How about one more time?

[Stephanie Brim]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110247545501&_trksid=p2759.l1259

Generally when I see a cheap price I can't help myself. This is no exception. I figure that since I'm going to make lens boards for my Graphic View I may as well have some fun with cheap lenses.

So...can I put this in a shutter or no? Either way is fine with me. I'm up to the challenge of a barrel lens. Here's hoping I can find a lens cap that fits...or a hat that's light tight. ;)

[Jan Pedersen]

Stephanie, Only way this could be mounted would be as a front mount in a big #5 shutter.

I have a similar lens but have only used it a couple of times for some close up. Don't know how well it will perform at inifinty, it is a process lens and as you will know only stop down to about f16 so DOF will be limited.
Have fun.

[big_ben_blue]

Generally when I see a cheap price I can't help myself. This is no exception.


Jeepers, you're getting to be like my grandma - buying everything and anything which is either cheap or on sale :D

I don't think there's an easy way to mount a shutter on that lens. It's probably a lens from a copier or something similar (whatever else Xerox is making). So have a little fun with it. There are frontmount shutter available, but they are rare and therfor expensive (Luc, Silens, etc). You could try a Thornton Pickard rollerblind shutter if you're bored, or a Packard. Either way, if it was me, I woudn't bother with an elaborate solution and just goof away (one of my favorite past times). Might be an interesting lens to try light painting (looooooooooooooooong exposures).

[Hollis]

Cheap can be fun when you get a 'deal' but when you have to buy ten lenses that are 1/10th the price of a decent lens, what is the point? You will frustrate yourself and burn a lot if film by trying to keep track of all the junkers and you wont make any real progress. Step up to the 100-300 dollar range and you will get your hands on some beautiful lenses. Do your homework.

[Stephanie Brim]

It's a purposeful approach.

Sometimes the best isn't what you want. I have a Geronar in modern shutter for when I want to be serious. It needs some work, but I'll probably have it operational in a bit. At the moment I'm wanting to mess around.

I plan on using this for portraits, so really I don't need a shutter. Slow film and a hat will work. While serious work is what I'm aiming for, I never want to lose one of the basic photographic lessons I learned way back when I started shooting B&W: at least for me, good photography comes out of having fun and using what is available. At the moment, in my price range, process lenses and older lenses are it.

[Nick_3536]

Packard. But I wonder how good a Xerox lens would be.

[Stephanie Brim]

You'll find out. I'll post results. Print scans, though, due to not having access to a 4x5 film scanner.

The Ilex lens hasn't arrived yet, but I plan to use the crap out of that one, too.

[Mark Sawyer]

My guess is that it will make a nice, sharp portrait lens on 4x5. Probably with a fairly conventional modern look, not that different from your Geronar. I've had a lot of fun and gotten some excellent results with simple magnifying glasses and the front element off an old set of binoculars lately. Very inexpensive, and the non-photo-intended lenses have their own look, different even from the old pictorial lenses, though every bit as beautiful, at least in my eyes...

The Packard shutter is a good suggestion; they're simple, inexpensive, and allow for a lot of possibilities. Get the largest one that will fit your camera, and rig it so you can use it with other lenses on other lensboards. I suspect there will be more barrel lenses and experiments in your future...

[Andrey Donchev]

My grandma used to say: "We are not so wealthy, to afford cheap things!"
Now, after three years in LF and, in the same time, in chasing the perfect deal on eBay, I'm without money and without lens. When I bought those cheap, but excellent lenses, I didn't thought of the consequences. All of them are, reputable, with perfect glass, without shutters and without easy way of mounting filters. I'll sell them all! It will hurt, but I see it like some king of surgical treatment for GAS!
Be smart! Don't do like me! Put one lens on your camera and go! And every time when you see a killer deal out there, put the money for your maximum bid in a shoe box. After few mounts, or year, spent in shooting, you'll know what you're needing and you'll have the money to afford it!

The truth is out there! . . . on the field!

[Stephanie Brim]

My guess is that it will make a nice, sharp portrait lens on 4x5. Probably with a fairly conventional modern look, not that different from your Geronar. I've had a lot of fun and gotten some excellent results with simple magnifying glasses and the front element off an old set of binoculars lately. Very inexpensive, and the non-photo-intended lenses have their own look, different even from the old pictorial lenses, though every bit as beautiful, at least in my eyes...

The Packard shutter is a good suggestion; they're simple, inexpensive, and allow for a lot of possibilities. Get the largest one that will fit your camera, and rig it so you can use it with other lenses on other lensboards. I suspect there will be more barrel lenses and experiments in your future...

Yeah, I'm pretty experimental as a rule. One of those plastic camera shooters. I also have an Argus Brick (C3 for the uninitiated) that does see occasional use despite the fact that there is some weird light leak and I have to tape the thing up.

I believe in experimenting with many different things. Tends to lead me to what I like the best.

[Steve Hamley]

Stephanie,

Look for Schneider Xenars in Compound shutters. They can be had cheaply and the shutters make life easier. You can also remove the glass and tape all kinds of interesting optics to the shutter.

Have fun,

Steve

[BarryS]

I just bought one of the same lenses to use in a prototype box camera. I haven't tried it yet, but it's a nice little hunk of glass for the price. I did read that Taylor Hobson copy lenses can be very sharp even at longer distances, but who knows how this one will perform. It's an inexpensive pleasure and it can always be resold--probably without any loss. Packard shutters, Thornton Pickard roller shutters, hats, slow film--they're all possibilities.

Some people think it's crazy to spend a little money for a sharp lens in a barrel when you can spend a lot for blurry lens in a barrel. :)

[Stephanie Brim]

I need to get myself a Packard, but I haven't found one that will work with my camera yet. I wonder if Jim Galli still has that really beat up one that he was trying to sell a while back...

[Dan Fromm]

I just bought one of the same lenses to use in a prototype box camera. I haven't tried it yet, but it's a nice little hunk of glass for the price. I did read that Taylor Hobson copy lenses can be very sharp even at longer distances, but who knows how this one will perform. It's an inexpensive pleasure and it can always be resold--probably without any loss. Packard shutters, Thornton Pickard roller shutters, hats, slow film--they're all possibilities.

Some people think it's crazy to spend a little money for a sharp lens in a barrel when you can spend a lot for blurry lens in a barrel. :)Um, the triplet lens TTH made for Xerox is not one of their good post-WWII copy lenses. Their good copy lenses were tessar types (Apotals, "Cook Copying," "Taylor Hobson Copying") and heliar types (Butal).

Since you have one, please check that it is a triplet. I could be mistaken, if so I'd like to know it.

[Dan Fromm]

I need to get myself a Packard, but I haven't found one that will work with my camera yet. I wonder if Jim Galli still has that really beat up one that he was trying to sell a while back...Please refresh my failing memory. Do you have a 4x5 Crown Graphic?

If so, a behind-the-lens shutter isn't practical because of lack of room in the front standard. But you should be able to find a way to hang a Packard (or similar) in front of a lens not matter what the lens is attached to.

[Chauncey Walden]

Or, if you see a lot of barrel lenses in your future, pick up a beater Speed Graphic.

[David Vickery]

You can probably take that lens apart and make some adjustments to the aperture control ring so that it will stop down a little further. I would put the lens on a board and use a black plastic roll film developing tank as a shutter.

[Stephanie Brim]

I think I'll figure out what I'm going to do with it when I get it. I think it'll be great fun either way.

And Dan, the Graphic was borrowed. I'm buying a Graphic View. Probably not much more room in that than the other. However, a Packard should be the plan. Barrel lenses are intriguing. ;)

[Dan Fromm]

Stephanie, barrel lenses whose cells are not direct fits into relatively inexpensive shutters are snares for the unwary.

[Stephanie Brim]

Yes. They snare them and force them to buy silly hats. :)

I'm not really concerned. This just gives me the excuse to finally buy that box of Efke 25 I've been wanting.

[Nick_3536]

Or surf over to Freestyle and get the lith film.

[Stephanie Brim]

Yeah, I was thinking that. Never used it. Might be my excuse to try that, too.

[Jim Galli]

Steph, if you want to play around with these cheap old barrel lenses, do yourself a favor and find a working Speed Graphic with the focal plane shutter. That TTH lens will be best wide open. Easily done with a curtain shutter.