dubious coverage claim in for sale listing

[Leszek Vogt]

OK, as Dan mentioned....

http://seattle.craigslist.org/kit/pho/5783187146.html

This lens has been for sale for several years now. The v. first give away was, that NO coverage was given. The guy upped the price since the last time I saw it. :>)

Les

[mdarnton]

I have the 135mm on one of my 4x5s. Since I shoot portraits where everything is central, I can't comment on marginal sharpness, but it throws a larger image than a 135 Wolly. I think $20 is a steal.

[Dan Fromm]

Michael, I've shot three of the wretched things on 2x3. They all failed acceptance testing on central sharpness closeup and a distance.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Michael, I've shot three of the wretched things on 2x3. They all failed acceptance testing on central sharpness closeup and a distance.

Perhaps we should have a category for Worthless Lenses.

[Two23]

To unfinity..........and beyond!



Kent in SD

[Peter Gomena]

Unfinity = infinity minus 1.

[Jim Galli]

Perhaps we should have a category for Worthless Lenses.

I think Dan has described the "category" for us very well. Wretched.

It is a Tessar and has the usual 60 degrees of cone of light. So where does 60 degrees cover the diagonal of a 4X5 sheet? Somewhere around 120mm. So when your bellows is at 120mm with a 75mm lens you've moved in pretty darn close. Not 1:1 but getting in the 'hood'. Also, BEWARE, as many of these are on Polaroid Copal shutters and DO NOT have an aperture.

As Dan says, some basic knowledge can go a long way when you're entertaining yourself with a bag of Cheetoh's and reading the latest lies on ebay and craigslist. It's up to YOU to know what you're buying. No one else.

How did I learn what I know? By gullibly buying all sorts of worthless trash and taking my lumps.

[Jac@stafford.net]

So, why not have a hammer down on the crap? Is it not worth a category to at least point to?

[Willie]

I think Dan has described the "category" for us very well. Wretched.

It is a Tessar and has the usual 60 degrees of cone of light. So where does 60 degrees cover the diagonal of a 4X5 sheet? Somewhere around 120mm. So when your bellows is at 120mm with a 75mm lens you've moved in pretty darn close. Not 1:1 but getting in the 'hood'. Also, BEWARE, as many of these are on Polaroid Copal shutters and DO NOT have an aperture.

As Dan says, some basic knowledge can go a long way when you're entertaining yourself with a bag of Cheetoh's and reading the latest lies on ebay and craigslist. It's up to YOU to know what you're buying. No one else.

How did I learn what I know? By gullibly buying all sorts of worthless trash and taking my lumps.

Has to be the Jalapeno Cheetos. None of the bland stuff.

[Dan Fromm]

Jim, Jac, I dunno. There are people who like what lenses I, possibly both of you too, see as unusable (or not worth buying when better lenses are available for around the same price) do. There are people who enjoy looking for buried treasure and aren't bothered by finding pyrite instead of gold. And there are people -- I'm sometimes one -- who think that sharpness isn't always the only thing or even very important. And there are huge differences of opinion about what's usable. People's needs and the standards to which they work vary.

I don't think its safe to tell anyone not to use a lens. I mean, Polaroid sold many MP-4s and many 135/4.5 Tominons for them. The lenses did what the users needed them to do well enough. That I dump on them doesn't mean they didn't meet Polaroid's or paying customers' needs. The ones I tried didn't meet mine as well as other lenses did.

Jim, MP-4 Tominons are all in barrels with diaphragms. They're made to screw into the front of a Copal Press #1 that was made for the MP-4 system and that has no diaphragm. Having one shutter for as many as six lenses saves the customer money. And, when the lenses are used as recommended they all cover 4x5 with no mechanical vignetting by the shutter. When they're used as recommended.