Fast lens

[ceebdub]

I am looking for a fast lens (2.8 ish), no shutter required (making Daguerreotypes).
I dont care what it looks like, it needs to cover 5x4, edges not sharp is not too much of an issue, budget of course is an issue, home made would be fine, what do I get?

[cyrus]

I am looking for a fast lens (2.8 ish), no shutter required (making Daguerreotypes).
I dont care what it looks like, it needs to cover 5x4, edges not sharp is not too much of an issue, budget of course is an issue, home made would be fine, what do I get?

A 2.8 that covers 4x5 and is inexpensive? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Well I suppose at 1:1 there would be something

[Hugo Zhang]

8" Dallmeyer Pentac is fast with f/2.9 for a few hundred $$$ on the bay.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Lots of posts on this. If you want cheap, move up to an f3.5, and you can get a 150mm Tessar for $100 or thereabouts if you are patient. Of course 1/2 of a stop can be painful if doing Becquerel portraits, so your best bet is an exRAF Pentac, as Hugo mentioned (search ebay for 8" f2.9 lenses, the word Pentac isn't always on the lens). You might also have luck finding a cheap (<$250) 16.5cm f2.7 Zeiss Tessar. If you are in England Cooke lenses may be more of a bargain than in the US. If so, look around for Cooke Series X (Speedic, f2.5) or XIII (f2.9) lenses. Projection lenses are also often cheap and very fast, but of dubious quality.

[Richard Rankin]

If you are willing to go f3 - f3.5 you should be able to find a petzval that might do.

Richard

[voigtf64]

ok you asked for it, how about 170mm f1.4 fujinon tv projection lens, no variable apertures, but i guess cutting a slot for waterhouse stops is a possibility! I suspect it is a petzval design, but it is mighty big and mighty heavy and there is a plexiglas front which i have kept in place so the front should be mint

[cyrus]

Schneider 150mm f/2.8 Xenotar but it won't be cheap (about $400-$800? top price w/ shutter)

I think the performance of the 8" Dallymeyer leaves something to be desired so the effective speed is 3.5.
Same for the 7" Kodak f2.5 Aero-Ektar.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

For what it is worth, the Aero-Ektar is highly impractical for daguerreotypes and other color-blind processes, as its yellow stain (even when "bleached" by UV light) significantly reduces blue and near-uv light.

[voigtf64]

my 6 inch Dallmeyer Super-Six would fit fit the bill, but I did not suggest it on grounds of cost

[voigtf64]

ok joking apart, look out for tth f4.5 aviar 178mm exquisite image no shutter, slightly slower than your preference, superb wide open

[Chauncey Walden]

I have an Aldis-Butcher 178mm f3.4 that was quite inexpensive (read "dirt cheap") when I found it. There must be some more of them kicking around in Jolly Olde.

[ceebdub]

Hey thanks for all of your help,
I am in negotiations with some of the lens sellers...

[eddie]

You might also have luck finding a cheap (<$250) 16.5cm f2.7 Zeiss Tessar.

do you have any photos of this lens?

isnt there a real fast cooke that is like f 2ish....they always get bigger money but a nice lens....may not cover 4x5 though

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

I can try to take an image later in the week Eddie. (PS welcome back!)

The Cooke Series 0 (AKA Lee Opic) is, I believe, a f2, and came in several lengths appropriate for LF. I think it is a six-element lens, like the early Planar or the Dallmeyer Super-Six. Probably very expensive, if you can find one.

[Corran]

Schneider 150mm f/2.8 Xenotar but it won't be cheap (about $400-$800? top price w/ shutter)

Last one on ebay went for almost $2,000 actually.


You might also have luck finding a cheap (<$250) 16.5cm f2.7 Zeiss Tessar.

Last one on ebay was almost $600


Super-fast lenses have really come in vogue so the prices are very high on ebay. Even Xenotar 135mm f/3.5 lenses are $500-$800 or more.

However, here's a suggestion: The Schneider Gottingen 12.5cm f/2 lens almost covers 4x5 (and does at portrait distance I believe) and can be had for $400 or so. I think they are still somewhat unknown.

[cyrus]

Last one on ebay went for almost $2,000 actually.


Wow. Just...wow.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Last one on ebay was almost $600

I will quibble with this, since I bought one two months or so ago on eBay for $250 or thereabouts. Regardless, fast lenses are expensive.

[Corran]

If you did you got a deal. Another Xenotar 150mm f/2.8 ended a few hours ago at over $1,000, a lot less than the other I watched. Probably too rare to get a large enough data pool for a general price.

[Dan Fromm]

I can try to take an image later in the week Eddie. (PS welcome back!)

The Cooke Series 0 (AKA Lee Opic) is, I believe, a f2, and came in several lengths appropriate for LF. I think it is a six-element lens, like the early Planar or the Dallmeyer Super-Six. Probably very expensive, if you can find one.

Jason, OPICs are like hens teeth. I don't know why, but is seems that most OPICs and derivatives -- familiar TTH names like Lee and Warmisham patented many variations and assigned the patents to Kapella, Ltd, not to TTH -- made were no longer than 4". Cine lenses, mainly. Panchros, Speed Panchros, Deep Field Panchros, ...

I have a 1950s-vintage TTH son-of-OPIC four incher that covers 2x3. It was made for a couple of aerial cameras that shot 6x6 on 70 mm film. One recently brought $2,800 on eBay.

Dallmeyer Super Sixes are sort of in the same family, came to market after the OPIC. Long ones are relatively gigantic. I had a 6"/1.9 for a while. It weighed 3 1/2 pounds. Years ago I saw an 8"/2.0 on offer. I didn't have the heart to bid on it. I now have a 200/2 S.F.O.M. that weighs around 7 kg; it was made for an aerial camera that shot 114 x 114 on 5" roll film.

There are two 6"/2.8 Elcans, one for 6x6 (serial number begins 138-), the other for 114 x 114 (s/n begins 180-). The big 'un weighs 6.6 pounds.

Long fast lenses that cover larger formats are usually too damn much.

[Thebes]

If you don't require an aperture then get a projection lens. I have a Buhl 200mm f/2.8 on my desk (in an ugly anodized red) that cost me ten bucks plus shipping. It illuminates to the corners on 4x5 when I hold it up, but I haven't mounted it. Most of these lenses are triplets and you'd probably need 178mm or longer to cover 4x5 at infinity, faster ones seem to have a larger circle of illumination, they often have a focusing barrel for a projector which needs to be unscrewed, not all can be made to cover, ymmv.