Protar V 6.5x8.5: worth putting in shutter?

I got a freebe Bausch & Lomb Zeiss Protar V f/18 6.5x8.5 inches format. Looks uncoated. I saw one on e-bay for $295 in very scuffy condition. Mine is pristine even in original container and one original lens cap. Supposedly it has a 5 9/16" focal length (141 mm) which may be a nice intermediate for me. I shoot 4x5 color. From previous threads, it seems the lens series V is quite popular with the 8x10 and above crowd. But, is it worth putting it in shutter (SK Grimes) for 4x5 and is chromatic abberation acceptable? Or has it more decorative value?

Thanks for the collective insight!

Here's what R*n W**n*r said about the licensor's version of your lens:

14cm Zeiss Protar V f:18 in original barrel, waterhouse stop disk $400 . This has long been one of my favorite lenses for 8x10. Many of my portfolio images have been taken with one of these lenses. I do not like to mount these in shutters, but rather, use the original barrel and a lens cap. You get the most coverage this way, and they are tiny to carry, weighing only a few ounces.

I've never used Protars for color, but I have in B/W and they have a wonderful image quality. But they may be too "soft" for color and certainly for enlarging. They are uncoated so the contrast is less than modern lenses in many outdoor setting.

The real question is whether you will use the lens. If "yes," ignore the $500 or so (and R*n) to mount it. The downside is that a 120mm Super Angulon will also cover both formats, so I'd be wary of spending more than that. That said, I'd wager you could always sell it. Old pristine glass in a modern shutter grabs a bunch of people.

Enjoy it whatever you do.

I'm not sure you CAN put it in a shutter. The Protar V cell spacing is extremely close. There may not be a modern shutter that can get them close enough together. 141mm on 4X5 isn't worth troubling with IMHO. There are so many other choices.

Before I spent any money I'd try it in the barrel. Using f/64 ought to mean long enough exposures for the lenscap-as-shutter method. And strangely enough, the last time I tried an uncoated lens (not a Protar), the color images looked better than the b/w ones. Lower contrast of course, but still pleasing, whereas the b/w images were just too flat looking. I'd never have guessed it if I hadn't tried it.

I think I've seen one of these front-mounted in a large shutter. But since first-rate modern 135s and 150s are widely and inexpensively available, I doubt it's worth it for 4x5, unless you've tried it and there's something distinctive about its optical character that appeals to you. Its main claim to fame is as an ultracompact ultrawide for 8x10.

I use one back mounted to a #5 shutter, you can reach right in and set it with the shutter locked open. I have shot color and b&W with it - color is what you might expect, low saturation, but I can speak well of the sharpness and the tonality is sweet. It is a well corrected lens, it just lacks a coating.

If you do want to mount it you'll need a Volute shutter that uses the iris for the shutter, there is not room enough for two sets of blades between the cells.

The particular MTF for this lens is unique, I love it. I am happy enough with the back mounting scheme; I have applied it to 5 smaller barrel lenses. Cheap thrills, highly recommended.

Cheers,

Okay, I've got to ask about what may be a similar lens.

B&L Zeiss Anastigmat Series V 6 ½ x 8½ in a barrell mount, f 18 to 90.5 (waterhouse stops on a rotating wheel).

This is a different lens, right? I've had it for about six years, have tried it on the camera and know it covers 8x10, but have not shot with it, mainly because it's so hard to focus being an f18. Has anyone out there used this lens?

Thanks in advance.

DG

Thanks for the various opinions. Now I only have to figure out how to barrel mount the lens. I trust I get an undrilled board and go to the local machine shop. I may try it just for the heck of hit. Should be fun.

David Gagnon: I think we do have different lenses. Mine has an iris diaphragm engraved from f/18 to f/64.

David, same design. Yours is pre-1917, Daniel's is later.

It is great to see some information on Protar lenses. I also just got one of these lenses and was wondering how old it is. It is a Bausch & Lomb Zeiss Protar, Series V . This came in a brass barrel with a diaphragm and US stops engraved from 20 to 256. Does anyone have a list of Bausch & Lomb serial numbers?

Dan,

Thanks for the info---I knew it was an older lens but I didn't think it would be that old. How far back before 1917 was that lens produced?

Daniel,

Please forgive me if I hijacked your thread... certainly wasn't the intention. And thanks for clarifying the style of stops and their range. When I try mine, I'll be using a packard shutter, as slow shutter speeds are the norm for me.

DG

David, the Vade Mecum doesn't have much of a B&L chronology. It does say that B&L licensed the Zeiss Anastigmats, Ser. V included, in the 1890s, also that B&L used s/n 500,000 around 1903.

B&L stopped engraving the Zeiss name on lenses whose designs were licensed from Zeiss around the time the US entered WWI.

Dan, I was given one of these years ago. Mine is front mounted in a #2 Acme Ilex shutter. Mine has a small scratch on the front element and the filter ring has a slight ding. I shoot 4x5 and the few shots I've done with this one show that it gives a slightly lower contrast neg maybe slightly less sharp than a modern lens of the same FL. That's not based on any critical testing, so take it with a grain of salt. Ansel talked about the uncoated lenses being an advantage in that they add some density to the lower zones due to flare. If you shoot wide open at f 18 you'll get some interesting chromatic aberrations, which in black and white look like double images, I suppose where certain colors are shifting. Makes a soft, old fashioned look when used wide open. The chromatic aberration disappears as soon as you stop down to f22 and beyond. I think it has creative possibilites and worth playing around with.

Just since I just remembered: The Zeiss-made Protar V's are not marked "V", "Series V", or anything like that. Just "Protar F/18".

It can be confusing that Zeiss and B&L used different designations for the same lens, but it's nowhere near as bad as the Steinheil/Beck chaos.

For now, there's still a picture up from a recent auction of one of these in a Copal Press #1:

cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7549471978