Cheap lens with huge coverage--does it exist?

[BarryS]

I recently got some big rolls of 5" wide aerial film in a package deal and was thinking about making a 5x24 camera from black foam core. Is there anything such as a cheap lens that would cover 5x24? Any focal length is fine, I don't need a shutter-and I don't expect wonderful optical quality. Is there some unloved dog of a process lens that might fit the bill? Is it possible to build a crude 2-element lens that would cover?

[Nick_3536]

What's the IC over 600mm?

I once got a Brown 19" process lens for almost nothing. It's not long enough if you want to focus at infinity. But the thing is heavier then the anchor on your average cruise ship. I wonder if you could find a 24" focal length? Or go shorter and focus closer then infinity.

But these aren't the sort of lenses for light weight cameras.

Nothing wrong with the glass or the performance. IIRC the real maker was a large US firm with much sought after lenses.

[Vick Vickery]

Barry, your best bet for a low-cost lens with that kind of coverage probably lies in process lenses. Mostly in barrel, these lenses were used mostly by printers such as newspapers, etc., and are often now found at bargain prices. The process cameras they were used on were often real "beasts" that filled an 8' x 10' room and took 24" to 30" litho films.

[John O'Connell]

You need a nominal IC of ~622mm. The recently discussed 21.25" Copying Ektanon might do it, and they’re cheap.

[Dave Wooten]

Pin hole lens would also be nice, 10 inch focal length should cover. I think the front lens from some binoculars would cover, single element.

[BarryS]

Thanks Nick. Beggars can't be choosers, so a heavy lens would be ok. It's not like I plan to go hiking with this beast. Being able to focus at infinity would be nice, but if I could get close that would be ok.

[Songyun]

I recently got some big rolls of 5" wide aerial film in a package deal and was thinking about making a 5x24 camera from black foam core.
Are you sure not 5X14? I like to see you beat Jim's only 5X14 camera in the world.
:p :D

[BarryS]

Ok, thanks for the suggestions--it sounds like some of those process lenses would be perfect. Just have to snag a cheap one somewhere.

Songyun-- Hey, this will beat Jim's 5x14--at least by size. I'd definitely accept his Chamonix in exchange if he wants to "move up". :)

[Songyun]

Songyun-- Hey, this will beat Jim's 5x14--at least by size. I'd definitely accept his Chamonix in exchange if he wants to "move up". :)

5X24 is way too long for my taste. You must have your special project, please keep us updated with your project and don't forget show us the photos you take with this camera.

[Monty McCutchen]

Barry,

I have a Nikkor (750 Process lens) that I bought for my 20 x 24 that would cover that I paid 500$ for--I would let it go at some loss, how much we would have to discuss if you need one soon.

let me know. I'm not that hot to sell it so no worries if you aren't interested.

Good luck with however it pans out.

Monty

[Ole Tjugen]

The 65cm and 75cm cells from a Busch Vade Mecum casket set? Half of a 420mm Aplanat? possibly the rear cell of a 360mm Symmar, although th ecorners will be soft and the weight be heavy. Equally soft but less weighty is the rear half of a 210mm Angulon...

[BarryS]

Monty-- thanks for the offer, let me think about it, but I was hoping to find a less expensive solution.

Ole--Thanks. Soft in the corners would be ok. My longest lens is a Nikkor 300M--is it worth trying without the front cell?

[Ole Tjugen]

I thought the Nikkor M lenses were Tessars - in which case the sharpness of the rear cell alone is only slightly worse than a +1 reading glass lens.

If they aren't Tessars, it's certainly worth a try!

[John Schneider]

The 24" Aero-Ektar from a K-18 camera covers 9x18 and might cover 5x24 as well...

[Darren Kruger]

I have a Wollensak Velostigmat 1a 8x10" lens, with i think 20" and 26" elements. Does anyone know if the 26" element will cover what Barry is looking for?

-Darren

[Frank R]

I have a 24 inch Ronar that should cover. Email me and I will dig it out and find a price. Definitely below $300.

I have some 20x24 bellows and a 20x24 ground glass too.

[Jim Galli]

You need a #6 Cirkut camera. Then any old 8 inch lens will be fine and you can make 5X40 inch pics. Your cheapest solution will be a single element out of a longish RR lens. I may have one around here. I'm guessing the diagonal will be similar to a 12X20 so I could check a couple out. You'll have to have about a 30" I think to get the math right so light falloff in the corners isn't too bad. A single element from a 19" Artar would be a good place to start.

[John Schneider]

Now that the inestimable Mr. Galli has jogged my memory, why not consider this:

If you want wide panoramas and have a roll of 5" aerial film already, why not find a panoramic aerial rotating-prism camera and use that? The KA-56, -71 and others of that line use a rotating dove prism in front of a 75 Biogon to take either 4.5x18" or 4.5x24" images (I forget which and my files are buried away). You'll have to adapt it to ground power but there are instructions out there for doing so. This seems like a lot of work but probably will be less work overall than your plan of doing everything from scratch (film holders? film flatness? falloff?); plus the lens is included. If you go to the Surplus Shed site and look at their smaller KB-18A/B (70mm film) cameras, you'll get a feel for what these cameras look like

[Paul Fitzgerald]

Hi there,

Surplus Shed (http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/category/objectivelenses_1.html)

pick one you like, they're cheap.

Have fun with it.

[Dave Wooten]

Monty-- thanks for the offer, let me think about it, but I was hoping to find a less expensive solution.

Ole--Thanks. Soft in the corners would be ok. My longest lens is a Nikkor 300M--is it worth trying without the front cell?

Try your Nikkor 300 M. I use that lens on 7 x 17.