Printable View
I do not know if this fits in with the question, however, just yesterday I used a historic Scovill Albion field camera, 8.5x11 with a Rochester 5x7 film holder with its historic Rochester Victor lens to produce this image---it is my understanding that the Rochester Victor lens was not designed as a "portrait" lens, but rather a "quality normal lens".Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Meisburger
Raymond in Colorado
Attachment 161022
Favorite soft focus 5x7 portrait lens, the 9" Karl Struss Pictorial, of course! One by me, one by the man himself:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6042/6...f832fec6_z.jpg
http://c300221.r21.cf1.rackcdn.com/v...486202_org.jpg
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/719/23...213eda5c_z.jpg
My mistake and I offer my apologies -----The historic Scovill Albion camera, late 1880's, is 6.5 x 8.5 in size, not 8.5x11, all other info is correct. Raymond
And is not a soft focus lens.
Another vote for Universal Heliar. I use a 36cm one for 5x7 head and shoulder shots and dial in #3 if for middle-aged ladies who don't like to wrinkles on their faces.
probably a 14" portrait veritar
Yours is better! What a nice signature.Quote:
Originally Posted by goamules
Thanks Tim, too kind. You take some great shots too.
13" Cooke Series II Anastigmat. Mine's in a Betax shutter. Not very soft although it was considered a portrait lens in it's day (1900s & teens, I'm guessing.)
+1 for 9 inch Karl Struss Pictorial, the 305 Kodak Portrait in Ilex5 shutter, the 405 Kodak Portrait. I'd love to try Universal Heliar.