PDA

View Full Version : Taylor Hubson Cooke 27" Lens



Dwayne Ealy
25-May-2007, 10:53
I have Taylor-Hudson Cooke 27 inch, Portrait Anastigmat lens (over 50 lbs). Five stops of soft focus. I obtained it from a New Mexico photographer that opened his studio in 1907. He used it on a double bellows 1114 studio camera that I also have. He said that he had the lens specially made where he could do head and shoulder 1114 contact prints. He was very old and I do not know if that was true; but, I can not find the lens in any Taylor documentation ... 18" is the longest which I also have and it looks very small next to the 27" lens.

Does anyone have any info on this lens ... History, value, etc.?

Thank you!
dwayne@imagesbydwayne.com

Gene McCluney
25-May-2007, 11:00
This is very cool. Can you post a photo of it?

Hugo Zhang
25-May-2007, 11:04
Over 50 Ibs. Wow!!! I can't imagine what type of front standard of 11x14 can handle that weight.

Ole Tjugen
25-May-2007, 11:11
I suppose you mount the camera on the back of the lens, rather than the lens on the camera? :)

Walter Calahan
25-May-2007, 12:16
Sounds like my 24" Kodak Aero-Ektar f/6.0 lens, but bigger. Post a snap of that puppy!

Jim Galli
25-May-2007, 13:18
WOW! My new hero. Pix please! Sorry, I don't have any new info for you either. The story sounds beliveable enough. 55" bellows just to get a 1:1 head on 11X14, holy cow! Truly, dinosaurs once roamed free.

Pete Watkins
25-May-2007, 13:54
Try looking for Taylor Hobson. The historian there (the company still exist in Leicestershire, U.K.) has a superb reputation for being very helpful. Check their website.
Best wishes,
Pete.

Ash
25-May-2007, 14:42
Hubson? Hudson?? :eek:

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
25-May-2007, 15:54
Great find.

27" is awful long for an 11x14 portrait lens, particularly a Cooke Anastigmat (read: triplet design, not Petzval or rapid rectilinear). For the Cooke portrait lenses 20" was the standard FL for 12x15, so I would guess that yours was designed for something much larger, probably 16x20.

I am sure we could provide more information if you could let us know exactly what is engraved on the barrel. And of course a picture for us to drool over.

Jim Galli
25-May-2007, 16:05
Great find.

27" is awful long for an 11x14 portrait lens, particularly a Cooke Anastigmat (read: triplet design, not Petzval or rapid rectilinear). For the Cooke portrait lenses 20" was the standard FL for 12x15, so I would guess that yours was designed for something much larger, probably 16x20.

I am sure we could provide more information if you could let us know exactly what is engraved on the barrel. And of course a picture for us to drool over.


27" Cooke, meet Mr. 20X24 Polaroid. ;)

Dwayne Ealy
29-May-2007, 11:37
Sorry, I have been away for the long weekend in the US.
The actual weight turns out to be 48 lbs. with the extension barrel.

Years ago I did check it out on the ground glass and I could get a great H&S composition with perfect long lens compression and no distortion. I will say the bellows were extended a long way which created a very "big" camera. He must have had a very large studio for the early 1900's.

Thanks,
Dwayne

Tri Tran
29-May-2007, 18:38
Hi Dwayne,
Thanks for posting the pictures.Please check your email.Thanks.TT

Paul Fitzgerald
29-May-2007, 19:42
Dwayne,

DAMN, a real double-fisted knuckle buster. Good luck and great fun with it.

Jim, dinosaurs still roam the earth.

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
29-May-2007, 19:51
Beautiful. Please use it!

Dwayne Ealy
30-May-2007, 10:05
I would love to use it but since I have gone digital I will need an 11X14 digital back! Lets see ... that would be about a two tera-pixel sensor which would result in a 12 terapixel, 12bit file per image. I think I had better start buying hard drives now to be ready when the 1114 back comes out!!!

Thanks for all of the interest you people have shown and any additional info you can provide.

Ole Tjugen
30-May-2007, 10:12
Use 11x14" film as an intermediate capture medium, then scan the film to get the whole Terapixel image. :D

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
30-May-2007, 10:38
Sad. Another beautiful lens collects dust.

Gene McCluney
30-May-2007, 10:40
Use 11x14" film as an intermediate capture medium, then scan the film to get the whole Terapixel image. :D

Just curious, as I would like to do this myself with my 11x14. What scanner do you suggest that will scan an 11x14 neg??

Jim Galli
30-May-2007, 10:46
Sad. Another beautiful lens collects dust.


The only solution I foresee is for that lens to come to live in Tonopah Nevada! :cool:

Kerik Kouklis
30-May-2007, 10:50
Sad. Another beautiful lens collects dust.Yes, yes... what a shame!!

Hugo Zhang
30-May-2007, 12:54
Dwayne,

PM sent.

Amund BLix Aaeng
30-May-2007, 14:09
Dwayne,

PM sent.

I have a feeling Jim beat you to it :D