not help me either. In a post by Eddie on big Petzvals he pictures a Voigtlander that is exactly 16". But his lens looks completely different from mine.
The image on the ground glass my Voigtlander projects is wonderful. This even though some moron during its long life flipped the rear flint glass. The flint protruded beyond the barrel because of this. Of course this moron (or another one) saw no problem in repeatedly putting away the lens on its glass surface. It is badly scratched now. I reflipped the element and the image looks perfect now, so I may keep it.
Why do people flip these elements? There should be a law against that.
Thanks, Maurits
100683 100684 100685 100686
The lens is 28 cm tall (11") and the hood is 15 cm across (6"). The glass elements measure 10.6 cm (4 1/8") at the front and 11.5 cm (4 1/2") at the rear. These measurements were made with the elements mounted in the brass encasings. Given are the actual diameters of the glass as light passes through the lens.
Mounted on my Century its focal length appears to be 16 inches. Measured from the ground glass to the Waterhouse slot when focused at infinity. Back focus is 12 inches. I am estimating the speed of the lens at f3.7 or f3.8.
I have looked through several threads about Voigtlander Petzvals, but I am still unsure what I have found. Data and catalogs provided by Steven Tribe and Dan Colucci tell me that it is either a #6 or a #7 portrait lens. In a book Steven refers to #6 is a 14" lens and #7 a 17 1/2" lens. Mine is 16". In the book the diameter of the front lens for both #6 and #7 is 10.6 cm, as is mine. So that does not help me either.
There are no markings on the barrel, except for a tiny 7 at the bottom near the flange thread. This marking is invisible when the lens is mounted on a camera. But on the circumference of the brass glass encasings, someone wrote what looks like a 6 with a pencil.
In Dan's 1864 catalog pages I can find no #6 or #7, only smaller lenses. In his 1890 catalog I can see a #6B and a #7B. One is 11" and the other one is 14". So that does not help me either. In a post by Eddie on big Petzvals he pictures a Voigtlander that is exactly 16". But his lens looks completely different from mine.
The image on the ground glass my Voigtlander projects is wonderful. This even though some moron during its long life flipped the rear flint glass. The flint protruded beyond the barrel because of this. Of course this moron (or another one) saw no problem in repeatedly putting away the lens on its glass surface. It is badly scratched now. I reflipped the element and the image looks perfect now, so I may keep it.
Why do people flip these elements? There should be a law against that.
Thanks, Maurits
100683 100684 100685 100686