View Full Version : Remounting Lens (into a barrel)

Paul Metcalf
26-Apr-2006, 15:58
I have a Goerz Double-Anastigmat Series III No 4 lens (9-1/2 inch focus) that is mounted in it's vintage Bausch & Lomb Opt Co. shutter. I want to go backwards, and mount this in a barrel for use with a packard shutter. The B&L shutter is very heavy and awkward to use, especially when used in near vertical shots of objects on the ground. It appears as though the iris control is integrated into the shutter. Is it possible to go backwards like this? Has anyone done this, and what does it take? thanks.

Ernest Purdum
26-Apr-2006, 17:05
It's possible, but it would be difficult and expensive. Finding a correct barrel that would take the cells directly would be extremely unlikely. I suppose you might be able to find someone with the same lens who would trade his barrel for your shutter, but sometimes makers used differing dimensions for barrel and shutter mounts of the same lens. Failing this, you would then have to find a barrel of appropriate size and pay a highly competent machinist to make adapters and redo the diaphragm scale.

Maybe selling this lens and buying one in barrel would be less costly alternative.

Oren Grad
26-Apr-2006, 17:09
Another alternative would be to mount it in a more compact modern shutter. Per SK Grimes, a 9 1/2" Dagor ought to fit in a Copal 1.

Dan Fromm
27-Apr-2006, 05:14
Following up on Oren's suggestions, let's move this discussion from the abstract to the concrete.

Paul, remove the cells from their shutter and measure their diameters across the mounting threads. Then go to www.skgrimes.com , look around until you find their handy tables of shutters' sizes and see if there's anything modern that will fit.

Paul Metcalf
27-Apr-2006, 15:22
Thanks all. I suspected going backwards would be hard. Here's the issue with going forward, and it has more to do with abstract reasoning than concrete reasoning. This lens came with an old camera and it was just sitting around. Shutter hardley worked, and the rear lens element is pretty scratched up. Bored one day, I fiddled with the shutter and got it to work, and decided to take a portrait of a plant in my yard. Shot virtually wide open (some iris closure, but not really sure of the actual f/stop), completely guessed at the exposure (or more accurately, I got what the shutter gave me when set on 2 secs - something more like 5 or 6 seconds). Now I've very rarely not taken near-to-far sharp pictures since I moved to large format, so this was a completely new thing for me. Anyhow, the story ends that the negative is soft, dreamy is the best description I can put on it. And the print follows suit. Most importantly, now it's my wife's favorite print (she actually calls it dreamy). So, now I have to do more of this, but, honestly I can't get past putting the lens in anything like a copal (all my other lens are, so it's not a complete phobia). For some reason, either I have to keep using it as is (and it's a klunker), or get it in a barrel and use the packard shutter (that's also been sitting on the shelf). I've tried to replicate with my more modern lenses, but I think the scratches contribute a lot.

Dan Fromm
27-Apr-2006, 16:22
So front mount the entire thing, shutter and all. I do that with one of my ancient lenses that's in a well-busted Lukos II whose diaphragm still works.

Paul Metcalf
27-Apr-2006, 21:57
I'm trying to get away from the Baucsh&Lomb shutter. It's huge and weighs a ton.

Dan Fromm
28-Apr-2006, 04:55
Paul, in that case your best bet -- if the cells won't go straight into a modern shutter -- is probably to send the lens and a pot of money to S. K. Grimes.