A historically important Cooke finds it's way to Tonopah Nevada

[Jim Galli]

It's been a while since the anticipation of a camera purchase has been a big deal. This Cooke lens and the camera it is on, lit me up!

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/021502/13Cooke_00.jpg

I could tell from the sellers photos that it said Cooke Series II Portrait, but nothing else
about it looked familiar to any of the Cooke lenses I've had, save one. I recently sold an ancient Cooke Rapid Rectilinear lens that had similar machining on the aperture control. That helped me date this in my mind as very early.

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/021502/13Cooke_01.jpg

After several emails about customs and brokerage (yikes, hope I don't get a nasty bill) an email came this AM that said it had been delivered to my door. Really?? Got up off my dead bum and went to the door, and there was a very large box.

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/021502/13Cooke_03.jpg

Of course I bought the outfit for the lens, but holy moly, the camera is gorgeous! Studio Camera #3 8 1/2 X 6 1/2 Kodak Ltd, London, W.C. 2 Made in Great Britain.

It was missing it's back, but luck has struck twice, and the back that I bought years ago for my 2D matches the camera tags and all perfectly. Same color like it was made the same day.

The lens is unique. At least to me. Maybe they are 2 - a - penny in UK, but I've never seen one. I knew that if it was a Series II and said Portrait, it should have diffusion. The seller said there was no second dial with dial for softness numbers. He was right. The mystery was solved today when I unpacked it.

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/021502/13Cooke_04.jpg

You unscrew the rear group three revolutions and match up the arrows for sharpest definition. Turn in for diffused focus. You have 3 revolutions to choose from. Turned in all the way, I can see the diffusion on the ground glass. Turned out all 3 revs to sharpest definition and it is Cooke spectacular. What a gorgeous lens. The aperture turns all the way down to f45 which is also unique. Later Portrait lenses only stopped to f16. Hey, it's a portrait lens. You shouldn't even think about f45, right?

So does anyone else have an early one? Can anyone help with dating? Always curious to learn more about this stuff. Serial No. 3262

It would be fun to set up a table like Gordon Moats HBH page and slowly gather info and changes to these important lenses. I don't have the know how to do that.

More pics in the next post.

[Jim Galli]

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/021502/13Cooke_02.jpg


http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/021502/13Cooke_05.jpg


http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/021502/13Cooke_06.jpg

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Jim, very sweet. A Cooke would be a nice addition to my lens gathering. The camera is a very nice bonus, very nice. Congrat's!!

[Jim Galli]

Thanks Jim. Another interesting Cooke-ism;

13.05" focus for 6 1/2 X 4 3/4?? Half plate. That is really really conservative. It would cover 8 1/2X 6 1/2 with ease, and even 8X10 very well. 13" was always the later size for full plate.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I would think a 13' would be fine. I've used a 14" with some nice results. I agree on the coverage being conservative. Again, one of those lenses on my list of "one of these days". Glass looks sweet.

[eddie]

Nice one james!

[Mark Sawyer]

mmmmmmm... tasty!!!

There's something about those Cooke lenses... Maybe there was someone there who just knew what glass went with what, but the tonalities just seemed a little richer, flowed a little smoother...

You've got something special there, Jim!

[Pete Watkins]

Jim,
I had a Taylor, Taylor & Hobson RR that I sold and that only had a four number serial number. I did a bit of research and it had no mention of Cooke on the lens. This was because it was made before Cooke was involved with the company. It's not a Cooke lens, it's a TT&H lens. Yours is that early, all the help that I can give.
Pete.

[Steven Tribe]

T,T&H are one of those makers that were logical (chronological) with their serial numbers. Unfortunately, they started from 0001 (or perhaps 0100) again in the middle of of the 1890's. This may have co-incided with the Cooke innovation or change in the flange mounting system. This series II may have been produced at the same time that RR's were being made as the engraving looks a lot like the text on RR's - with efl given to 2 decimal points. It is estimated that T,T &H hade made between 10,000 and 20,000 lenses before they started from scratch.
The UK made Kodak cameras are clones of the US made ones - so there is interchangeability.

I would treat the iris ring initially with great care, Jim. I have two of this "black" sort on RR's and both show symptoms of looseness.

[CCHarrison]

Hi Jim

Dont mean to burst a bubble, but this is just the early version of the Cooke Soft Focus Line with the soft focus dialed in the rear. I'd peg your lens at 1900-1902. See the 1898 ad below from my webpage on Soft Focus lenses http://antiquecameras.net/softfocuslenses2.html


http://antiquecameras.net/images/336_photographpicdelaredec1898.jpg


And 1904 Kodak London Ad


http://antiquecameras.net/images/540_1904cooke.jpg

Dan


PS - Adjusting the soft focus of any lens via the rear element is a problem once a lens is mounted to a camera... you have to take the lens/lensboard off the camera each time you want to make an adjustment after viewing on the GG -or- open the rear of the camera and reach your hand inside the camera ! So you find that at the turn of the Century, makers like Cooke and Dallmeyer who used this rear element method of diffusion moved their adjustments for soft focus forward on the barrel and outside the camera for ease of adjustment.

In 1906/7, Cooke even came up with a pulley system to aid the photographer in using their lens.

http://antiquecameras.net/images/678_thecameradec1907.jpg

[tuant]

I would have missed this one totally, but the geezers can always spot a good lens, even across from the Atlantic:D Congratulations! Lets' see how you Ford would turn out on this one.

[William Whitaker]

Simply serendipitous about the back. It's a 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 back you have, right? (looks like...) Beautiful camera. Cookes are nice. The FL does seem awfully long to be marked for half plate, but either way, you got one sweet ride! Looking forward to some photos from it.

[Jim Galli]

Thanks guys. Dan, bubble intact. You confirmed what I suspected, 1897 - 1902 timeframe. The catalog pages are very neat.

Yes Will, the back was harvested from across the pond 3 or 4 years ago to use 6.5X8.5 film holders on the venerable 2D as a reducing back. Color and tags are a match, so serendipity is a good word.

This will definitely be an image maker. I have to decide how to repair the bellows though. I hate to replace it, leather, you know, but I may have to.

[Tracy Storer]

Jim, I think Custom Bellows can make you a new leather bellows ?

[Jim Galli]

Jim, I think Custom Bellows can make you a new leather bellows ?

It would be a sin to do it any other way! Lovin' this camera. Made 2 images today with it. Not developed yet.

[Eric James]

Forum rules stipulate that you must list a price :D

Looking forward to some images.

[Geoffrey_5995]

After seeing Jim's lens it reminded me of my early Cooke Portrait soft focus lens that I acquired some time back. It's not as in good shape but it is a very interesting lens for full plate. It has the soft focus adjustment in the back. Much of the indicator marks are worn off or under paint but some can still be seen such as the arrow and the word THREE. I'm posting some pics.

[Jim Galli]

After seeing Jim's lens it reminded me of my early Cooke Portrait soft focus lens that I acquired some time back. It's not as in good shape but it is a very interesting lens for full plate. It has the soft focus adjustment in the back. Much of the indicator marks are worn off or under paint but some can still be seen such as the arrow and the word THREE. I'm posting some pics.

Thanks Geoffrey. Very interesting that mine is 13.05 inch and says 6 1/2X4 3/4 and yours is 13.1 and says 8 1/2X6 1/2. Yours looks like it has the aperture control by turning the front of the barrel. Does it stop at f16 like the later lenses?

[Greg Miller]

Looks like you got a rare tripod too?!?! Looks like a 1902 aluminum Weber - part of the "grill" model line complete with bubble level / temperature gauge. Very sweet! ;)

[Jim Galli]

Looks like you got a rare tripod too?!?! Looks like a 1902 aluminum Weber - part of the "grill" model line complete with bubble level / temperature gauge. Very sweet! ;)

Don't be knockin' my tripod. It's the studio model on wheels.

[Geoffrey_5995]

Thanks Geoffrey. Very interesting that mine is 13.05 inch and says 6 1/2X4 3/4 and yours is 13.1 and says 8 1/2X6 1/2. Yours looks like it has the aperture control by turning the front of the barrel. Does it stop at f16 like the later lenses?

Hi Jim, The lens is at the office so will check on the f stops when I have the lens in hand. The aperture ring is is near the bottom of the lens like yours. I'll post the serial number as well. The incongruous focal lengths is interesting. Perhaps the formula was changed so the angle was different between these lenses. Geoff

[Geoffrey_5995]

Thanks Geoffrey. Very interesting that mine is 13.05 inch and says 6 1/2X4 3/4 and yours is 13.1 and says 8 1/2X6 1/2. Yours looks like it has the aperture control by turning the front of the barrel. Does it stop at f16 like the later lenses?


Hi Jim, My lens stops down to f64. Serial # 19339. What is your serial #? Geoff

[eddie]

Hi Jim, My lens stops down to f64. Serial # 19339. What is your serial #? Geoff


Serial No. 3262