PDA

View Full Version : A new line of Chinese pictorial lenses!



Mark Sawyer
8-Apr-2008, 19:00
Well, it's like this...

We've been covering photo-history in my high school classes lately, and when we looked at the soft focus stuff from the Photo-Secession through Hurrell, I also brought in some stuff made with my vintage and home-made soft focus lenses.

The kids liked them, and a few wanted to try out the soft-focus look, but I didn't want to bring in the expensive old ones (teen-agers are pretty rough on photo equipment...), and my home-made ones are just for me. So I decided there must be a good third option...

Down to the 99-cent store I went, and bought a few magnifying glasses, cheap but made with real glass at least... There were two (small and medium) together for 99 cents, and a larger one for 99 cents by itself. The focal lengths turned out to be 9.5", 12", and 14", and all had an f/stop of about f/3.8. Perfect!

I ground the plastic handle off the 9.5" lens, and attached it to a blank lensboard with a bead of "liquid nails". We put it on the Cambo 4x5 at school, and tried it out. Without a shutter, we'd focus, cover the lens, pull the darkslide, turn off the room lights, pop the flash (bounced off an umbrella), cover the lens, flip on the room lights and reinsert the darkslide. These are from the first day's work, some by me, some by students. I could tell you which were which, but it doesn't really matter...

A few from the 2F99c (2 for 99 cents!) lens:

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/2500hi.jpg

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/4500hi.jpg

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/8.jpg

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/6500hi.jpg

BarryS
8-Apr-2008, 19:12
Very cool--those look pretty nice for a one buck lens. I recently got a bag of mixed lens elements with some darkroom gear and I'd like to build some of my own simple view camera lenses.

Vaughn
8-Apr-2008, 19:14
Beautiful...and such a wonderful way to move students away from the idea that the art of photography is not about the latest and greatest piece of equipment!

(but did you have to sharpen the images in PhotoShop?)

Vaughn

Mark Sawyer
8-Apr-2008, 19:21
Thanks, guys! The only manipulation in photoshop was to match the tone and contrast to the prints (at least as close as I can get it on my monitor!) and take out the dust on the underside of the scanner's glass.

It really is a nice project with the students, so simple they can understand it on the most basic levels, and the equipment is cheap enough they could do it on their own after high school.

I'll scan the one 8x10 we did with the 14" 1F99c lens and post it in a little bit...

Hugo Zhang
8-Apr-2008, 19:24
Mark,

These pictures are very unique and beautiful! Quite an eye opening experience!

Hugo

Frank Petronio
8-Apr-2008, 19:24
All those suckers who spent an extra $1298.37 on their lens are kicking themselves right now, lol, great stuff!

IanMazursky
8-Apr-2008, 19:45
Wow! These are great shots. It makes me really want to go out and try this with my Crown Graphic.
I wonder if i could find a lens big enough to cover my 12x20? I really like the soft focus dreamy look.

Mark Sawyer
8-Apr-2008, 19:46
And this is the first and only 8x10 image we've done with the 14" 1F99c lens. Also Regina's first 8x10 ever. I think she done good...

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/5500hi.jpg

Jim Galli
8-Apr-2008, 19:55
"Values plummeted on rare and ancient soft focus optics today as a new line of foreign lenses was unveiled at an attractive pricepoint."

Several students were heard to ask "...who would pay $3000 for a lens when a 99˘ one will work just as well?" Jim Galli commented that this has been tried before but people have short memories and Pinkhams, Eidoscop's and the like will be back up to stupid money by next week, ten days tops.

David A. Goldfarb
8-Apr-2008, 19:55
Great project!

The 8x10" looks almost like a drawing. It would make an interesting gum print.

Mark Sawyer
8-Apr-2008, 20:03
Hey, Jim! I'll trade you five of these lenses for one Pinkham & Smith lens... ;)

It does seem sometimes that there's a surprisingly fuzzy line between P&S lenses and PoS lenses... :rolleyes:

Mark Sawyer
8-Apr-2008, 20:05
Great project!

The 8x10" looks almost like a drawing. It would make an interesting gum print.

Funny, the first print Regina pulled, I was thinking, "that would make such a beautiful photo-gravure..."

BarryS
8-Apr-2008, 20:17
And this is the first and only 8x10 image we've done with the 14" 1F99c lens. Also Regina's first 8x10 ever. I think she done good...


You aren't kidding--that's a beautiful image.

Anupam
8-Apr-2008, 23:12
Hat's off ... good stuff.

Asher Kelman
8-Apr-2008, 23:40
Mark,

The portraits are extraordinary!

Some of us lose sight of the goal and get lost in the vehicle choice to get there! You are a great travel guide for your class!

These kids will have a good lesson for their lives if you also show them the prices of rare lenses we lust after!

You have used a $1 piece of glass to add some extra to their lives:

extra + ordinary=extraordinary!

Good job and humbling!

Asher

Capocheny
9-Apr-2008, 00:37
Outstanding examples of what you can do with low-cost optics...

Kudos Mark!

Cheers

John Kasaian
9-Apr-2008, 01:12
Truly beautiful images, Mark!

Wimpler
9-Apr-2008, 02:20
I did exactly the same thing for this test picture:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/106/317074204_5038f42b68.jpg

This one was about 300mm f3. An exposure of a couple of seconds on a paper 4x5 negative.

I must admit your portraits are a lot more exciting then my test image! But the lenses seem to perform equally interesting!

wfwhitaker
9-Apr-2008, 07:58
My high school was never so interesting as this. Can't wait to see your yearbook!

Benno Jones
9-Apr-2008, 08:00
Great stuff, Mark. Could you possibly post a pic of the lens on a lensboard so I can get a better idea of just what you did? I'd love to experiment with homemade lenses but I'm rather non-mechanical and have a hard time picturing things like this.

Thanks!

Jim Galli
9-Apr-2008, 08:05
BTW, I was busy cracking jokes and forgot to say the pictures truly are stunning. Great Job!

darr
9-Apr-2008, 08:20
Mark,

You are indeed teaching so much to your kids (and us) -- they are lucky to have you! And as usual, your photography is stupendous!

Thanks for sharing,
Darr

Dave Aharonian
9-Apr-2008, 08:31
Mark, Kudos to you for doing this work with the kids. In grade 6 we made pinhole cameras in shoeboxes on photo paper. For me, it was the start of my lifelong interest in photography. The portraits you've made are really wonderful. Makes me glad I didn't end up forking out $800 for the Petzval that went on ebay yesterday!

Chauncey Walden
9-Apr-2008, 09:17
But, are they multicoated?;-)

Mark Sawyer
9-Apr-2008, 10:16
But, are they multicoated?;-)

Yes they are, with little fingerprints... :D

Mark Sawyer
9-Apr-2008, 10:28
Great stuff, Mark. Could you possibly post a pic of the lens on a lensboard so I can get a better idea of just what you did? I'd love to experiment with homemade lenses but I'm rather non-mechanical and have a hard time picturing things like this.

Thanks!

Here's one of the 4x5 with the 9.5" 2F99c lens on a cardboard lensboard (it's black on the backside), and the 8x10 with the 14" 1F99c lens on a Pergo lensboard. By the way, I lied about them all being f/3.8. The 14" is an f/3.5, and is now properly engraved as such with a Sharpie...

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/IMG_0590400hi.jpg

And the 2F99c lenses sitting brand new in the store:

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/IMG_0588400hi.jpg

Sadly, they are currently out of the 14" size. But I spent $5.35 (with tax) stocking up on five more each of the 9.5" and 12" lenses. Don't you wish you could do that with the old Veritos...

Any other questions, let me know...

Benno Jones
9-Apr-2008, 11:17
Thanks! The pics verify what I was picturing in my head, but I wanted to be sure.

Brian Bullen
9-Apr-2008, 11:47
Mark, I wish I had a High School photography teacher like you! My teacher was fully uninspiring and you are exactly the opposite. Thanks for the lesson and the beautiful photos.

Eric Biggerstaff
9-Apr-2008, 15:01
Mark,

You and your students should be proud, the work is simply beautiful.

Pat Kearns
9-Apr-2008, 20:19
I am amazed over the images. You've come up with the Poor Man's LF Lensbabies. You need to head to Home Depot or Auto Zone to get some rubber gaskets to use as Waterhouse stops. Looks like I'm off to Dollar Tree to buy me some new lenses. :p

Murray
10-Apr-2008, 00:12
Really nice stuff.

Yeah, my HS photg. teacher was a jerk, to be charitable.

Here are my reading glass semi-symmetricals. Apologies for the phone-cam images. I haven't put stops in or shot anything with them yet.

$1/pair also. I used I think a +2.50 and + 3 and +3.5 pair, one isn't finished yet.

I picked the goofiest looking reading glasses I could find. Seriously, was I going to choose 'attitude glasses' at a $ store?

http://www.uptowngallery.org/Murray/ReadingGlassLenses/no0.jpg
http://www.uptowngallery.org/Murray/ReadingGlassLenses/no1.jpg
http://www.uptowngallery.org/Murray/ReadingGlassLenses/no2.jpg

Paul H
10-Apr-2008, 03:34
Great images, and a great lesson for the students.

I might have to find a $2 Shop and see what they have here!

eddie
10-Apr-2008, 04:29
And the 2F99c lenses sitting brand new in the store:

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/IMG_0588400hi.jpg

Sadly, they are currently out of the 14" size. But I spent $5.35 (with tax) stocking up on five more each of the 9.5" and 12" lenses. Don't you wish you could do that with the old Veritos...

Any other questions, let me know...

har har har! great stuff. awesome shots. now take your new soft focus chinese lenses over to the FS section and see if you can start the price climbing. i am sure you could get 10 times your money easy! :)

did you use one lens from the magnifying glass or both of them?

eddie

Darryl Baird
10-Apr-2008, 07:17
GREAT! How much for these "Sawyer Magnigon" lenses in modern shutters? You could start a bidding war right here.

Thanks Mark, you made my day (and it's early). Today I'm talking to students about LF lens specs, styles, and modern choices... I'm going to come back here for the grand finale. I can't wait to see their faces. :eek:


Well, it's like this...

We've been covering photo-history in my high school classes lately, and when we looked at the soft focus stuff from the Photo-Secession through Hurrell, I also brought in some stuff made with my vintage and home-made soft focus lenses.

The kids liked them, and a few wanted to try out the soft-focus look, but I didn't want to bring in the expensive old ones (teen-agers are pretty rough on photo equipment...), and my home-made ones are just for me. So I decided there must be a good third option...

Down to the 99-cent store I went, and bought a few magnifying glasses, cheap but made with real glass at least... There were two (small and medium) together for 99 cents, and a larger one for 99 cents by itself. The focal lengths turned out to be 9.5", 12", and 14", and all had an f/stop of about f/3.8. Perfect!

I ground the plastic handle off the 9.5" lens, and attached it to a blank lensboard with a bead of "liquid nails". We put it on the Cambo 4x5 at school, and tried it out. Without a shutter, we'd focus, cover the lens, pull the darkslide, turn off the room lights, pop the flash (bounced off an umbrella), cover the lens, flip on the room lights and reinsert the darkslide. These are from the first day's work, some by me, some by students. I could tell you which were which, but it doesn't really matter...

A few from the 2F99c (2 for 99 cents!) lens:

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/2500hi.jpg

chachahavana
13-Apr-2008, 15:40
This is just great and unbelieveable !! This is the style I like very much, very Margaret Juliet Cameron look !! What lens ( Mag Glass ) did you use on the 8x10 ?
You said you use a flash, isn't it more difficult to shoot it under normal light, I mean to cover the lens and all that !? Thank you for sharing !!

I've been looking for a f/2.8 Xenotar for a while, may be this is a good alternative !!

Mark Sawyer
14-Apr-2008, 09:38
har har har! great stuff. awesome shots. now take your new soft focus chinese lenses over to the FS section and see if you can start the price climbing. i am sure you could get 10 times your money easy! :)

did you use one lens from the magnifying glass or both of them?

eddie

Just one lens at a time. Simplicity itself!

I should have kept my mouth shut about what these are. I coulda sold 'em for a bunch!


This is just great and unbelieveable !! This is the style I like very much, very Margaret Juliet Cameron look !! What lens ( Mag Glass ) did you use on the 8x10 ?
You said you use a flash, isn't it more difficult to shoot it under normal light, I mean to cover the lens and all that !? Thank you for sharing !!

I've been looking for a f/2.8 Xenotar for a while, may be this is a good alternative !!

On the 8x10 we used a 14" f/3.8, which you only get one of for 99 cents.

Our normal room light id pretty boring, just overhead flourescents with no windows. The exposure time there would be about a quarter second, so subject motion would be a factor. The strobe is the only option for decent looking light. Plus it lets the background go a bit darker, which we like, and it's more fun.

Thanks again, everyone!

Ralph Barker
14-Apr-2008, 09:54
Love the images, Mark, and what a great idea for your class. Kudos to the kids, too.

The only problem is that there will now be a big run-up on the price of magnifying glasses (as with old brassies), and the dollar stores will be forced to stop carrying them. ;)

lisa larson
13-Jul-2009, 16:39
Thank you for all the info. I love the portraits done with the Chinese mag. lens. They are beautiful! Is there a lens wth a shutter that would give this effect that would fit the Wista 4 x 5 ? Thanks. Lisa

Mark Barendt
13-Jul-2009, 17:38
"Values plummeted on rare and ancient soft focus optics today as a new line of foreign lenses was unveiled at an attractive pricepoint."

Several students were heard to ask "...who would pay $3000 for a lens when a 99˘ one will work just as well?" Jim Galli commented that this has been tried before but people have short memories and Pinkhams, Eidoscop's and the like will be back up to stupid money by next week, ten days tops.

I think I'm going to work on one or two of these to play with in Tonopah. :cool:

Mike1234
13-Jul-2009, 19:54
Who the heck do you think you are, Mark Sawyer?! In one just single post you've completely deflated my Imagon lust. Now what am I to do with my Rod' softy???

Petzval Paul
13-Jul-2009, 21:38
Is what you see on the GG what you get, or do you need to adjust the focus as with other non-achromats?

Jim Galli
13-Jul-2009, 22:05
Is what you see on the GG what you get, or do you need to adjust the focus as with other non-achromats?

I think what appears as delightful peripheral fuzz in the BW photos would be hideous color banding in a color photo with no real way to correct it, focus or otherwise.

fuegocito
13-Jul-2009, 22:37
I never did find the 2F99C lens, so I made do with the 1F99C lens

5x7 neg

Mark Sawyer
14-Jul-2009, 00:01
Is what you see on the GG what you get, or do you need to adjust the focus as with other non-achromats?

Jim is probably right about the chromatic aberrations, but I checked pretty carefully for focus shift, and didn't find any, so no focus adjustment needed for that.

Remember, the depth of field spreads a little with the spherical and chromatic aberrations, so even with the minimal overall depth of field, it's somewhat forgiving within a small range. Enough to compensate for a small focus shift? Maybe...

We're definitely going to play with them more this year! :)

Mark Sawyer
14-Jul-2009, 00:03
Who the heck do you think you are, Mark Sawyer?! In one just single post you've completely deflated my Imagon lust. Now what am I to do with my Rod' softy???

Ummmm... sell it to me cheap? :D

Mike1234
14-Jul-2009, 00:29
Ummmm... sell it to me cheap? :D

"Cheap" is a relative term. There's cheap, dirt cheap, and tin-can-alley cheap. ;)

I have a 250 in Compound w/ no discs (the shutter does have an aperture) and a 300 in barrel w/ all three discs, shade, and ND filter. The former is in good cosmetic condition w/ blotchy coatings but no scratches and the latter is near mint with perfect coatings. I'm open to offers/trades.

I'm piecing together a compact 6x9cm system (or a very small 4x5 for dedicate 6x9cm shooting)... looking for 47 f/5.6 and 65 f/5.6 SA's and a 90 f/8 SA... or a 5.6... just trying to save bulk/weight. For that matter I guess they could all be f/8. Furthermore, they could all be Acugons or a mix. I may also be interested in a very lightweight 4x5 or 6x9 camera capable of easily shooting ultrawide to moderately long lenses (47-360mm).

BTW, since you're interested in unusual optics, I have a rare Taylor-Hobson Series VIIB Wide Angle Anastigmat 2 1/2 inch (~65mm) factory front-mounted in a Compur-P. If what I've read is true this tiny gem covers 4x5.

After this we should probably take it off-line... PM me if there's any interest in purchase/sale/trade.

numnutz
15-Jul-2009, 06:22
Here Is my effort - Taken through a window on a rainy day last week with my Gandolfi 5 x 4.

First one is from a rectangular hand magnifying glass. Focal length guesstimated as around 250mm aperture about F3. I taped the glass over a lensboard with a hole in black card approximating an aperture of around f8 over the glass.

Second is using a magnifying glass from a "Helping Hands" Gizmo. focal length / aperture was guesstimated at 120mm F2 but I constructed an an aperture of around F5.6 from black card.

Shutter an old box capped over the lens I hoped the shutter speed was around ˝ a second.

Film was Foma 100 developed in Retro Pyro the two images were scanned and reduced in size and Quadtoned on Photoshop.


nn :)

goamules
15-Jul-2009, 08:39
OK, maybe I should try this. I have two of the large lenses from the innards of a magic lantern, will they work Mark?

They are convex on one side, flat on the other. Holding them up to the wall I get a soft image at about 8 inches, and they're so large they must be about f2. I better get some cardboard out for a lensboard.....

Mark Sawyer
15-Jul-2009, 10:57
Here Is my effort - Taken through a window on a rainy day last week with my Gandolfi 5 x 4.

First one is from a rectangular hand magnifying glass. Focal length guesstimated as around 250mm aperture about F3. I taped the glass over a lensboard with a hole in black card approximating an aperture of around f8 over the glass.

Fine images! They fit the soft aesthetic. I've wondered about those rectangular magnifying lenses, what sort of image they would give. Was your f/8 aperture hole round? How did the image look "wide open"?


OK, maybe I should try this. I have two of the large lenses from the innards of a magic lantern, will they work Mark?

They are convex on one side, flat on the other. Holding them up to the wall I get a soft image at about 8 inches, and they're so large they must be about f2. I better get some cardboard out for a lensboard.....

If the lens throws an image, the film or plate will catch it! Whether the quality of the image is something you want to work with is the big question. Sounds like you have some experimenting to do...

Archphoto
15-Jul-2009, 13:20
And that makes LF such wonderfull camera's: you can experiment with lenses of all kinds without having to take the camera apart with srewdrivers: just get your self a new (or used) lensboard.....

Great shots, great fun for little money .....

Peter

Dave Wooten
15-Jul-2009, 13:29
I think Rodenstock will coat lenses, only thing is turnaround time is not that optimal. :)

ljsegil
16-Jul-2009, 03:12
I think Rodenstock will coat lenses, only thing is turnaround time is not that optimal. :)

Might be something special to see Rodenstocks's reaction if you send in one of Mark's 2F99c specials for their premium multicoating. Could ask for mounting on a Sinar DB board in order to use the auto aperture feature of the Sinar shutter as well, taking full advantage of the myriad and mysterious optical qualities inherent in Mark's new optical system concept. Now there would be a conundrum for the mighty Rodenstock, might further extend their turnaround time a bit (or trigger an immediate event in the return post from the good wizards at Rodenstock).
Yours in mirth and admiration (much more the latter),
Larry

Mike1234
16-Jul-2009, 11:48
^^^ They would probably just grin and take his money. :)

Mark Sawyer
16-Jul-2009, 13:44
^^^ They would probably just grin and take his money. :)

Just like my old girlfriend... :rolleyes:

CatSplat
16-Jul-2009, 14:32
How would one go about measuring the aperture of these? Just estimating?

Mike1234
16-Jul-2009, 16:12
How would one go about measuring the aperture of these? Just estimating?

It has something to do with diameter vs. FL but I can't remember the formula. I'll bet Mark knows.

Mark Sawyer
16-Jul-2009, 16:18
How would one go about measuring the aperture of these? Just estimating?

Pretty easy, really:

1. Hold the lens in front of a white wall or sheet of cardboard and focus on something far away. Measure the distance from the lens to the wall. This is the focal length. (You can also measure from the lens to the ground glass if you have it on a camera.)

2. Measure the diameter of the lens.

3. Divide the focal length (1.) by the lens diameter (2.), and the answer is the f/stop!

Example: if it's ten inches from the lens to where the image focuses on the wall, and the lens is two inches in diameter, divide ten by two. You get five. It's an f/5 lens.

CatSplat
17-Jul-2009, 07:31
Aha, math to the rescue! I knew it was a ratio of some kind but I didn't know it was that simple.

CatSplat
21-Jul-2009, 18:53
Alright, so I dropped by my local dollar store and grabbed the only remaining glass-lensed magnifying glass in the shop ($1.50). I've fabbed up a lensboard and mounted it on the 4X5. It looks to be a 250mm lens with a 90mm diameter - and unless my calculations are terrible that makes it almost exactly a 250mm f/2.8! It's swirly as heck and the coverage seems massive, although I wouldn't say it's sharp in the corners, haha! I'll post some pics when I get some shots taken, hopefully this evening as I've really got no way of using a hat-shutter in broad daylight with an f/2.8 lens.

Toyon
22-Jul-2009, 07:03
Wonderful project. However, I think it is incorrect to call these "soft focus" lenses. Soft focus lenses are soft across the entire field (caveat: the center may be relatively sharper than the edges). We need another term for lenses that are not sharp outside of an inner circle - something like "grad-focus lenses".

stealthman_1
22-Jul-2009, 19:22
This whole thread is just really, really cool. Thanks for sharing and inspiring! :)

jb7
22-Jul-2009, 19:47
yes, lovely pictures-

sorry, but I prefer German pictorial lenses...

I put the lens from this, about a 50mm...
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/8715/jb4567agfa5427.jpg

into this-
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4127/jb4567front545pro5483.jpg


Here's one from Amsterdam a few weeks ago
FP10c 45
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3476/3746638769_121db53f69_o.jpg

Jim Galli
22-Jul-2009, 19:50
yes, lovely pictures-

sorry, but I prefer German pictorial lenses...

I put the lens from this, about a 50mm...


into this-



Here's one from Amsterdam a few weeks ago
FP10c 45



Oh, that's way cool. Is that some kind of rail car?

jb7
22-Jul-2009, 20:27
Sorry Jim, not a rail car, a canal boat, the Belle Epoque-
a group of us hired it for a few hours-

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2651/3746641783_b80cd0312a_o.jpg

RocketRick
10-Dec-2009, 14:57
Now I'm starting to wonder what would happen if I tried using one of those fresnel "page magnifier" sheets in place of a lens board and lens....

- Rick

Bosaiya
10-Dec-2009, 15:09
Now I'm starting to wonder what would happen if I tried using one of those fresnel "page magnifier" sheets in place of a lens board and lens....

- Rick

I use one for a brightscreen. Shhh, don't tell!

ljb0904
10-Dec-2009, 15:59
Mark, these are great! Thanks for sharing!

Turner Reich
10-Dec-2009, 16:56
How about combining one of these with other lens shapes or designs? Time to experiment.

Aahx
10-Dec-2009, 17:44
This is a cool thread.

Another fun place to pick up optics (but much higher priced) is a place like http://www.edmundoptics.com if one is wanting to build/design there own lens and needs higher quality glass.

SteveKarr
10-Dec-2009, 18:31
WOW ... I clicked on the Edmund Optics link ... Boy do I feel dumb ... numbers everywhere...

Turner Reich
12-Dec-2009, 07:22
I went to the Dollar store and found a 14" 1F99c lens in mint condition in original package with instructions and it was a "buy it now" so I took a huge chance and went for it. Turns out it's not coated but what the hey it's new glass and what an image it projects. I just put it up to a wall with a window on the other side of the room and the image is clear and bright with that beautiful pattern it is know for. They really knew how to make them in '09. You don't get deals like this every day do you? And it's fast too, about f 4.0. It's a barrel lens but it can be adapted to a shutter, like a hat very easily. Too bad I couldn't find a serial number but it was made in the Far East, I know that for sure.

Mark Sawyer
12-Dec-2009, 09:36
As mentioned earlier in the thread, Rodenstock might be able to coat it for you. And I'm sure S. K. Grimes could mount it into a modern shutter. I'm sure it's worth the investment, as the lens would at least double, perhaps even triple in value!

Turner Reich
12-Dec-2009, 15:43
1F3.00M lens multicoat?

What about a homemade coating? A decent lens shade is necessary too.

Asher Kelman
23-Jun-2011, 03:03
More pictures!

bobwysiwyg
23-Jun-2011, 04:54
The only problem is that there will now be a big run-up on the price of magnifying glasses (as with old brassies), and the dollar stores will be forced to stop carrying them. ;)

.. or, inflate the store name accordingly. :D Great thread, great pics, can't wait to give some of this a try. Thanks for the OP.

goamules
23-Jun-2011, 06:12
Mark started this thread back in 2009. Since then all the magnifying glass lenses have mysteriously disappeared from all dollar stores nationwide. Rumor has it they were bought out by a soft focus lens entrepreneur, who is working with toilet paper tube vendors, and is preparing to market a new pictorialist lens.

cdholden
23-Jun-2011, 06:14
Mark started this thread back in 2009. Since then all the magnifying glass lenses have mysteriously disappeared from all dollar stores nationwide. Rumor has it they were bought out by a soft focus lens entrepreneur, who is working with toilet paper tube vendors, and is preparing to market a new pictorialist lens.

Are we to expect Dollar General to become Thousand Dollar General?

Asher Kelman
23-Jun-2011, 08:46
Mark started this thread back in 2009. Since then all the magnifying glass lenses have mysteriously disappeared from all dollar stores nationwide. Rumor has it they were bought out by a soft focus lens entrepreneur, who is working with toilet paper tube vendors, and is preparing to market a new pictorialist lens.
I think you're right! Only there's a catch to this!

He's now in Europe removing the very last stocks! It's not so that his old fashioned petzvals will eventually regain their royal position again! The new cardboard toilet mount was started as a rumor. The truth is painful and shows the lengths these rich entrepreneurs will go to to exploit us! Rich dentists and lawyers snapping up softfocus lenses for $5,000 and driving prices out of our reach is nothing to this. At least then, these fine new artistic tools are available for future generations and, perhaps, Cooke can copy them if we sign up and promise to buy enough for a limited run.

The reality is far worse than that and simply unconscionable.

I discovered in the Wall Street Journal, this morning, to my horror and disgust, that the revered lens is not going to ever reappear on the general market as the expected! They're open about it! It's a major coup. All the Photokina reports and APUG stories were a ruse! Sadly the WSJ reports that, even now, the entire stock of prized optics is being broken up to make micro lenses by the millions for the iphone 5!

I can't disclose who advised them on this matter, but incidentally, the WSJ also reports that an anonymous philanthropist has funded an unprecedented donation of free iphones to the entire population of Tonopah, Nevada. Jim Galli's wife, apparently, refused to make any statement, but reportedly has been refurnishing an addition to their house.

Asher

Mark Sawyer
23-Jun-2011, 10:28
Now gentlemen, don't panic! I have some very good news. I've been in contact with the good people at Cooke Optics, and since these lenses are so revered and in demand, they are going to introduce a modernized version, just as they did with the PS945. This new lens will be called the PoS99cent, and will be multicoated and set in a Copal 3 shutter. Suggested retail will be $3,995, so find a dealer and reserve yours soon!

Greg Miller
23-Jun-2011, 16:34
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/IMG_0588400hi.jpg



Hmmm. I'm wondering how those X-Ray glasses i ordered from the comic book would work... :p

Uri A
27-Oct-2011, 22:28
Mark, this is the coolest thread I have ever seen. Kudos!

Vaughn
27-Oct-2011, 22:51
Since you re-opened this thread...

Alex, Last Game of the Season
Speed graphic w/ magnifying glass lens
Type 55
Scan of a contact print

Uri A
27-Oct-2011, 22:57
Beautiful, Vaughn.

Type 55... seriously, isn't there SOME factory in China that can make this happen goddammit ?!?!?!

Mark Sawyer
27-Oct-2011, 23:34
A few more weeks, and a new crop of students will be at them again... :)

Vaughn
27-Oct-2011, 23:40
Beautiful, Vaughn.

Type 55... seriously, isn't there SOME factory in China that can make this happen goddammit ?!?!?!

If a Chinese businessman had been on his toes, he would have bought the whole factory and shipped it to China...maybe that would have worked.

The beauty of the material was due to the (rumored) Kodak Panatomic X used for the negative in the Polaroid product. The magic was in the monobath goop in the chemical pod. The engineering was getting it all together in one package!

Mark -- good to hear that! Have fun!


Another:
Alex at Bat -- and getting a hit in the last game of the season
Scanned contact print.

Tim Meisburger
15-Jan-2013, 16:38
I already posted this in the portrait thread, but saw this old thread referenced in another thread, and decided to revive it. I remembered this thread, so while I was at my mothers in Tucson for the holidays with nothing to do, I went out to the garage and made a linhof board out of a piece of plywood, cut a hole in it and glued on a four inch length of cardboard shipping tube, then used clear caulk to mount a magnifying glass lens I bought at the 99 cent store inside. I cut a slot in the top and made some waterhouse stops out of cardboard, then spray painted the whole thing black. Yielded a 7 1/2" f2.7 meniscus.

Here is the first shot. My little sister at the dining room table, wide open.
http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l496/Tim_Meisburger/2012-12ChristmasinUS004.jpg

goamules
15-Jan-2013, 17:09
Good one Tim! I'll be sending you your plate and such tomorrow, from the workshop.

AtlantaTerry
16-Jan-2014, 21:45
This is a very interesting thread. I've been using small magnifying glass lenses taped to the front of a Nikon bellows on my 35mm cameras since the '70s for pictorial and soft focus portraits. I also have a couple very rare Sima SF lenses (one element + Waterhouse stops) in a T-mount.

So with my interest of many years in using magnifying glass lenses to make soft focus photos, I would like to extend this thread one step more: adding a shutter to the 2F99c lens to use in daylight on my Cambo or Crown Graphic cameras.

My first thought would be to mount the magnifying glass element on the back of a lens board and mount a shutter on the front in the traditional manner. The shutter will probably extend behind the lens board to some extent so we will have to move the lens element back a bit in order to give the shutter some clearance.

How to move it back easily? Hmmm... how about looking in the plumbing area of a hardware store where they have black PVC pipes of all sorts and sizes. Then use hot glue to affix the plumbing piece to the back of the lens board. We then attach the shutter in the normal way to the board.

Question: will it make much of a difference if the shutter is far from the lens element?

What size shutter will be best for a project like this? I'm certainly not going to use the Copal 3 shutter from one of my best lenses. But I might have some smaller shutters around here. I'm sure in one of my storage boxes I have a shutter from a Polaroid MP3 copy camera or another shutter with no lens in it.

Suggestions?

Mark Sawyer
16-Jan-2014, 22:44
Question: will it make much of a difference if the shutter is far from the lens element?

What size shutter will be best for a project like this? I'm certainly not going to use the Copal 3 shutter from one of my best lenses. But I might have some smaller shutters around here. I'm sure in one of my storage boxes I have a shutter from a Polaroid MP3 copy camera or another shutter with no lens in it.

Suggestions?

The only difference the shutter-to-lens difference will make is in mechanical vignetting. As the Copal 3 has a 58mm thread front and rear, I'd consider blowing the big bucks for a set of 58mm close-up diopters, and screw them in at the rear. +1 is 1000mm, +2 is 500mm, +3 is 333mm, +4 is 250mm. A nice set of meniscus soft focus lenses that fit your shutter for under $20!

Example: http://www.ebay.com/itm/58mm-macro-close-up-1-2-3-4-close-up-filter-set-58-/170477936690?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item27b146e032

But you can hunt around and find them even cheaper, I bet!

AtlantaTerry
16-Jan-2014, 23:27
Mark, good suggestions. But, once again, I am not going to take apart my best lens just go get to the Copal 3 shutter.

What I will do is see what empty shutter I have around here then see about attaching a close-up diopter to it.

Mark Sawyer
17-Jan-2014, 00:03
Yes you will, Terry, or the photo-fairies will sprinkle pixie-dust in your film-holders!!! :rolleyes:

The elements just unscrew, and you can put them somewhere safe while using the shutter. Maybe put a UV filter on the front to keep out the dust. :)

Tin Can
17-Jan-2014, 00:24
Shoot, I am going to do this! Get out of the way, Terry! KIDDING.

Great idea and I do have a Copal 3 or 4 (joke) I think my close ups are 52mm, but I have adapters to SEE what could done be with those hot shot 58mm diopters.

Cheap fun, just what I need tonight, as I may not sleep tonight. I had terrible news today. I am in mourning. I have meniscus eyes. (not joking)




Yes you will, Terry, or the photo-fairies will sprinkle pixie-dust in your film-holders!!! :rolleyes:

The elements just unscrew, and you can put them somewhere safe while using the shutter. Maybe put a UV filter on the front to keep out the dust. :)

analoguey
17-Jan-2014, 00:30
Wow. What a thread!
Time to go hunt for a few of these!

What I didn't get was how did you estimate the f stops? I dont remember any magnifying lens stating so? :-/

Mark Sawyer
17-Jan-2014, 01:30
(I'll cross-post the answer I just gave in another thread...)

The f/stop is easy: The focal length (distance from the lens to the ground glass when in focus) divided by the aperture, (diameter of the lens. So a 12-inch focal length with a 2-inch diameter lens is 12 divided by 2... f/6!

If you want to shut down the aperture, cut some circular holes in black cardboard and put it in front of the lens. A half-inch hole on that 12-inch lens gives you f/24.

analoguey
17-Jan-2014, 05:06
(I'll cross-post the answer I just gave in another thread...)

The f/stop is easy: The focal length (distance from the lens to the ground glass when in focus) divided by the aperture, (diameter of the lens. So a 12-inch focal length with a 2-inch diameter lens is 12 divided by 2... f/6!

If you want to shut down the aperture, cut some circular holes in black cardboard and put it in front of the lens. A half-inch hole on that 12-inch lens gives you f/24.

Oh indeed!
Wish there more teachers like you, demonstrating these principles in actuality!

tangyimail
17-Jan-2014, 07:19
Very cool thread, thanks Mark.

peter k.
17-Jan-2014, 20:56
Oh this is great.. wanted a new lens to try on a recent resurrected 4x5 Pacemaker from parts.. I know what I'll be doing tomorrow.. thank you .. very in~sight~full ;-)

peter k.
18-Jan-2014, 13:27
The f/stop is easy: The focal length (distance from the lens to the ground glass when in focus) divided by the aperture, (diameter of the lens. So a 12-inch focal length with a 2-inch diameter lens is 12 divided by 2... f/6!

Bear with me I'm a newbie in all this stuff, (Started since becoming retarded, I mean retired, a couple of years ago) I'm confused!
I made a lens, 2-inch diameter, and focused on objects 4 feet+. The focal length measured is 10.75" to ground glass. Giving an f~5.375.
1) When I move the camera further away, or closer the focal length changes?
2) If this is so, then you have to figure the new focal length, and make a new cutout?
3)
A half-inch hole on that 12-inch lens gives you f/24.
How did you come up with this? de formula please.. ;-)
What fun!!!

BTW.. I made a cutout, and put it on the inside of the lens, as the second part of the lens board, using a 1/4 hole in center. Shot HP5 400, (all I have in 4x5) with Focal Plane Shutter set to 500 and then another shot @ 125. Going to develop now, and will see.
Ha.. Have no idea if the F.P.S. is even close, as have not tested it as of yet, yet alone, if the 1/4" hole was close to the correct aperture.

Reference:
If you want to shut down the aperture, cut some circular holes in black cardboard and put it in front of the lens.

AtlantaTerry
18-Jan-2014, 14:26
Bear with me I'm a newbie in all this stuff, (Started since becoming retarded, I mean retired, a couple of years ago) I'm confused!
I made a lens, 2-inch diameter, and focused on objects 4 feet+. The focal length measured is 10.75" to ground glass. Giving an f~5.375.
1) When I move the camera further away, or closer the focal length changes?
2) If this is so, then you have to figure the new focal length, and make a new cutout?
3)
How did you come up with this? de formula please.. ;-)
What fun!!!

BTW.. I made a cutout, and put it on the inside of the lens, as the second part of the lens board, using a 1/4 hole in center. Shot HP5 400, (all I have in 4x5) with Focal Plane Shutter set to 500 and then another shot @ 125. Going to develop now, and will see.
Ha.. Have no idea if the F.P.S. is even close, as have not tested it as of yet, yet alone, if the 1/4" hole was close to the correct aperture.

Reference:

Peter, no the focal length never changes, a 200mm prime lens is always a 200mm lens. But as you focus on closer objects the lens needs to get farther and farther away therefore bit by bit less light gets to the film. If you remember back to when you were a kid in school you were taught the light falls off at the inverse square of the distance. We need to compensate for this loss of light.

First of all, as has been discussed earlier in this thread, measure the focal length of your lens by focusing on something far away, preferably at infinity. Then calculate the maximum aperture using that focal length.

All lenses, not only one you make, needs a some compensation when you focus on something closer than infinity. You can either add a bit of time or open the aperture. With a home made lens compensating with time is easier because you probably won't have a variable aperture. In general, there is not that much compensation needed when focusing at maybe 20 or 10 feet but anything closer does start to need exposure compensation. Again, this is true with all lenses. The term is "bellows extension factor".

One way to make your own bellows extension factor chart for any lens is to use a handheld light meter set not to incident but reflective.

You will need to know how far your lens is from the film when at infinity. A small lightweight inexpensive tape measure will work. Then focus on subjects at various typical distances such as 20, 10, 5, and 3 feet. At each point note how far your lens is from the film.

Now go inside and aim your camera at an evenly lit plain wall with the lens set to the widest aperture. Set the lens to how far it was at infinity and take a meter reading by placing the light meter on the center of the ground glass. That is your base. Then start extending the lens and make multiple readings at those 20, 10, 5 and 3 foot distances. Your light meter will tell you how much light is lost as the lens is extended.

In the future when you go take photos you will now know how much bellows extension compensation is needed. Just use that same tape measure. Some photographers like to make a scale to affix to their camera. If you have multiple lenses you can make up a card for your camera kit that consists of a grid - down one side is a list of your lenses and across the top are distances then each intersecting cell shows the bellows extension factor.

Easy peasy.

Tim Meisburger
18-Jan-2014, 18:12
Actually, focal length does change. For convenience we name a a lens after its focal length at infinity, but if you focus a lens at an object three feet from the camera, then measure the distance from the center of the lens to the film plane, that is the relevant focal length for calculating aperture.

Suppose you have a 90mm lens (at infinity focus) that is 30mm wide. At infinity focus your lens is f3 (90/30). You now focus on an object a meter away from the camera. With your tape measure check the distance from lens to ground glass and lets say its 180mm. Now your focal length is 180mm, and your aperture is still the same size, so 180/30=f6. Use that to determine exposure time and there is no need for bellows extension charts or tricks (which are just rough estimates of the calculation you just made).

If you now want to stop down the lens a disk with a 15mm hole will yield an f12 at a focal length of 180mm (180/15) or f6 at infinity focus (90/15).

Mark Sawyer
19-Jan-2014, 00:17
Tim's got it. Focal length is just the distance from the lens to where it focuses. And if you calculate the f/stop by dividing that focal length by the aperture's diameter, you can forget all that bellows extension stuff. You'll know the actual f/stop you're using.

Řyvind:D
19-Jan-2014, 03:35
I have tested step down rings and close-up filters in Copal #3 (and #3S used in Fujinon, Computar etc). None fit because the 58mm (56mm on #3S) filter threads start further in than on a lens or a filter ring. The solution is to buy a step down ring from SK Grimes. I bought two for my Ilex #5, front up to 77mm and back down to 72mm. This way I can use a +2 Canon close up lens mounted back or combine it with a +1 in the front to reduce focal length (and increase aperture). Here is the pricing of these threaded adapters if you dont want to tape the close up filters in place: http://www.skgrimes.com/products/adapters

Řyvind:D
19-Jan-2014, 12:42
Here is example of bokeh of +2 achromat Canon and a +1 no-name http://www.flickr.com/photos/47052585@N06/9442603334/

Řyvind:D
19-Jan-2014, 12:45
As you can see the +2 Canon 500D close-up lens has a close to perfect bokeh mounted behind the aperture. These are photos of the ground glass only: http://www.flickr.com/photos/47052585@N06/9439819005/in/photostream/

Řyvind:D
19-Jan-2014, 12:52
I find the bokeh of the +4 Canon 250D really cool: http://www.flickr.com/photos/47052585@N06/9442602988/in/photostream/

Note: all bokeh pictures are focused and then extended 10%

rpa
29-Apr-2014, 11:37
So I ordered some cheap eyeglasses from Zenni Optical (recommended _if_ you exactly know what you want) and also extra round frames with +4 and +3 lenses for $10.

Chinese +4 eyeglass lens (plastic meniscus) taped behind aperture convex side forward. Fomapan 100, 15s ~F22. D76 stock 8min (in Paterson Orbital).

114570

Wut?

Tim Meisburger
29-Apr-2014, 19:01
Fun stuff! So you just tape the lens to the back of a shutter from which you had removed the lens elements? Good idea, as then you have aperture control and a shutter!

Try it outside next time. I think you will like it.

Patrick13
29-Apr-2014, 22:43
This is the best thread on the internet.

So many ideas!

ruilourosa
1-May-2014, 04:44
Achromat close up lenses work quite well, specially in combination, one on the front and one on the back, i find identical individual focal lenght of the elements work better than different, i am using minolta achromats an leica elpro, the main problem is price... achromats are expensive...

i had excellent results building a +- 500mm with two +1 close up lenses in 77mm,

Check the rapid rectilinear and steinheil periskop lens formulas

i am building the lens barrels out of rings of cheap uv filters (i broke the glasses)

i am in an experimental level and have no need to use shutters, but in the future i will have to consider that...


cheers


rui

Mark Sawyer
1-May-2014, 11:14
It's nice to see this thread pop up again! For those interested in mounting those simple close-up lenses into shutters, here's a link to a page with the common shutters and their front and rear thread sizes:

http://lensn2shutter.com/shutters.html

There are also a number of these lenses made as achromatic doublets. Here's a pretty good list of options:

http://fuzzcraft.com/achromats.html

Brassai
1-May-2014, 18:35
How much did you have to spend to bribe your kids to pose? Mine now demands a new cell phone.

ruilourosa
2-May-2014, 04:19
I would love to find 2 identical achromats with a 2000mm focal lenght or +0,5 diopters... in a 77mm or more diameter... i really want to make a 1000mm lens... :)

Tim Meisburger
2-May-2014, 05:24
Weirdly, so do I! I want to shoot the moon in 4x5. Let me know if you find them somewhere.

ruilourosa
2-May-2014, 09:55
if you use a +1 diopter only you will have a 1000mm.... but i´m trying to make a steinheil periskop... not a chevalier achromat... nor a meniscus wollaston...

Tin Can
2-May-2014, 10:58
You will find it one day. I think http://www.surplusshed.com/ had them at one point.


I would love to find 2 identical achromats with a 2000mm focal lenght or +0,5 diopters... in a 77mm or more diameter... i really want to make a 1000mm lens... :)

Mkillmer
4-May-2014, 02:16
This was made with a +3 closeup lens with the back of a film canister as the aperture and a Packard shutter...
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7177/13915743740_716e820dfe_z_d.jpg
Should be f/32, but this was shot at f/22 as an 8x10 Paper Negative.
The biggest practical problem with this lens is focussing.
Things are pretty blurry with the aperture off, and pretty dim with the aperture on...

taulen
4-May-2014, 03:52
Thats why you should use an aperture cutout like f9 or f11, compromise, for focusing =)

Mkillmer
4-May-2014, 05:30
Thats why you should use an aperture cutout like f9 or f11, compromise, for focusing =)
Yeah, good point. I start looking for some nice round "thing", and I'll make a middle value aperture.

Mark Sawyer
4-May-2014, 14:40
I'd recommend focusing at the taking aperture. Much of the charm of these lenses comes from spherical aberration, which goes hand-in-hand with focus shift when stopping down the aperture.

Keith Fleming
4-May-2014, 18:38
Don't the lenses for eyeglasses begin as large (about 3 inches diameter) round blanks that are ground in a lab to fit the eyeglass frames? If so, your local optometrist may be able to order various diopter blanks and have the lab grind them to desired diameter.

As an eyeglass wearer, I should have thought of this long ago.

Keith

EuroPhoto
11-Sep-2014, 08:40
Mark, the last one is very beautiful and intense!
And what a great idea with the loupes ;))

Adamphotoman
17-Sep-2014, 05:54
Back in 1990 give or take a few years I tried this on 4X5.
I had Schneider put a barrel 305 Claron G into a shutter so I had the barrel left over. I epoxied the barrel to a self cocking MP4 shutter and used 58mm Bronica closeup lenses.
All on a discarded Sinar lens board.

Looked pretty ugly but worked quite well. Gave me a variable aperture and a flash sync and shutter speeds.

Fun stuff Mark. Wish I had a teach like you.

asmariglia
19-Feb-2015, 15:59
i got a magnifying glass 75mm and just finished my first lens... it's 260mm f3,5 and now i was looking for the distance between the lens and the shutter to put in front of it. I can't find any formula about and for what i can read on the primitive photography book there are only recommendations to maintain a certain distance from the lens element ... something between 1/6 to 1/7 of the focal length. Maybe a 40mm distance ?

Tim Meisburger
19-Feb-2015, 17:45
I don't think there is any particular distance for the shutter. As close as possible is fine. Are you thinking of the aperture? If so, there are standards for placing it between two lenses, but for something like that I don't think it matters. I stopped down a magnifying glass by taping a piece of black plastic from a film bag to the glass frame, with an appropriate size hole for f/8 that I cut with the little knife on my keychain. Worked fine.

FWIW, I like f/8 with magnifying glass lenses. Gives a (in relative terms) and large sharp centre with a defocused frame.

asmariglia
20-Feb-2015, 01:59
hi tim and thanks, if so it's ok, i got a shutter from a pasta measurer with 2 different apertures f5,6 and f11, i can try to make another one of f8 like you said... maybe it works better and looks more pro =)
at the end I maintained the distance of 40mm for my convenience and now I just have to try it together with a film
129502

Tim Meisburger
20-Feb-2015, 04:11
Great. I look forward to seeing your work!

Technically, in English that is not called a shutter, it is a lens diaphragm (a machine for changing hole size), and used to control the size of the aperture (aperture just means hole). A shutter is the machine that rapidly opens and closes the aperture, and that you click to take your picture.

That is a nice diaphragm!

jp
20-Feb-2015, 05:35
Aesthetically better than my Pipe & Spaghetti (P&S) lens. Look forward to the shooting results.

stiganas
9-Apr-2015, 12:59
I got a (stupid) question:

this magnifying glasses are symmetrical or they have an orientation and a proper way to use as lens ?

132123

Mark Sawyer
9-Apr-2015, 13:46
Nearly all common round magnifying glasses are symmetrical convex lenses, so it doesn't matter which side faces the subject. Hope this helps!

plaubel
9-Apr-2015, 14:00
i was looking for the distance between the lens and the shutter to put in front of it. I can't find any formula about

M. Neumüller said anno 1940 : nearly 10 percent of the focal length, if my memory is right.
I can search the formula in his book "Practice of using softfocus", if needed...

Cheers,
Ritchie

stiganas
10-Apr-2015, 01:03
Thank you,

Now I have to investigate the problem of slight misfocus.

132142132143

I focused on the eyes and I got the nose. It is a paper positive, not a contact.


Nearly all common round magnifying glasses are symmetrical convex lenses, so it doesn't matter which side faces the subject. Hope this helps!

stiganas
10-Apr-2015, 08:00
I've done more test and I definitively have a problem with the focus and I have no idea where it come from.

So here is the scene (the ruler in in cm):

132158132159

tiny airplanes from a kinder-egg.

Here is the first picture with Nikkor-W 300mm at f:5.6 - 6 seconds
132160

The focus is on the middle plane on the GG and on the paper.

And here is the picture with the magnifying glass, wide open with the focus on the GG on the same middle plane. In the picture the plane in focus is in the front; 8 seconds exposure (a little bit to much)
132161

I didn't change anything. I just focus on the GG, put the holder inside and took the picture.

The camera is Agfa 8x10 but the paper is cut in 4 and kept with tape in the center of the holder, I don't want to waste good paper. This is direct positive (reversed). I tested this with two different holders and got the same result, the focus shift.

Mark Sawyer
10-Apr-2015, 08:34
Off the top of my head, I'd say the magnifying glass is displaying chromatic aberration, where the blue light is focused closer than the rest of the visual spectrum. The paper you're using is blue-sensitive, and is capturing that blue light. The Nikkor-W is, of course, relatively apochromatic, so doesn't have that problem.

jp
10-Apr-2015, 09:09
Try putting the glass BEHIND the iris. Looks like it's at the front of your shutter/iris in the photo. Mark refers to the old problem documented of chemical/actinic focus. You could focus with a blue filter and/or get the iris working right so it can stop down and gain more DOF. Or just shoot some normal film to try it.

stiganas
10-Apr-2015, 12:27
I learned something new; chemical/actinic focus, thank you. Obviously this must be the problem.

The shutter is a Compound 5, no iris but I can put the glass behind, the threads are identical.