Help choosing a "soft focus" lens, please.

[paulbarden]

I've been pondering which (if any) soft focus lens would be right for me, and I'm having a hard time choosing.
I know a fair bit about how the Verito lenses work, and the Aero Ektars as well. But based on examples I've seen of photos made with the Kodak Portrait lens, I have a feeling this might be closest to what I want, in terms of a "look".

So I'm soliciting opinions: which of these three do you use, and why do you feel it has merit? How do these three compare? I've had people say the Aero Ektar is a pain in the arse to use because it requires modification to get it on a camera. Thoughts?

PS: this is for 8x10 format.
Paul

[Jody_S]

The Aero-Ektar is a fad, shallow DoF + flare =/= soft focus. The Verito is probably the most successful soft focus lens in history. Kodak Portrait is probably #2 on the list. It would be easier for you to select some images you like and work backwards. I personally use a 14-1/2" Verito and a Darlot pillbox landscape with the front removed (works out to a 14" f9 Kodak Portrait with a hood).

[Jim Noel]

I have a Verito, a Veritar , a variable softness Wollensak a triple convertible Protar, a Heliar,a Versar and a couple of others. , . The Wolly is one of my favorites even though it is not in a modern shutter,the convertible Protar is the most versatile and I suppose I use it most often. Iwould really like to have a Kodak Portrait but it is far out of my range. Also,it is the most unusual, or some say difficult, to use of all I have. So I Guess I am not of much help to you.
Imst say that I Had the Protar for probably 30-40 years before I realized its versatility.

[Dugan]

You might want to look into a Wollaston Meniscus by Reinhold Schable.

[William Whitaker]

I've been very fond of the Verito since I first learned about it about 20 years ago..It is versatile because it is a convertible lens. Remove the front group and you have a soft focus lens about 1.5x longer FL with commensurate speed. An 11 1/2" f/4 Verito converted gives you a 20" lens with a slightly smaller max f/stop. Do the arithmetic. The iris controls the diffusion effect, so choose your film speed and lighting wisely. Stopped way down it's a fairly sharp lens, but still not without character. I have other SF lenses, but the Verito is my favorite.
Pick one. Or two different lenses. Try them. You'll quickly learn what's for you. There is a lot of subjectivity to it.

[Mark Sawyer]

Simple answer, the Verito. It's a true historic soft focus lens, and there are enough around that the price is pretty reasonable. And there's no denying it gives beautiful results.

The Kodak Portrait Lens is also very nice. If it's too pricey, the Imagon gives a very similar look when used with a conventional diaphragm.

Another good option that won't break the bank is a Velostigmat Series II with it's soft focus dial liberated from that pesky limiting screw.

[LabRat]

What format???

I have a few classic SF lenses that have their own personality, bit in general (for 4X5 I usually shoot), I have most everything I want (for tabletop) with faster 300mm or up lenses like big/old Tessars... Wide open there is some flare and a pretty shallow DOF effects... Stop down a little and the effect blends with the increasing sharpness... Problem is you need a camera with big bellows extension...

A Verito is always a safe bet, but note many lenses are soft in contrast and the fuzz can be a bit much when you want to hold some detail (instead of just forms)... I have been liking using a middle aperture so there is a slightly sharp image with some creamy smoothness to it...

Had a couple of 178mm AE's for many years (long before the "fad"), and found them better for "sharp" renditions rather than "special" effect... They looked kinda mushy wide open, and got sharp quickly while stopping down... I think the reason they became so popular was they were a cheap, fast lens that could barely fit onto a SG (with a rear shutter), but they went "viral"... I much prefer the look of an old fast 300mm on my 24" bellows studio camera, a Verito on field cameras, a Hyperion on my Graflex RB 4X5, and my old Linhof Tek has a home made 270mm f11 Meniscus sourced from scrap optics + Polaroid shutter I like as much as my other lenses...

You could try a fresnel or magnifier lens on the camera before plunking down the big bucks, as these can also fill the bill nicely...

Steve K

[mdarnton]

What film size are we talking about?

I have a Verito, the soft focus Velostigmat, two Wollastons, and a lens I cobbled up myself from an achromatic two-element close-up lens, but my fave is the front half of a 15" Tele-Raptar used with the elements either in front or of in back of the shutter (different effects). It's around 180mm, only good on 4x5. It's a solid, sharp 15" lens on 4x5 and 5x7 also. My second favorite is the Verito, just as most people are saying. The one no one mentions is the SF Fuji. Just say no to that one; of all options it is the worst. I gutted the cells of mine to make the achromat--threw the Fuji glass in the trash where it belongs.

[jp]

Paul; what film size and what is the subject matter?

( I don't consider AE soft focus; it's pretty crisp and exacting )

[paulbarden]

What format???

Steve K

For 8x10. Thanks

[Ari]

I really liked the Wollensak Series II Velostigmat with adjustable soft focus ring. The possibilities were seemingly endless as you could mix the softness of the lens with the sharpness of a smaller aperture.
For 8x10, I found that the 9 1/2 covered nicely, though the 12" is probably better-suited to the format because of its FL.

[jp]

I love the Kodak Portrait 305 for 8x10. It's meant for 5x7 which makes it a little swirlier and wider than intended when used for 8x10. But it's a good character. You can subdue that a little by stopping down. Only issue with the lens is that the Ilex5 shutters are often in need of repair.

Aside from that you might be able to get a verito which is a good choice in an even older and crappier shutter. Then you might be able to get a Imagon with a great German shutter; I don't like the strainer look, but it's not a necessary part for good soft focus.

[robshepherd]

For those of you with experience using the Wollensak Series II Velostigmat, can you obtain a soft-focus image at smaller apertures (f.16, 22 ex.) if you adjust the front ring well past number 5, as Mark has described doing? Thank you!

[mdarnton]

Mine appears to sharpen. I don't use it like that, so I'm just looking at the GG.

In my opinion, for 8x10 portraits it's a bit short. Laying on the soft focus shortens the FL, also, to around 11.5". I'd want a 16" Verito, in that case. Also, the Verito is softer than the Wolly at max, as I remember.

Really for 8x10 I would choose the longer Kodak lens, if you could find/afford one, but they're both scarce and expensive.

[Jim Noel]

I forgot to mention the 3 Wollaston Meniscus. Wide open they are hard to beat for softness. Although the effect goes away with smaller apertures, it is still evident at f16. My favorite for portraits is f-11. I have a large front mounted Packard shutter which I am able to easily to move to any of my lenses which need it.

[paulbarden]

What practical differences are there between the Verito and the Velostigmat Series II?

[Alan Gales]

Just some info if this matters to you. You can get the 305mm Kodak portrait lens in a shutter or barrel. The 405mm only comes in a barrel.

[goamules]

There are a few others that come up from time to time that give a similar affect to the two or three mentioned. The B&L Portrait Plastigmat for example, the Unar Portrait, Graf, and 4-5 others.

[paulbarden]

Just some info if this matters to you. You can get the 305mm Kodak portrait lens in a shutter or barrel. The 405mm only comes in a barrel.

Based on my research, there's no way I am going to afford myself the 405mm. I prefer a lens that's barely going to cover the format anyway, so that's the 305 for my needs. It doesn't much matter to me if its in a barrel or a shutter, as this will be mostly for making wet plate negatives. Thanks!

[mdarnton]

What practical differences are there between the Verito and the Velostigmat Series II?

The Velo may come in a nice Betax shutter (one of my personal fave shutters).
The Verito may have more fuzz and glow, but often no shutter. The 11.5" Verito is a large, but not heavy, lens.
The Velo wasn't really intended to be a soft focus lens as such--it's use was as a general purpose lens that would also work blur skin defects and pores to avoid retouching. The idea of taking the stop off so it goes a couple of turns beyond 5 is because they didn't intend it to be used as a real SF lens, and dialing it to 5 doesn't get you much.

That's part of the intent of the Verito, too, the pore blurring, but it was from an earlier era when soft focus was more of a thing. A Verito wide open is pretty fuzzy, with a LOT of glow for pictorialists (a breed that was gone by the time the Velostigmat came out, I believe) and it wasn't intended for use that way as a normal portrait lens--portraitists stopped them down, mostly, based on what I see in old portraits.

I'm with Jim. The Wollastons are a fun introduction to SF. But they're not quite the pictorialist look, if that's your intent.

If you flip through my LF Flickr stuff there's a small abundance of SF portrature with a couple of different lenses. I haven't yet found a place in my heart for the Velo II, so no examples.

Others' impressions of these lenses may not agree with mine!

[Oslolens]

But based on examples I've seen of photos made with the Kodak Portrait lens, I have a feeling this might be closest to what I want, in terms of a "look".

PS: this is for 8x10 format.
Paul

The Kodak portrait and Rodenstock Imagon might be described as a back lens cell of a Rectilinear or Anastigmat, or as a +3 achromatic diopter behind an aperture or shutter. I got an Ilex #5, adapter rings from SKGRIMES.COM and mount +3 diopter with 72mm filter diameter. You can see my rude bokeh tests on Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/47052585@N06/albums/72157634939838558

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk