Ilex 10.5" Photoplastic Extreme Soft Focus - new images

[Don Dudenbostel]

Several years ago i acquired an Ilex Protoplastic 10.5" f4.5 with the extreme soft focus rear cell. I've found very little information about this lens and have only seen one others that had the medium soft back sell. It appears these were made in the 1920's and came with a choice of non soft focus, medium soft and extreme soft rear cells. The one I have is the extreme soft version. My lens is mounted in a semi working black number 5 shutter that I had cleaned and refurbished as much as possible with a shutter of that age. I say it's semi working because Bulb and Time work just fine but the shutter speeds are seriously off but consistent. The best shutter speed is the 1/25 which is actually 1/18 of a second.

1/18 of a second makes it difficult to shoot wide open under bright conditions so I purchased an 8 stop variable neutral density filter and put it on my Fuji X-T3 and use it as a metering system. When I set the ISO at 100 and the shutter speed at 1/20 and aperture at f4.5 or the desired f stop, when the exposure is correct I'm good to go with the Ilex.

I took it to the mountains this week and did a series of exposures on FP-4 at f4.5, 5.6 and 8. At f8 the lens sharpens up a little but it's still quite soft. I shot them along a stream hoping I'd get some nice halation around specular highlights. The images attached are in order from left to right, the first one I made a few years ago at f5.6, the second f8, third f5.6 and 4th wide open at f4.5. Looking at the images I think I could have picked a better and more simple subject. This was just a little complex. Also the images are coming up darker when I posted them for some reason. Please excuse them, it's not the scans.

I'm hoping to get back into it this week and will post more as I get them. I probably will do a portrait or like Jim Gali, an old car if I can find one.

Please post your thoughts.

Don

[Tracy Storer]

Oh cool. I have the 10.5" with the NON soft focus (unmarked) rear cell, also in a semi-working older black Ilex Universal #5. I need to mount it on my V8 and see what it does.

[pjd]

Some photos of the markings (or lack of) on the cells might be useful for future reference. Someone (no connection to me) has been trying to sell an Ilex photoplastic lens for a while on eBay in the UK, but doesn't seem to know which cell (which degree of softness) it is.

[erian]

Yes, I second to the idea - could you please post picture of your lens, especially of the rear cell. I too have the 10.5 lens and I suspect that it is non soft version too, as I couldn't find any markings on the cell.

[Tracy Storer]

According to previous posts about this lens, the "normal" rear cell is unmarked and the other two are marked "medium" and "extreme".
With that said, though, I've just put my "normal" ie: unmarked rear celled 10.5" on my 8x10 in my workshop and it's not crazy sharp, there does seem to be some degree of "glow", perhaps beyond it being wide open at f/4.5, but I'll need to expose some film to really get a feel for it.

Scroll down to page 6 from an old Ilex catalog:
https://www.cameraeccentric.com/static/img/pdfs/ilex_2.pdf


Some photos of the markings (or lack of) on the cells might be useful for future reference. Someone (no connection to me) has been trying to sell an Ilex photoplastic lens for a while on eBay in the UK, but doesn't seem to know which cell (which degree of softness) it is.

[Don Dudenbostel]

Sorry I’ve not posted images. I’ve been pretty busy and will try to post some this weekend.

[Don Dudenbostel]

Here are a few images.

The first of the individual cells is the rear cell. I can’t tell but it’s either a single Plano-convex element or a cemented doublet but think it’s a single element.

The front is possibly a cemented triplet. There’s either No or very little curvature to the rear element. I don’t believe there are any air spaces but Tracy will know better than I.

[pjd]

Here are a few images.

The first of the individual cells is the rear cell. I can’t tell but it’s either a single Plano-convex element or a cemented doublet but think it’s a single element.

The front is possibly a cemented triplet. There’s either No or very little curvature to the rear element. I don’t believe there are any air spaces but Tracy will know better than I.

Thank you for posting the images taken with the lens, and also the images of the lens.

[Tin Can]

Good

Look forward to Galli-ism

[Tracy Storer]

Front cell is net negative, looks like three elements in two groups.
My rear cell ("normal") seems to be a strongly positive single element (meniscus with very slightly concave inner surface and a proudly convex outer surface)


Here are a few images.

The first of the individual cells is the rear cell. I can’t tell but it’s either a single Plano-convex element or a cemented doublet but think it’s a single element.

The front is possibly a cemented triplet. There’s either No or very little curvature to the rear element. I don’t believe there are any air spaces but Tracy will know better than I.

[Don Dudenbostel]

Tracy if you get a chance post a couple of images shot with yours. I’m especially interested in how it performs wide open.

I’m going to be busy this week but next I’m planning on getting out and shooting some images that better represent what it does.

I’m not educated on soft focus lenses and wondering if these are similar to any other design. The only other SF lenses I have are a 200mm Imagon in a compound shutter and a Wollensak Vesta Portrait in a barrel and many years ago had Kodak in a #5 shutter and a B&J Rembrandt that I gave to a friend that worked for me. Wish I had the Rembrandt now.

[Don Dudenbostel]

It’s hard to tell much from this image but this was with the Vesta Portrait. It was shot wide open and I wouldn’t call it really soft.