Wollensak lens or alternate choice

[mylek]

Hi,

i'm looking to add a lens to my 5X7. What will be the best one to pick up between a Wollensak Vista, velostigmat series II with or w/o diffusion? Which focal length will be better? How different are they compare to the B&L 5X8 series 1c and Schneider Symmar 150mm f/5.6 i owned?
I'm also looking for a more modern 210/240mm lens with a shutter to be able to use films. So far, i have only done wet plates with the 5X7.
I'm interested mostly in portraits and still life.

[Mark Sawyer]

The B&L 1c is a Tessar, as is the Velostigmat, and if both are equal in maximum aperture and whether they are coated, they will be very similar. The B&L can be modified for soft focus the same way a non-sf Velostigmat can, by spacing the front element farther forward.

The Symmar is a convertable Plasmat, and will have more coverage and probably more contrast as it is probably multicoated, vs. single- or non-coated for the Tessars.

The Vesta is an f/5 Petzval, and will have a slightly curved field of focus. Petzvals are the most popular of the "wet plate-era" lenses, but the Vesta was made well after wet plates were considered "obsolete".

[E. von Hoegh]

Mark, the convertible Symmars were all single coated. I think the first Symmar-S were single coated, too, but I might be wrong there. A Tessar has 4 internal surfaces, vs. six for a Plasmat. So a single coated Tessar may have a slight edge over a single coated Plasmat.

[Lynn Jones]

EvH, you are correct, the first Symmar S's were traditionally coated although the lens design was a startlingly better lens. The early convertible single coated lenses were awful, so low in contrast as the not being very sharp, although when converted the contrast got a bit better, weird, huh!

BTW, in my 65 years as a photographer, all of the Velostigmats were triplets, some of them excellent, some not so. The Raptars were tessar type and were usually quite good.

Lynn

[Mark Sawyer]

Too many types of Symmars out there, I remember a multicoated one. But hence the "probably's"...

Velostigmat was a catch-all tradename for some of Wollensak's lenses. For large format, the Series II and Series IV Velostigmats (the most common) are Tessars, the series III is the Extra Wide Angle and had a couple of formulas, (I think the f/9.5 was a double-Gauss and the f/12.5 was a "modified Protar"), and the Series Ia was a triple convertable, so not a Tessar (maybe a plasmat/dagor variation?). The (fairly rare) f/7.5 Series V is the only large format Velostigmat I know of that might be a triplet.

[E. von Hoegh]

The Ser Ia was a Protar derivative. I think there's a cutaway in one of Cameraeccentric's catalogs.

[mylek]

Yes, the first Symmar S were not multi coated until S/N 13,000,000 or around it. I guess, i 'll be better to get the Vesta (Petzval) lens to have something different from what i have.
Will a 10"" be interesting for a 5x7?

[Mark Sawyer]

Yes, the first Symmar S were not multi coated until S/N 13,000,000 or around it. I guess, i 'll be better to get the Vesta (Petzval) lens to have something different from what i have.
Will a 10"" be interesting for a 5x7?

Just checked my 240mm f/5.6 Symmar S; serial no. 14,326,099 and labeled "Multi-coated".

Ten-inch is the recommended size Vesta for 5x7. Whether it's "interesting" is up to you! :)