From a $30 vintage Pinkham & Smith lens

[Mark Sawyer]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51295119113_d4c74a53fe.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m9LTPp)

I've wanted a Pinkham and Smith lens for years, but even on those rare occasions when one came up, it was way out of my price range. Then I found an old set of Pinkham & Smith binoculars for $30. The front element focuses at 5.75" and has an aperture of just over 1.5" making it an f/3.8 lens. Probably as close as I'll ever get...

The spider plant is one my neighbors, thinking it was dead, yanked from its pot and threw in the oleander hedge as compost. I saw a little green left in it a few days later and figured, what the heck, let's give the little thing a chance. That was maybe five years ago. It's a happy little guy these days. So, remembering Jim's spider plant from his "secret weapon lens", it seemed appropriate...

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51295653489_04760d7d8d_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m9PCEM)

Edit on 8/9/24: 14+ years later, the once-discarded spider plant is still going strong, and has children and grandchildren flourishing in my backyard. :)

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Mark, this is beautiful. I can see the mad dash now to find the binoculars on E-bay! Hell, I better go look before they are all gone. What film did you use/

[Kerik Kouklis]

Excellent!

[Ash]

I knew I shouldn't have chucked away all those cheap binoculars :)

[Mark Sawyer]

Mark, this is beautiful. I can see the mad dash now to find the binoculars on E-bay! Hell, I better go look before they are all gone. What film did you use/

Thanks, Jim! Considering your Euryscop hybrid, Jim's secret weapon lens and sh*tpipe lens, and my IWSWGon lenses, 99-cent lenses, and now this, there's a wonderful little low-budget pictorial lens rennaisance going on. And the images are beautiful!

The film was just Arista.edu Ultra 200, used at 100 and slightly over-developed in HC110 dilution b. From that, you'd think the negative would be a bit dense, but that's what eexperience told me to do, and it looks and prints just right.

My only complaint against that film is that there are sometimes (rarely) flaws in the emulsion. Beyond that, I've had the opportunity to use quite a few different films from different manufacturers, and while there are differences, I haven't found one I didn't like.

[Mark Sawyer]

Excellent!

Thank you, Kerik! I appreciate that especially, as I've admired your work for some time. In fact, I recently posted an image in the "new portrait" thread you started that was influenced more than a little by one of your photographs. Hope you don't mind...

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Mark, thanks. I need to find something to put the 14" Commercial Ektar cells in and I'll see what it does wide open. Still have to do the .99 thing.

Jim

[Brian Bullen]

Looks great Mark, those out of focus areas are superb. By the way congrats on the Pinkham and Smith lens but you should edit your post so no one knows where the lens came from. Then you can sell the other side for an insane amount of money and go onto to buy a "real" P&S.

[Jim Galli]

Wow. Gorgeous! This is all very contagious. I just ordered dioptors for my #5 Euryscop.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Good job Jim. Can't wait to see the results. My Voigtlander has become my favorite 8x10 and 11x14 lens!

Jim

[Mark Sawyer]

I had a little time late this afternoon, (a rarity these days), and got to print the second negative from the $30 P&S Bi-(nocular)-Quality lens...

A bunny toy in my back yard.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51295958325_5ea5791817_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m9Rchz)