View Full Version : Vintage/barrel Lens as investment
Stephane
13-Dec-2009, 08:59
I have been acquiring lenses, some cheap, some more expensive. These days I decided to go for the rare and more expensive lenses that cover 8x10. I would like to know which barrel lenses are seen as great investment, regardless of price. I am in the "buy better and less".
So far, this is what I have:
- Dallmeyer wide angle anastigmat, 140mm f/6.5
- Zeiss Jena Tessar, 210mm f/4.5
- L.W. Krank Petzval lens, 210mm f/4.5
- No Name Petzval lens, 210mm, f/5.6
- Emil Busch Aplanat convertible, 340/640mm f/8
- Emil Busch ROJA aplanat portrait, 300mm, f/6
- Voigtlander Heliar, 300mm f/4.5
- Wollensak Veritar portrait lens, 14.5" f/6
- Kodak Apo, 450mm f/9
- Zeiss Tessar, 450mm f/9
- Wollensak Vitax #3 16"
Soon, I will get 2 persheids (the 300 and 480mm), which are my biggest investment so far. What is missing in a good investment point of view? Oh yes, I intend to use them rather than store them in a box.
Thank you for any input.
From an investment view, I recommend you stop buying lenses.
Stephane
13-Dec-2009, 09:32
BarrysS, your advice, however helpful it may be, is far from what I was asking. Nevertheless, point taken.
Paul Metcalf
13-Dec-2009, 09:35
BarrysS, your advice, however helpful it may be, is far from what I was asking. Nevertheless, point taken.
Huh? It's what you asked for... "I would like to know which barrel lenses are seen as great investment..."
Stephane
13-Dec-2009, 09:41
So Paul, a shutter will make a better investment? That's a strange point of view.
I look at glass and its quality and rarity, nothing else. I dont care about shutter.
Paul Fitzgerald
13-Dec-2009, 09:47
Stephane,
from your list Busch, Voigtlander and Wollensak.
I'll agree with the others, don't buy them for investment, buy them because you like the look they produce OR how pretty they are on display. The market for lenses is fairly well pumped-up and dropping, buying high and selling low only works in volume :D
sun of sand
13-Dec-2009, 09:49
Beckett
Stephane-- :) I also enjoy vintage lenses, but I think it's hard to predict which lenses will appreciate in value and which will depreciate. Some lenses are rare and in demand like the Nicola Perscheids, but that doesn't mean they're a good investment if you buy at a high price. Lenses go in an out of fashion and the prices fluctuate. Overall, I'd look for good values--lenses currently in demand at lower than average prices--not easy to find!
Early American Petzvals like the CC Harrison and Holmes and Booth & Haydens seem to be in constant demand and I see the prices as stable compared to Darlot--which although currently popular, they made a lot of lenses.
goamules
13-Dec-2009, 10:01
I have seen enough collecting and investment bubbles burst to agree lenses are not something you can count on to go up. There are several risk factors. For one, as digital gets better and less people are interested in film, the demand shrinks. There are some lenses that will probably remain stable in price over the next decade, because there are just so many of them, and demand will shrink.
I've seen fads come and go in all the things I've collected. With lenses, Dagors were really hot a couple years ago, for example, but they made millions of them, and the prices (and of all lenses) are down now. But with most collectors, quality and rarity count for something. If you hold onto something long enough, it should slowly go up in value at least as inflation goes up.
Jason Greenberg Motamedi
13-Dec-2009, 10:03
As others have written, I think it is too late to profitably invest in period lenses (at least in the current bubble) and expect much of a return. Six to eight years ago many "bargains" (as seen from today's standard) could be had. Wait another 10+ years for the interest to wain, and then do your buying. Then wait another 30 years for the next bubble to form...
For what it is worth, the only lens on your list worth "investing" in would be the Heliar. Personally however I prefer to choose my lenses based on use-value, rather than an artificial market-value.
Stephane
13-Dec-2009, 10:05
Point taken, sure getting lenses is maybe not the most clever investment, but you got to recognize that I will not sell them and hopefully pass them on to my son when he will be old enough. That means another 20 years or so. I am not looking at short term fluctuations. The perscheids seem to be rare, collectible and highly desirable right now. I dont think the perscheid value can go down that much. Just look at Joseph Burke's Dallmeyer 6D: a rare and expensive model. Is the value likely going to go down? Dont think so (but again, I am no photo-economist).
Are there more barrel lens that are made these days? Wouldn't think so. I can only see their numbers declining and hence value going up (again in the long term). I am trying to collect beautiful lenses, some of which can be considered as collectible, and that can be passed on to the next generation.
Photography has a very young history, and we are lucky to be not too far from its beginnings. That is why these days we can find these early pre-1900 lenses.
Mark Sawyer
13-Dec-2009, 10:11
I'm afraid I tend to agree about the investment angle; My biggest fear from an "investor's" standpoint is that it's primarily a bunch of old farts like me driving up the prices, and as we die off, the prices will plummet. Also, vintage lenses are a "luxury item", and those tend to suffer most as the world economy suffers, and that forecast doesn't look so good right now.
On the other hand, I regard my lenses as a necessity, not a luxury...:rolleyes:
Of the list, I'd note that most tessars are fairly common, and while they're lovely lenses to use, I doubt they'll appreciate much.
The Perscheids should be wonderful to use, and will be the best investment *IF* large format remains a viable form of art photography and the neo-pictorialist comeback continues. The Heliar, Veritar, Vitax, and Krank Petzval should also be desireable lenses from the "buy better, buy less" pointy of view.
The aplanats are good sharp lenses, and look lovely on an old camera, but their "signature" is unremarkable. Still, it's hard to predict the next aesthetic trend, and maybe we'll all be clamoring after them in a couple of years...
It's true that most large format lenses are no longer being manufactured, but at some not-to-distant point in the future, it will be much harder to find sheet film. The lack of easy film availability and high expense will diminish the number of LF photographers and shrink the demand for equipment. Yes, there are photographers doing wet plate and dry plate, but those numbers will always be tiny. Buy what you love to use today.
Stephane
13-Dec-2009, 10:20
The list includes all lenses I purchased, and some where really cheap (20$ for the tessar and same for the velostigmat). I enjoy using them though.
What I am getting at is that some of the barrel lens are 100 years old or more. If they have been looked after properly, they as good as new. In another 100 years or so, they will still be there with proper care. The investment I am talking about is not the profitable return, but it is also some king of preservation of the photographic history.
Now, the modern lenses on digital camera are a different matter, and will not survive that long I am sure. Camera body change, compatibility changes and old lenses become obsolete because they only work with one type of house.
Barrel lens are different. they are brass, solid from different times. How many people have posed in front of a 100 years old portrait lens? Barrel lens have a souls.
Also the reason for this thread is the recent purchase of the perscheids. Did I do right? Only time will tell.
"Also the reason for this thread is the recent purchase of the perscheids. Did I do right? Only time will tell."
I agree these are beautiful artifacts from the beginnings of photography. It's satisfying to use them and dream about the orginal owners and subjects. Please post some images as you use the Persheids. We hear about these wonderful lenses, but rarely see a body of work (ore even single images) done with them.
goamules
13-Dec-2009, 10:31
I concur that as far as a lens being an antique, difficult to make (some of them), extremely expensive in their day, and technological marvels from another era, there will always be collectors and users. But don't forget the numbers made.
A box Brownie is quite historic, so is a Speed Graflex. But I suspect both will remain pretty flat for the next couple decades. There were just too many made. Leicas, Nikons, and other mid century modern cameras are marvels, and have really boomed at times. They are all dropping now. You can get a Leica body for under $200. I am playing with a beautiful Canon that I paid next to nothing for. I could go out and start buying more of them but in 20 years they would be worth about the same, I predict. Too many of them.
Stephane
13-Dec-2009, 10:35
BarryS, when I receive these mythical lenses, I will definitely post some images. It is true you have too few images on the net to appreciate their pictorial quality (unsurpassed? probably not, just different signature).
I already know who I will be shooting.
To come back to the subject, and as mentionned by BarryS (again), film availability will decrease and vanish. Dont know that for sure, but the Ilfords and Kodaks are competing agains the Eras, Fomas and other cheaper brands. There will be film for as long as the process of making will be economical. And even if film disappear, there will be digital backs and these lenses will still be usable (and maybe more desireble).
I really can't believe the continued predictions of the demise of film-
true, some emulsions will cease production,
some manufacturers too-
As long as there is demand, it will be produced, somewhere-
two of the big three could decide they're not making enough return, and pull out-
but that will leave more market share for the remaining manufacturer-
That's not even to mention the smaller producers, or the Chinese ones-
I see people who have started their photography on digital turn to film-
the demand for film is not confined to rapidly dying out old farts-
the opposite is true.
Regarding the lenses, you buy them, you use them-
in my case, I'd be happy never to have to sell them.
Demand is a fickle thing, as has been mentioned,
but you haven't said how much you're paying for these things,
and if you can get them for little money, the value is more likely to go up than down-
Ebay is a good resource for tracking values-
this place too, and there's nothing like producing good results from glass to make them more desirable...
However, whenever I win something on ebay, it also strikes me that nobody else in the world was willing to spend as much as I was...
Stephane
13-Dec-2009, 10:53
Joseph, I will tell how much $$$ once they are on their boards ready to shoot (hence a sealed deal), but you can guess it is far from cheap, but good when compared to the others on ebay.
I compare film availability with oil. Peak oil? B**l S**t! Almost every day we find more oil, and there are huge areas that have not been explored. And the old deposits will be re-exploited when technologies allow to pump what is left behind. Film will be there, and if Ilford or Kodak fail to adapt, Era and whatever new comer will be the big supplier. But now it is going off-topic...
Dan Fromm
13-Dec-2009, 10:58
Stephane, its impossible to predict which lenses will be in high demand when you want to sell. At the moment there are fads for Petzval (the swirlies) and soft focus LF lenses. There's no telling when they'll end.
The only reasonably safe way to make money on lenses is to buy ones that are in high demand right now at prices far far below market and then sell immediately. I've done that a couple of times and have had a couple of very nice strokes of luck. I can't do it consistently and as far as I know neither can anyone else. That includes you.
If you want to buy lenses to use or that you think your son will enjoy using, then let your own taste, not advice from others, guide you.
About the lenses you listed. Tessars are common as dirt. There's nothing wrong with them, but millions were made.
Process lenses are common as dirt. I have a couple of process lenses of the same focal length and speed; I'm an idiot for keeping more than one. You have the option of not being an idiot.
The only 4/4 double Gauss wide angles that people now love are Wide Field Ektars and Cooke Ser. VIIbs. And they're not loved strongly.
Making a barrel lens useful isn't cheap. The usual advice about lenses in barrel is that buying the equivalent lens in shutter is almost always less expensive.
That said, its your money. If you want to make purchases that I'd find hard to justify, go do it. Just don't expect encouragement from me before you buy and congratulations after.
Cheers,
Dan
Brian Ellis
13-Dec-2009, 10:59
Can't do any worse than some of my stocks and LF lenses are a lot more fun to look at if not use. Go for it. Buy one of each.
Armin Seeholzer
13-Dec-2009, 11:55
Universal Heliars are very rare and go up in the price if you are lucky to find one, for a fair price;--)))$$$
But you don't get mine!
Mark Sawyer
13-Dec-2009, 12:08
The investment I am talking about is not the profitable return, but it is also some king of preservation of the photographic history...
Barrel lens are different. they are brass, solid from different times. How many people have posed in front of a 100 years old portrait lens? Barrel lens have a souls.
I think this is the wisest view of "investing" in lenses. We always think of money when "investment" comes around. The tools of our art are investments in ourselves and our souls, moreso as they become family heirlooms.
Stephane, there are so many wonderful lenses out there, from all ages, you need to find the ones that harmonize with your own voice...
Steven Tribe
13-Dec-2009, 12:13
The Kranz (not Krank!) is probably a good investment as the equivalent Voigtländers are much more expensive and the quality is the same.
Nicola Perscheids are a bad investment as there are so few on the market (they are already in most collections!) and growth in pictorial composition will mean that other (cheaper) ideas like self-built objectives and meniscus landscape lenses, that are almost just as much fun, will reduce the market for the "genuine" article. Nicola Perscheid had a sorry end to his life, by the way.
Stephane
13-Dec-2009, 12:13
I am not here for a quick buck. This is the best way to regret selling some time later. Didn't I read someone bought a perscheid for peanuts and sold it immediately for profit, not really realizing what was in his hands, and now regrets it?
Gordon Moat
13-Dec-2009, 12:20
I think the best choice, much like vintage automobiles, is to have a history with a lens. Find some photographer now who is somewhat known and uses vintage lenses. Then convince him to sell you a lens, but make sure to include documentation showing that the lens was used by that photographer.
Mark Sawyer
13-Dec-2009, 12:23
I think the best choice, much like vintage automobiles, is to have a history with a lens. Find some photographer now who is somewhat known and uses vintage lenses. Then convince him to sell you a lens, but make sure to include documentation showing that the lens was used by that photographer.
Oh, crap. Now mine will be worthless!
Stephane
13-Dec-2009, 12:42
You are talking about pedigree and lineage... Jim Galli should engrave his no-name lens for sale with his name on the barrel and see what happens. Same for you, Mark...
panchro-press
13-Dec-2009, 15:32
I wish I could give you an answer regarding lenses as an investment. I bought most of my lenses back in the 1960's and 1970's. 'Doorstops' they were called and priced accordingly. I bought them because I wanted to use them.
I suppose they're now worth many times more than I paid: yet I have no intention of selling them. That's the bottom line of an investment, isn't it? Regardless of how much money I can get for a Graf Variable or Struss Pictorial I can't make a photograph with a dollar bill.
-30-
Ken Lee
13-Dec-2009, 15:34
If something happens to one of my Heliar lenses, I'll have to replace it - which may not be true of my other lenses.
That's the investment value to me.
If something happens to one of my Heliar lenses, I'll have to replace it - which may not be true of my other lenses.
That's the investment value to me.
That's not "investment" value it is "replacement" value. Investment pertains to committing money or capital in the pursuit of profitable returns.
Note that once a type of asset skews from being one that is valued on its own intrinsic merits to one that is valued primarily on its external appreciation, greater volatility is introduced and the randomness of market variation becomes a more abd more dominant and, necessarily uncertain, factor. The very acting of thinking about "investing" in a good, effects the value of that good. For those of us who use lenses, and who buy them only for their intrinsic value, this is a turn very much to the worse.
The lesson: don't encourage fortune's fools
Investment pertains to committing money or capital in the pursuit of profitable returns.
Do pictures count as a return?
Your question got me thinking-
I've just bought an old lens, from 1862-
thanks to Dan (CCHarrison) and his excellent site, http://www.antiquecameras.net
I was able to find an advertisement for mine-
originally it sold for $150.
Using a randomly chosen historical currency converter, http://www.measuringworth.com
I was able to convert that amount into today's values, in a number of different ways-
According to the Consumer Price index, $150 then, is worth $3,312 now.
Based on a comparison of an unskilled wage, it's worth $24,212.26
So in real terms, and even allowing for the bubble we talk about, I reckon I still got a bargain-
and that initial investment 150 years ago doesn't look very far sighted, as an investment...
Steven Tribe
14-Dec-2009, 13:53
Comparisons with unskilled wages then are not helpful! The distribution of wealth and income was rather different then. The original buyers of the things we collect and use now, had quite a lot of disposable income after they paid the household bill and servant wages. They were doctors, lawyers etc. plying their hobby .
Jim Galli
14-Dec-2009, 14:20
I can add little as so much has been very excellently stated. Here are a few thoughts though. Supply / demand are dependent on variables no one has much control of so predictions are pretty much voo-doo. That said, my own modus operandi is to buy what I think I may enjoy if I have the $$$. Our president is busy turning a dollar into .55 cents, so why not have your dollars tied up in something......anything, that will travel with the coming inflation. Antique cars, real estate etc. It's a bad time to have dollars standing around, so buy the Perscheid IF you can put it to good use. These are luxury items, so if we did go into a really bad season, ie. depression equivalent of the 1930's or worse, your investment will be a bad one if you need to get your $$$ back out. I like the others do not think anyone will get rich buying old lenses. They'll never give a return like microsoft stock did. More like gold that simply travels with the current inflation. If you bought $265 worth of gold in 1924 when you could buy a new Model T Ford for the same amount, and then cashed it out in 2010, you could buy a Ford Focus. So what. All you did was protect the buying power of your dollars. You didn't end up buying any more with the return though.
The market for vintage lens seems so imperfect to me. You can buy a lens at a garage sale/estate sale/Craigslist and sell it for double or more what you paid for it almost rountinely. But the only place you can really sell them for what they are "worth" is EBay (and this Forum). How long can this go on? More and more people are going to discover how much these lens are worth, find them and list them on EBay and eventually flood the market. Combine that with the (assumed) dwindling numbers of LF users and you have a problem.
I can add little as so much has been very excellently stated. Here are a few thoughts though. Supply / demand are dependent on variables no one has much control of so predictions are pretty much voo-doo. That said, my own modus operandi is to buy what I think I may enjoy if I have the $$$. Our president is busy turning a dollar into .55 cents
Not to get political but it is important to note that although conventional wisdom is that inflation will happen in the future- right now we are in a deflationary environment with no solid economic evidence of any inflationary pressures occuring. My point is keep this in mind before you spend a lot of cash in a deflationary environment that may continue.
Dan Fromm
14-Dec-2009, 16:06
I can add little as so much has been very excellently stated. Here are a few thoughts though. Supply / demand are dependent on variables no one has much control of so predictions are pretty much voo-doo. That said, my own modus operandi is to buy what I think I may enjoy if I have the $$$. Jim, I'm not sure I ever told you this, but my two best resales were lenses I'd bought, respectively, to be outrageous with (can you imagine mounting a 6"/1.9 Super Six on a 2x3 Speed Graphic?) and because I very badly wanted to know what a 60/1.4 Saphir was (the price was right, I bought, and now I know). The 20 Biogons were arbitrage plain and simple, but before I bought as many as I could afford I laid out $700 to find out whether they could be used; unusable, no arbitrage opportunity.
Cheers,
Dan
Jim Galli
14-Dec-2009, 16:11
Jim, I'm not sure I ever told you this, but my two best resales were lenses I'd bought, respectively, to be outrageous with (can you imagine mounting a 6"/1.9 Super Six on a 2x3 Speed Graphic?) and because I very badly wanted to know what a 60/1.4 Saphir was (the price was right, I bought, and now I know). The 20 Biogons were arbitrage plain and simple, but before I bought as many as I could afford I laid out $700 to find out whether they could be used; unusable, no arbitrage opportunity.
Cheers,
Dan
Dan, you and I are both horse traders. I think that's different from investors. I've got Texans and New Mexicans in my blood that would never pass up a horse they knew had more value than the one they were on. ;)
long term i think antique lenses is a bad investment.
if a 150$ dallmeyer in 1869 was worth $3,000 plus dollars today then you have lost money. as they only get 800-1200 on average in the open market. there are always extremes.....like the guy who pays $2000 for one and the other guy that paid $25 at yard sale. so if you look at it like that then lenses would be a bad investment.
NOW. if you have been buying these lenses 5-3 years ago (at most recent) you would be getting like 3-5 times your money.
i remember buying an f5 no name petzval that said 8x10 on it on e bay for like $200. i was drinking while i was "gambling" on e bay and forgot to change my snipe in the morning when i woke up....i forgot i even mad the bid/bet. anyway i kicked myself hard...for a long time. i used that lens for a few years...a lot. when i finally sold it i got $550 for it. the guy that bought it was a dealer. it was on e bay for months. started at $1900 BIN and began dropping in price. it went at auction for $400....the opening bid....i was going to bid on it as he had it at $150 opening bid....i was waiting and then he changed the opening bid! i thought i might have been able to buy it back for less and use it again! :)
to answer your question. the lenses that are the best investment are the ones that are currently the most expensive. dallmeyer petzvals, CCHarisson, P&S, etc etc. you get the point.
god luck with your investing.
eddie
eddie
goamules
14-Dec-2009, 17:30
I'm like Jim, and probably you too Eddie. I know it's not a retirement plan, but I like wheeling and dealing. I used to do it with cars as a kid in NC, then with antique guns and probably a few other collectibles I've forgotten about. I don't get desperate for anything, I buy only if it's a good deal. To me, it is a form of entertainment and it's been a fun learning experience.
But I think there are always opportunities for the patient person willing to research. To me the treasure hunt is half the fun. I'll always remember how I got my HBH, my CC Harrison, My 1855 Voigtlander...It was patience and hard work, not deep pockets. It's a great hobby. If they are all worth nothing in 10 years I'll enjoy them just the same.
har har har! we are going to have so much fun in Paris! you ARE still coming right?
yes, the wheeling and dealing is fun. meeting the people and swapping stories is the best. i met a dutch man who was the Queen of the netherlands personal photographer for years! he has been everywhere shooting awesome stuff AND important people.
you got an 1855 voigtlander? what serial #? i got a nice 11 inch f3 and a half-ish voigtlander # 5723. i just need a flange. i waited on it for 9 months!...circling...waiting
eddie
I'm like Jim, and probably you too Eddie. I know it's not a retirement plan, but I like wheeling and dealing. I used to do it with cars as a kid in NC, then with antique guns and probably a few other collectibles I've forgotten about. I don't get desperate for anything, I buy only if it's a good deal. To me, it is a form of entertainment and it's been a fun learning experience.
But I think there are always opportunities for the patient person willing to research. To me the treasure hunt is half the fun. I'll always remember how I got my HBH, my CC Harrison, My 1855 Voigtlander...It was patience and hard work, not deep pockets. It's a great hobby. If they are all worth nothing in 10 years I'll enjoy them just the same.
goamules
14-Dec-2009, 18:09
Yep, I'm planning on coming. I better get the reservations, or we're bunking with you!
Mine is 62xx, so pretty close. It's an 8inch size, and I love it. I'll tell you in Paris how I got it!
h
you got an 1855 voigtlander? what serial #? i got a nice 11 inch f3 and a half-ish voigtlander # 5723. i just need a flange. i waited on it for 9 months!...circling...waiting
eddie
Eddie, the very man-
Are those ones before they started marking the series numbers?
I've seen the 11'" referred to as a 6B, but my one only has name, address, and serial number- 10,xxx, so later than yours-
Is it a 6B, do you know, or is it whole plate, or what might you call it?
Yep, I'm planning on coming. I better get the reservations, or we're bunking with you!
HA! sure! bunk with me.....you wife will be at the nice hotel with or without you i am sure....:) i am ina hostel for sure. france is much more money that germany or holland. i may just hide out in holland for a week and then blow into paris for a bit of shoot and lie fest. looking forward to it. i guess i should start checking out plane tickets.
maybe we should start a serial number thing for early voigtlanders like they do for CC Harrison or the like.....we will keep it to only the years BEFORE the other famous US and English manufacturers were even in business....Hell lets throw that frencie Darolt in the mix as well....:) .
eddie
hey joe,
i am sure they did not put much on the real early stuff. i am sure you saw the ad here (http://www.antiquecameras.net/petzvallens.html) about the B series voigtlanders. the ad is from 1890. i have a 7B voigtlander that was made about 1879 (23,xxx). so we know they were doing it then. yours is from about 61 i think...sounds sweet BTW. My 7B is has a mass to it that all my other lenses do not. it is a 14 inch FL 8x10 lens. of all my lenses this is the most massive as far as diameter related to FL. you can really tell it is fast. i will exactly measure my 11 inch and get the f stop. i am just approx. right now (i should be close) at f3.38. the 7b is supposed to be 3.16....much faster in wet plate collodion terms. (equates to second(s) in exposure.
basically i think the early ones may have been a bit slower as they probably improved the glass etc etc to eeekkk out a bit more speed (i could be wrong too). they were able to do this with the euryscop lenses. they effectively got them from f8 down to below f6 in some cases.
hope this helps.
eddie
Eddie, the very man-
Are those ones before they started marking the series numbers?
I've seen the 11'" referred to as a 6B, but my one only has name, address, and serial number- 10,xxx, so later than yours-
Is it a 6B, do you know, or is it whole plate, or what might you call it?
Back on topic for a minute. i think the problem with "investing" in lenses is that as less people use them then the supply will increase holding down the value. in order to compensate for this i would only buy super rare totally complete lenses. the historical value and the fact they are complete will keep the numbers high....but i would not want to use them ona regular base.
a friend of mine just bought a FREAKIN HUGE Jamin cone lens. it is supposed to be 9 inches in diameter! i have yet to see it in person. this has significant collect-ability.....butr it is not 100% complete....but very rare due to the size. i wanted to buy it and keep it but i just do not have that kind of cash laying around in the form of a lens. i wish i had more money (i should have been at work for teh last 20 years and not out running around the world exploring!)
eddie
Thanks Eddie-
Yes, I've seen your big one-
you've posted pictures, and there aren't many references on the web,
and less images-
That 7B is massive-
This one is not an 8x10 lens-
my first negs are drying now, will have a look in a bit-
It covers 8x10 at about 1.3m though-
1861- 62 more likely, maybe-
3.38 sounds about right- 3.3 maybe...
So, I don't suppose I could call it a 6b then-
it doesn't really cover whole plate either-
I suppose 11" portrait lens will have to do...
Thanks for that-
j
oh. i forgot to say....i prefer 11 and 12 inch lenses on 5x7. only because i like that amount of DOF. i have tried lenses liek the dallmeyer 3b on 8x10 but once you get into a tight head shot or a head and shoulders you really have no DOF. with wet plate you need the speed and can not stop down like you can with film. my preference is 11-12 on 5x7, 16-18 on 8x10....although i manage with the 14 in we talked about above...:)
post some pic from that 61-62 lens.
e
Stephane
15-Dec-2009, 00:45
Usually, when you start in photography, what you hear and read about is that the important thing to spend you money on is the glass, not the box that serves as camera. Is this axiom being challenged in this thread? I dont know, but good glass will always be a good investment for the photos, but maybe not for the return.
Investing/buying lens right now, as I see it, could be good. The dollar is low compared to European currencies. Also, this crisis add to the lowering of the prices (depends on what, some seem to not get lower). As I see it, a time like this is time of opportunity. And I do not see lens value shooting sky high, ever, but at least being able to break even.
Anyway, to all have fun wherever you will be for these xmas holidays (remember, it is full moon on the 31st December).
Dr Klaus Schmitt
15-Dec-2009, 02:48
Well I have been collecting (special) lenses for decades now (600++) and as it stands its value has still overall increased over the years, but it is hard to proof that, without selling them all....LOL
oh. i forgot to say....i prefer 11 and 12 inch lenses on 5x7. only because i like that amount of DOF. i have tried lenses liek the dallmeyer 3b on 8x10 but once you get into a tight head shot or a head and shoulders you really have no DOF. with wet plate you need the speed and can not stop down like you can with film. my preference is 11-12 on 5x7, 16-18 on 8x10....although i manage with the 14 in we talked about above...:)
post some pic from that 61-62 lens.
e
Thanks Eddie-
just what I need, another format-
Still, 5x7 sounds tempting, I had already considered that-
would probably be less expensive than a 14" Voigtlander, for me...
I'll put some pix in the December Portraits thread shortly...
And a Happy Christmas to you too Stephanie-
let's see some pix from yours too...
goamules
15-Dec-2009, 07:09
I think investing in quality lenses like Voigtlanders is a better idea than investing in no-name ones. I have a 12" Voigtlander 5A (marked so) Petzval from 1881. It's about f3.7 I think. Voigt changed formula and designations several times, so it's hard to track. One year a 5A is a Petzval, later it's a Euryscop.
Eddie, on serial lists, CCHarrison has Voigt on his petzval site. Darlot is the only list I've never seen, I should have kept records on all the Darlots I've had...and sold.
joe, just get a reducing back for your camera....if i remember correctly you have an 8x10. that is what i do. i use a reducing back for my kodak. this allows me the 6x6 lens board and the ability to shoot some 5x7.
i see we have anew forum category titled "Image Sharing & Discussion (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=30)" should be great
eddie
Thanks Eddie-
just what I need, another format-
Still, 5x7 sounds tempting, I had already considered that-
would probably be less expensive than a 14" Voigtlander, for me...
I'll put some pix in the December Portraits thread shortly...
And a Happy Christmas to you too Stephanie-
let's see some pix from yours too...
Something like that would work-
but if I had a 5x7, I'd feel the need to run a 72mm xl on it as well,
so it might have to be just a little bit more streamlined-
When will it ever end...
Maybe just taking a scissors to the 8x10 negs would be by far the most inexpensive option.
Any normal, sane person would tell you that...
When will it ever end...
Maybe just taking a scissors to the 8x10 negs would be by far the most inexpensive option.
Any normal, sane person would tell you that...
it will never end! if it did we all would not be here...:)
you know, you are right, cutting them down would be the best thing to do....actually just putting a piece of 5x7 under the neg and contact print8ing it would be the best....saves a scissor mistake!
just be sure your camera will squeeze down to 72mm.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.