PDA

View Full Version : Double Protar experience, please help.



wetplatemonamour
23-Oct-2009, 11:48
Hi all,
Had someone experience with two protarlenses 285(290) and 350 mm together? Seems they covers 8x10 with 180mm focal length and f7. Can you describe the bokeh, plastics and volume of this lens? It would be great to see some pictures. I'm going to buy one and looking for more arguments. Thanks a lot.

goamules
23-Oct-2009, 14:50
Well, as luck would have it, I recently got a F6.3 double Protar (two 19"). I've only shot one plate with it, but it certainly covers a lot, and is very sharp. Volume? It's not very loud. By your title, I'd assume you want it for wetplate. It would work best outdoors, with higher light levels.

goamules
23-Oct-2009, 14:58
Here is the shot, halfplate collodion:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2750/4033528454_48a6dedb9d_o.png

Garrett

Robert Hughes
23-Oct-2009, 15:01
Hey ... Is that a left-handed mandolin, or does a double Protar flip the image? :confused:

goamules
23-Oct-2009, 15:23
It's a right handed. A wetplate positive is flipped, all sorts of ways. My camera also takes upside down, but I scanned it right side up for convenience. !

Glenn Thoreson
23-Oct-2009, 15:52
As a lefty and a bluegrass fan, I noticed that mandolin instantly. :D

wetplatemonamour
24-Oct-2009, 03:34
Well, as luck would have it, I recently got a F6.3 double Protar (two 19"). I've only shot one plate with it, but it certainly covers a lot, and is very sharp. Volume? It's not very loud. By your title, I'd assume you want it for wetplate. It would work best outdoors, with higher light levels.


Great! Thank you.
Not a full time for wet plate, I hope to use it for landscape and cityscape as well as for portraits and still life, so I think it would be a prime lens for me due its weight and size.
And in this case I'm wondering how its works with close up, middle distance and infinity.
I saw a few prints taken by this lens and was very surprised by its incredible plastic and bokeh on portrait distance.
Thanks a lot.

wetplatemonamour
24-Oct-2009, 03:39
P.S.
Also is very interesting to compare double protar and double plasmat. Plasmat contains an air spaced elements and might be more interesting for portraits. But I'm not sure about so big coverage with the same focal length.

Kevin Crisp
24-Oct-2009, 07:23
Hopefully I am not the only one who wonders....

What do you mean by the "plastics" of a lens?

wetplatemonamour
24-Oct-2009, 07:57
Hopefully I am not the only one who wonders....

What do you mean by the "plastics" of a lens?


Sorry, English is not my native language. Say plastics I mean plasticity when image seems volume and natural like 3D, I don't know how to explain more. I thought that this term is international, all we know the lens Plasticca with the same root word.

Steven Tribe
24-Oct-2009, 12:07
Yes, plastic - meaning having the power to give form/mouldable - certainly does exist in english. Unfortunately, the use in connection with polymeric industrial products, has drowned the original use except in the plastic arts.

wetplatemonamour
24-Oct-2009, 12:32
Yes, plastic - meaning having the power to give form/mouldable - certainly does exist in english. Unfortunately, the use in connection with polymeric industrial products, has drowned the original use except in the plastic arts.

I'm glad to see that you are expert in polymeric products, but I hope to hear some opinions about double protar, especially that all we understand what I mean under the word "plastics". If this wrong word offended you or something else - I'm sorry.

Kevin Crisp
25-Oct-2009, 07:52
Wet Plate:

I probably use protars in various combinations more than modern lenses. I can't comment much on bokeh since it just isn't my style of have out of focus backgrounds very often. This does seem dependent to a large extent on the shutter these are mounted in (Volute, Acme, Betax are most common) and the shape of the aperture hole.

I don't know that I would say that protars make things look 3D as compared to other lenses. The prints I have thought looked 3D are usually the result of the composition and this often involves out of focus backgrounds. I don't know what you mean by "volume" as applied to a lens. And I'm not making fun of your language skills in English, just saying I don't know what that means. Much has been said of their being a "protar look" and I think I know what people mean by that. On the other hand, if I had to look through prints and pick out the ones shot on protars I think I could do no better than about 60% right. Sharp, with a certain presence in the shadows -- I don't know how else to describe it.

As for opinions on convertible protars, I'd say the following:

1. They are very sharp and contrasty when stopped down to f:16 or lower. If you think any old lens will give you a magic or special or different look that is much different than a modern lens, then the protar isn't going to do it.

2. Single cells are usable, but you need to stop down at least to f:32 if you want the edges sharp. Some are just unusable for anything but contacts prints when used as single cells. Most of mine (B&L) are decent enough for enlarging. Since you are apparently shooting 8X10 this is likely not an issue. I had a Zeiss-manufactured lenses on which the single cells were horrible. I couldn't make an 11X14 off a 5X7 negative. Again, some of mine are quite good used alone.

3. The focus on a single cell must be checked after stopping down and adjusted. They focus shift.

4. Use a lens shade if the sun might hit your lens from an angle. Modern lenses are better if the sun is in your picture.

5. I haven't checked the coverage tables, but from memory a combined 180mm lenses is not going to cover 8X10 very well and may not cover at all. If it does, you will have no room for movement and you will be stopped down to f:45. I know from experience that around a combined 220mm 8X10 coverage is borderline and I have always thought of the 180 combination as 5X7 lens. The cameraeccentric website has old product brochures that will give you a guide to this. (The table in "What lens shall I buy?" is a good one. The latest numbers in mm were in the 1940's B&L catalogue.) I know nothing about shooting wet plate so maybe sharpness fall off is something you don't mind.

6. Unless you are positive you have an original factory shutter mount, I'd double check the aperture scale by measurement to see if it is right. I have seen all sorts of mistakes in remountings.

There have been many posts on protars and if you search the forums you can find those. Since you have already purchased the lens, your opinion on it will be better than any of ours.

Kevin Crisp
25-Oct-2009, 10:06
Wet Plate:

Checking the newer (1940's) B&L literature, the 180mm combined protar is listed as a 5X7 lens at full stops. Looking at the 1919 brochure (which has information on smallest stop coverage) the 180mm is not indicated as covering 8X10. So unless you are shooting close ups, you will likely have a coverage problem.