PDA

View Full Version : 4x5 lens that "swirls" ?



buggz
23-Mar-2012, 08:27
Is there a lens known to "swirl" on a 4x5?
There seems to be a lot for the 8x10, but of the barrel lens I have tried on my 4x5 Sinar f2, none seem to "swirl".
By "swirl", I mean like the images produced from the "legendary" Russian 85mm f1.5 Helios 40-1 for 35mm systems.
Which is still on my wishlist of items to purchase.
As lot late, I am focusing more on my 4x5 system.
Thanks.

Jon Shiu
23-Mar-2012, 08:46
Could you provide an example picture from that Helios lens?

Jon

Louis Pacilla
23-Mar-2012, 09:11
Sounds like you need to look for a short FL Pertzval lens meant to cover something like a 1/8 th plate maybe a 4"or 5"FL.

If a Petzval lens is under sized for the format it will produce dark corners and will swirl the boarders of the frame. It will show up much more so if you have a busy background .

You may want to do a search on" lenses with swirl" or" Petzval lens with swirl". Plenty said on the subject.

Here's a post with some extreme examples of Petzval swirl.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?53937-Wildest-Petzval-Swirl-Ever&highlight=Petzval+swirl

Frank Petronio
23-Mar-2012, 09:19
Photoshop's Radial Blur filter followed by some careful use of the History brush will save you a lot of money and hassles ;-p

buggz
23-Mar-2012, 09:30
Thanks for this information.
Seems like the Petzval swirls are MUCH more pronounced than the various 35mm lens swirls.


Sounds like you need to look for a short FL Pertzval lens meant to cover something like a 1/8 th plate maybe a 4"or 5"FL.

If a Petzval lens is under sized for the format it will produce dark corners and will swirl the boarders of the frame. It will show up much more so if you have a busy background .

You may want to do a search on" lenses with swirl" or" Petzval lens with swirl". Plenty said on the subject.

Here's a post with some extreme examples of Petzval swirl.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?53937-Wildest-Petzval-Swirl-Ever&highlight=Petzval+swirl

buggz
23-Mar-2012, 09:40
Hmm, there were a bunch of Helios 40 85mm f1.5 examples on Fred Miranda Alternative forum, i can't seem to find them right.
Will search later.
I did find one good example from the Manual focus Lens Forum:
<<http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20116/big_3885_amfIMG_2342_1.jpg>>

cyrus
23-Mar-2012, 09:40
Vaseline on a lens filter is great too.

Louis Pacilla
23-Mar-2012, 09:58
Thanks for this information.
Seems like the Petzval swirls are MUCH more pronounced than the various 35mm lens swirls.


It depends on the FL of the Petzval lens and the plate size it's used on. So a 8-9" Petzval will hardly swirl on a 4x5 plate size .

It also depends on what distance your focused at. For example, you get more swirls the closer to infinity your focused and less when your focused at Portrait distance.

buggz
23-Mar-2012, 10:03
Here is the particular Helios 40 85mm f1.5 example I was thinking of:
<<https://secure.flickr.com/photos/49859852@N05/6081912158/>>

jp
23-Mar-2012, 10:03
Perhaps some projector lens would do?

Andrew
23-Mar-2012, 14:51
I think there's a few designs that are capable of swirling so long as it's a fast lens and you're stressing it by using the limits of the image circle...
I'd have to do some searching to find the images again but I'm sure I've seen swirly images that were from fast tessar design lenses

Emil Schildt
23-Mar-2012, 16:00
I have a couple of lenses that swirl like crazy on 6x6.... and some small petzvals that swirls a lot on 4x5.

Frank is not right! small projection lenses can be found for far less money than a photoshop program, and it is so much more fun - and it looks real... and...

RawheaD
23-Mar-2012, 16:23
Am I swirly enough for you?

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4008/4468747213_45f3801d77_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawhead/4468747213/)
Angst (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawhead/4468747213/) by Dr. RawheaD (http://www.flickr.com/people/rawhead/), on Flickr

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3289/5715256562_0107c9c97e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawhead/5715256562/)
Bodhgaya (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawhead/5715256562/) by Dr. RawheaD (http://www.flickr.com/people/rawhead/), on Flickr

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5227/5684033679_ac0280ecdd_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawhead/5684033679/)
Peace (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawhead/5684033679/) by Dr. RawheaD (http://www.flickr.com/people/rawhead/), on Flickr

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6098/6283608971_aea1126d6a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawhead/6283608971/)
The Count (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawhead/6283608971/) by Dr. RawheaD (http://www.flickr.com/people/rawhead/), on Flickr

parleton
23-Mar-2012, 17:06
IMHO Helios' bokeh are unsightly compared to Noct's bokeh but i guess that's the len characteristics. There are plenty of lens that swirl ranging from 16mm to large format. There's a group on flickr dedicated to swirly bokeh check out http://www.flickr.com/groups/swirlybokeh/ and each picture might have more infor on the len

jcoldslabs
23-Mar-2012, 17:25
This was shot on 4x5 film with a small 4.25" B&L projection lens.

http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/T-Max%20400%20-%20Porch%20Post%20%28Cinephor%29%20900.jpg

Jonathan

goamules
24-Mar-2012, 06:12
By the way, the swirling is caused by uncorrected coma, and was an aberration side effect of some early lenses. But a Petzval is the most usual with the effect. With a normal photographic petzval, the only way to get swirl is to use a smaller focal length than originally intended for the format. Also, the faster ones do it mostly, those below about F4.5. This is about a 5" F3.2 on 4x5:

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6211/6354626829_08b6072f25_z.jpg

Frank Petronio
24-Mar-2012, 07:40
Subject matter helps a lot too, a young topless woman in front of a Willow tree will almost always get rave reviews and improve the performance and resale value of the lens.

parleton
24-Mar-2012, 13:38
aha i seconded this by frank. that will certainly correct the optical aberration !

benrains
24-Mar-2012, 14:15
Other lenses to look at in addition to Petzvals would be the old landscape/meniscus lenses with their stops removed. I've found mine to have quite a bit of swirl (in addition to the expected softness you get when using the lenses this way):

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4098/4783850341_72b736bcb2_b.jpg

Frank Petronio
24-Mar-2012, 15:28
Swirly lens without trees are kind of worthless....

goamules
24-Mar-2012, 17:15
Swirly lens without trees are kind of worthless....

I don't agree. They are good in snowstorms, or down pillow factory explosions too.

Old-N-Feeble
24-Mar-2012, 17:16
swirly lens without trees are kind of worthless....


I don't agree. They are good in snowstorms, or down pillow factory explosions too.

Lol... Lol... Lol!!!

GSX4
24-Mar-2012, 19:19
Bausch and Lomb 4" or 5" 6" Cinephor II 35mm movie projector lenses are superb on 4x5 and can be had for peanuts. They are super fast as well. The 5.25" for instance is a modified petzval, with a maximum aperture of f1.4

parleton
25-Mar-2012, 00:34
GSX4: does it has a mark indicate f/1.4 on the barrel or are you guesstimating? I have a Cinephor 5.5 inches with unmarked f-stop that has a big front element but the back part is smaller and I think it is slower than f/3.5. Correct me if I am wrong. The fastest one I have is 5 inches marked with f/2

jcoldslabs
25-Mar-2012, 01:26
I am curious about this as well. I have a 6.00 inch E.F. Series II Cinephor--unmarked as to f-stop--whose front element is 2 3/8" in diameter and whose rear element is 1 7/8" in diameter. If I use the front element diameter to calculate the maximum aperture I get f/2.5, but if I use the rear element diameter I get f/3.2. Which is it?

Jonathan

parleton
25-Mar-2012, 03:41
jcoldslabs: while you are estimating the aperture remember it's for single but not combined 2 elements on the front unit, and it is usually slower than the calculated aperture based on my experience, and it is like the rear element that governed the amount of light. point being i did a wet plate comparison test for my 5.5 inches cinephor since i thought it was brighter than my projection len Luxtar f/3.5 since the glass look bigger. turned out it was slower than f/3.5 maybe near f/4. you can always do a test shot to test your theory with f/3.5 or f/3 len, and i would love to know too

goamules
25-Mar-2012, 06:10
You should measure the apparent aperture (the circle of light you see) when looking through the front element. The F-stop of a lens is based on a measurement of what you can see on the other side. Not the glass diameter. Hold a ruler up to the front of the lens, then hold the lens up to a lighted window. Measure the circle from the edge of the black to the other edge.

jp
26-Mar-2012, 06:54
I don't agree. They are good in snowstorms, or down pillow factory explosions too.

If you're shooting color, Christmas lights or other countless point sources turned into big bokeh can get nice and swirley. Kinda handy to have a tree of some sort to hang the lights in though.

jcoldslabs
26-Mar-2012, 13:22
Speaking of Christmas lights and Petzval lenses.....

http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/FP100C---Blurry-Xmas-Tree-S.jpg

Jonathan

RobertSzabo
26-Mar-2012, 14:39
I shoot a CC Harrison Petzval lens on half plate and sometimes 5x7. Its an early lens made in 1851. I have a permanent stop in since it is not cut for waterhouse stops. It probably stops the lens down about 1/3. Half plate is max size for this lens. Half plate here in the US is 4 1/4 x 5 1/2 inches so close to the 4x5 size you are after. When used on a 5x7 I get dark corners. The amount depends on how far I am from the subject. The swirl I get is mostly noticeable when trees are on the edges of the frame.

70892
This is a print from a half plate collodion negative with the CC Harrison. Some of the swirl in this is from the tree moving in the wind. Exposure was a few seconds early in the morning.


70893
This is a 5x7 collodion negative with the CC Harrison.

70894
This was taken with a full plate (6 1/2 x 8 1/2 inches) Petzval Lens made by Emil Busch. It was shot on a 5x7 plate. Since it is made for a larger plate not much swirling but very nice narrow depth of field.

Frank Petronio
26-Mar-2012, 14:43
I wonder if you could shake a tree and get the same effect with a Symmar?

RobertSzabo
26-Mar-2012, 15:38
I wonder if you could shake a tree and get the same effect with a Symmar?

Probably not it would just be blurry. I think you would have to move it side to side in a semi circle. If you could do that I think it would work.

nonuniform
27-Mar-2012, 22:32
I have a Schneider Xenar 135mm from a Crown Graphic that produces a swirled blur. It's an interesting effect, and when I don't want it, I can switch with the other Xenar 135 that doesn't have a swirly blur!


Is there a lens known to "swirl" on a 4x5?
There seems to be a lot for the 8x10, but of the barrel lens I have tried on my 4x5 Sinar f2, none seem to "swirl".
By "swirl", I mean like the images produced from the "legendary" Russian 85mm f1.5 Helios 40-1 for 35mm systems.
Which is still on my wishlist of items to purchase.
As lot late, I am focusing more on my 4x5 system.
Thanks.

goamules
28-Mar-2012, 06:05
By the way, if the OP is still reading, I have a Voigtlander 7" Petzval that should swirl, and would sell him if he PMs me.

Randy
28-Mar-2012, 07:02
I have a tiny lens, an Agfa Apotar 105mm f/4.5 that came off an Agfa Billy Record II (folding 120 camera).

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/Record_II.jpg

Shutter speeds 1-1/250 and B. I have played with it on my Mini Crown Graphic, 4X5, and even 5X7 for close ups. If you focus the lens it's self at infinity (by turning the front of the lens), images are sharp and have a slight swirl in the background, but if you focus the lens at it's close point, which is just under a meter, then use the belows to focus on the ground glass at what ever distance you need, the image takes on a soft glow.

Image samples in next post.

Randy
28-Mar-2012, 07:02
2 1/4 X 3 1/4
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/swirl4.jpg

4X5
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/swirl2.jpg

4X5
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/swirl3.jpg

5X7
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/swirl1.jpg

Old-N-Feeble
28-Mar-2012, 16:21
When I want my photos to swirl more I just mix my drinks stronger. It's amazing how much a pint of whiskey can save you on lenses. :)

buggz
8-Apr-2012, 18:53
How do the Cinephors differ?
Between a Cinephor, a Cinephor II, and a Supr Cinephor ?

buggz
8-Apr-2012, 18:54
Oh, I like those photos, nice!


I have a tiny lens, an Agfa Apotar 105mm f/4.5 that came off an Agfa Billy Record II (folding 120 camera).

Shutter speeds 1-1/250 and B. I have played with it on my Mini Crown Graphic, 4X5, and even 5X7 for close ups. If you focus the lens it's self at infinity (by turning the front of the lens), images are sharp and have a slight swirl in the background, but if you focus the lens at it's close point, which is just under a meter, then use the belows to focus on the ground glass at what ever distance you need, the image takes on a soft glow.

Image samples in next post.

jcoldslabs
8-Apr-2012, 19:58
buggz,

I'm not sure of all the differences. The two "Cinephor Series II" lenses I own have much larger entrance pupils than exit pupils. The front elements are really big compared to the rear. The one regular "Cinephor" I have, which is older, is a straight tube with the same size elements front and back. Other than that I can't tell you. I do get more swirls with the older one, but I think that's because it has much less coverage on 4x5 and thus I end up pushing it to the limits of its image circle.

Jonathan

Gerald Figal
11-Apr-2012, 06:50
I have a Cinephor Series I 5.5", and Series II 6.25", and a Series II 9". The most convenient one to use with 4x5 is the 5.5"--plenty of swirl and good coverage. Interestingly the Series II 6.25" has less coverage than the 5.5", but, as you would expect, more swirls. I just got the 9" this week and have been testing it. Covers 5x7 great with nicely subtle swirls, but I've only done a few shots with it. In fact, I was experimenting with it in a shutter I had, which required shortening the distance between the two lens components (to have the shutter/aperture in between them), and the results were pretty cool--subtle Petzval swirls in the background, but now also a blurry falloff about 1/3 along and outer edge of the image in the foreground as well. It will make for a very nice cheap petzvelesque selective focus portrait lens on the 5x7 and probably not bad on the 4x5. But for you, I'd recommend the 5.5" Cinephor for inexpensive swirlies....

Maynaard
11-Apr-2012, 19:12
Has anyone put a 5.5" Cinephor in a shutter? If so which shutter, and if not any clues how it might be done?

parleton
12-Apr-2012, 01:13
you can get the speed graphic pacemaker, it has a built-in focal plane shutter. at least that's how i used my cinephors if needed for fast shutter speed. otherwise packard, "galli", or gravity shutter is the way to go. or do wet plate/dag that's surely eliminated the needed for fast shutter :-)

buggz
15-Apr-2012, 11:45
Well, this one does it, I guess "the conditions" have to be right.
And it is not too crazy, I like it that way.
4x5 Sinar f2 - cemeted pair meniscus from Jim Galli - Fuji Instant
Swirly background, wee...
http://www.cornbread.com/~buggz/RedRose.jpg