PDA

View Full Version : ? use of Oscilloscope lenses in LF?



Greg
8-Aug-2019, 17:11
Over the years have accumulated three "Oscilloscope; optics:
75mm f/1.9 Wollensak-Dumont OSCILLO- ANASTIGMAT in a Alphax... bought it for the Alphax shutter
65mm f/1.0 & 65mm f/0.75 DE QUDE DELFT RAYXAR barrel lenses (for just a few $ couldn't pass them up).
Back focus measured in mm's. Coverage looks to be less that 24mmx36mm but maybe OK at 1:1?

The lens with the Alphax was intended to be used with an optic that I never was able to acquire. The other two optics look impressive but practically are paper weights. Have tried to find a cross sections for the 2 OLD DELFT lenses to see if they contained any convex-concave (double?) meniscus elements in them that could use on LF but dead end. Their construction is that they were never meant to be taken apart. Only way to access an element(s) is to essentially destroy the lenses which I'd have no problem doing if I knew they contained a lens element that I could use.

Have seen custom adaptions of similar optics for use on small digital format cameras, but don't own and most probably never will own a small digital format camera that takes interchangeable lenses. So... what to do with these lenses? Very open up to serious suggestions (please leave out for using them as paper weights). Tried using them as macro lenses with their nil depth-of-field on my FX camera, works but of little interest to me.

Thanks

Bob Salomon
8-Aug-2019, 17:13
Sell them.

LabRat
8-Aug-2019, 17:27
Most were used for close up crt images with 3X4 Pl
olaroid film and not super hi-res...I have a couple somewhere but a real wallflower with my other optics... Did some pola tests long ago, and nothing great stood out... And you would be lucky to cover 2 1/4" square at inf...

Bob's right, and I heard somewhere that value is shooting up in price... (Maybe someone has found a digital application such as very shallow DOF with them...)

I'd try to find out what they are being used for today, and find out what they are selling for...

Steve K

Jac@stafford.net
8-Aug-2019, 17:39
Might the lens work as a loupe? Try that and let us know.

Dan Fromm
8-Aug-2019, 17:52
Greg, most oscilloscope lenses are poisoned gifts. Not enough coverage for LF, sometimes poorly achromatized and generally poor performance.

Oude Delft Rayxars and similar lenses from Rodenstock (xr- and tv-heligons) were used in pairs a relay lenses to transfer an image from, effectively, a fluoroscope screen to a TV pickup tube.

Useful shutters, mainly Ilex and Alphax #3 but also some Copal Press #0, can be harvested from some oscilloscope cameras but many have electronic shutters that are basically useless.

Re Jac's suggestion, I have an Oscillo-Paragon on my desk whose front cell works well as a loupe. The rear cell might be useful if its rear shroud could be removed. Sorry, I'm not motivated enough to take a hacksaw to it.

Keith Fleming
8-Aug-2019, 17:55
I tossed the lens elements and kept the shutter. S.K. Grimes made for me an adapter to take 52 mm filters. (The commercial 46-52 mm adapters would not screw into the shutter properly). The combination of the adapter and a 52 mm close-up filter on the back of the shutter gave me an inexpensive meniscus soft-focus lens--a #3 close-up filter worked best on my 4X5. Experimenting with this arrangement saved me money--it has kept me from spending big bucks on one of the classic soft-focus lenses.

I should add that my shutter needs to be sent to a repairman. The iris will not open completely because it was factory limited to match the f.1.9 aperture of the oscilloscope lens. That work can be done during a routine cleaning and lubricating procedure.

I liked the soft-focus results enough to have Grimes make a second adapter for the front of the shutter. That keeps dust out of the shutter, and allows use of other soft-focus filters on the front. Various combinations of cheap soft-focus filters on both the front and rear give different focal lengths.

I enjoy the experimenting.

Keith

Greg
13-Aug-2019, 17:09
After a little of research discovered that small mirrorless digital camera users have been adapting these optics into focusing mounts to be used as ultra high speed tele lenses on their cameras.

Remembered Stanley Kubrick's film "BARRY LYNDON" where he used Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm f/0.7 still lenses to shoot the movie with.
http://neiloseman.com/barry-lyndon-the-full-story-of-the-famous-f0-7-lenses/

Viable option for having the 65mm f/0.75 optic adapted to a focusing mount for a Micro Four Thirds (M43) camera now sounds a path that would be very interesting to pursue... Then final prints Platinum/Palladium from digital negatives... Imagery about as far away from traditional LF and ULF photography as one could get, and definitely 180 degrees from the f/64 group. Now looking to borrow a Micro Four Thirds (M43) camera to see if this is at all possible. In the future will post my use of the 65mm f/0.75 optic, if it comes to fruition. Adapting the optic to a focusing mount to work on a a Micro Four Thirds (M43) camera my next challenge, have to look around and see how others have done it. Very open to suggestions on how to adapt this optic into a focusing mount.

65mm f/1.0 optic intend on disassembling to see what its lens elements just are and if just possibly one of them can be used with my LF cameras.

Dan Fromm
13-Aug-2019, 17:27
Greg, the Barry Lyndon lenses (there were more than one, my friend Charlie Barringer's brought 60,000 Euros plus, IIRC, a 20% buyer's premium in a Westlicht auction) were intended to be used at distance. 'scope and x-ray machine relay lenses are intended to be used around 1:1.

Even so, there's much to be said with tinkering. I'd try a sliding tube with y'r Wolly 'scope lens, I think that if you play with it you'll find its flange-to-film distance at infinity is on the order of the focal length. I just asked my 75/1.9 Oscillo-Raptar paperweight and loupe about this, that's what I got.

As for the x-ray machine lenses, I'd play with a stack of foamcore. One layer, two layers, ... For fine focusing and real headaches, black construction paper. Take this with a grain of salt, I've never been able to convince my self to get one.

Tin Can
13-Aug-2019, 17:34
I have 2 somewhere.

Following this discussion with interest.

ic-racer
13-Aug-2019, 19:33
I'd just get a macro lens if interested in creating oscilloscope art.
https://i0.wp.com/makezine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/oscopeGlith_Thumb1.jpg?resize=1200%2C670&strip=all&ssl=1

LabRat
13-Aug-2019, 20:11
What I have done when needing a focusing mount is to find junk metal 35mm faster normal lenses (with your camera mount) and strip them down... Harvest the optics for experimental lenses or loupes, remove iris assy and anything else in the way...

Front group usually has a front shroud with a set screw or 3, and will unscrew... Group has a set screw, then it will unscrew... Rear group will unscrew, but maybe some thread lok acetone will loosen... F ring might have a set screw on bottom, then all iris stuff out... Might have light baffle stuff, so remove...

But first see how high the (lens) mount is and if the new lens might slide into it (hope you can focus to infinity)... Many o-scope lenses are 75mm (3"), so that should be around the extension lens to "film" plane...

But if there's a big fat rear element on your new lens/shutter, it won't fit into the mount... And you will have to jury rig a way to hold lens to mount, but rubber or plumbing stuff might do the trick...

Try not to damage any of the mount ' s threads, as you might later like the lens enough to have a machinist make permanent metal parts for long term use...

Have fun!!!

Steve K

reddesert
14-Aug-2019, 00:43
You can buy focusing mounts now for relatively little money. Look on ebay for "focusing helicoid." They come with a variety of threads like M42 or M58 - probably easy to find adapters for a micro 4/3 camera to M42, use step rings to get to M58? Some of the market for these appears to be people adapting M42 lenses to small format digital, and I'm not sure what the application is for the M58 mount (maybe some Russian or Pentacon thing uses M58?) Anyway, these seem to be much easier to get than previously. I haven't bought one yet, but became aware of them from Dirk Fletcher's panoramic rollfilm camera build at http://dirkfletcher.blogspot.com/2018/06/finally-winding-this-thing-down.html

IMO the application for these oscilloscope lenses might be to get an oscilloscope. Make oscilloscope art, and document it.

Jan Becket
25-Aug-2019, 19:21
Dan was more correct than he realized in commenting that these lenses are "poisoned." I was given one and happened to measure it with a Berkeley Nucleonics rad meter, a fairly good one. The background radiation where I lived at that time (Hawaiʻi) was 40 CPM, more or less. Thatʻs normal. Within 12 inches, the lens measured 1300 CPM (counts per minute). Thatʻs definitely not normal. You would not want to sleep with one of these under your pilow. I ended up giving mine to the Hawaiʻi State Dept. of Health office that deals with radiation issues - they wanted it for demonstrations. Not sure, but that level of radiation might technically kick the lens into the hazardous waste zone.

arri
4-Oct-2019, 23:26
Mid September I tried to use a Steinheil Quinon 56mm f/1.9
This is an eight element lens, similar to the 75mm f/1.9 Oscillo Quinon
Both lenses have the best quality at around 1:1. Thatīs what I read in the Steinheil catalouge.

I made some 4x5" shots with the 56mm lens and I donīt find it very bad.
The high speed makes it easier to focus.
At infinity this lenses are not usable, I mounted the 56mm at my Sony Alpha 7A and the results are scrap, only something for flower photographers who like a little bit sharpness in the middle and all soft around with gruesome colours.
For macro use it is a very well working lens, why should Steinheil use 8 elements for a lens that should only produce photos of less quality?
For this kind of optical works a special lens design were necessary to produce a 100% sharp image of the tube pictures, sharp as possible, because the resolution of this tubes were not realy high but this makes it important that you donīt cut this low resolutions again with a bad lens.
Lenses made for the old Vidicon tubes were made in the same way, this tubes have had a resolution of 240x180 DPI, I think, but the lenses for it are high level products, like the Zeiss Jena Tevidon oder Cooke Vidital lenses.
So it is not true that you can use a simple lens for to taking pictures of a low resolution source, it is much more complicated than the most of us can imagine.

The X-ray lenses are only good for a loupe or for the flower photograhers with the digital system cameras. These guys pay a lot of money for it.
I find the flange register of, sometimes, less of a millimeter makes it not realy practical for use.
But here also, this lenses are absolute high end products but the band of usage is very small.

Now hereīs a sample I made with the Steinheil "Quinon" 56mm f/1.6 @f/16 Mounted in a Compur shutter
Film is the Fomapan 400 @ISO200, Sinar F1, ratio is ~ 3:1

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48728347428_7548c4ea60_b.jpg