Some process lenses, including some Kodaks, have reversed lettering on the lens ring, because they were intended to have a reversing prism mounted in front of the lens, for photostat (direct positive) applications.
Some process lenses, including some Kodaks, have reversed lettering on the lens ring, because they were intended to have a reversing prism mounted in front of the lens, for photostat (direct positive) applications.
Now I remember, when I got this lens from a large pile, the prism was close by, but the owner wanted it for a paperweight.
I wish I would have talked him out of it.
Too late...
Originally Posted by Mark Sampson
Tin Can
Those prisms are so heavy and so angular it would be good to keep on the nightstand for a weapon. Less talk, more pics. My 21" Kodak sucked. And that was on teensy little 12X20. Must see to believe.
Mark, the threads 15 years old, but what you really want is a Dallmeyer Stigmatic #9
Jim what is the value of LF pics on cell phones?
As I grow more feeble I will be doing more stupid things in my studio. Maybe with mirrors or prisms.
There are many variations possible even with LF.
I like to experiment.
So do you!
Tin Can
Of course it had to be a nice prism... For today's applications there is an alternative, a first surface mirror, this is efficient, flat and cheap.
Randy, I have one of the prisms for a 12" Kodak graphic lens. As Jim says, the prisms are heavy duty.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Good, I may have a Kodak lens to match.
As I told Jim, I like to experiment.
However smoke and mirrors always work too...
Tin Can
..I recently bought this APO TESSAR f9/60cm (made circa 1930) and I´m researching experiences with it but I it´s hard to find any ULF users. Mine has a little hazy. Probably it´s worthless, probably not. Has someone tried to dissasembly for clean it? Any advice It would really appreciate it.
Thank you very much guys
Ilich
It is a process lens, won't cover 16x20 at infinity, let alone 20x24. Tessars aren't particularly symmetrical but it seems that Apo-Tessars -- mine are all Taylor Hobson tessar type process lenses, not real Zeiss -- hold their corrections well at infinity.
If yours is like the few CZJ Tessars I have, the cells should screw out of the barrel, the singlets in the front cell should screw out and so should the rear cell's cemented doublet.
Hey Dan,
Thank you so much for you reply. Actually I´m a totally newbie around here so I was trying to resolve my doubts reading older posts from specialists in APO lenses like you or Arne. So the fact is I bought this Tessar and I was planning shooting ra4 paper as neg. mostly for still life ( I know is very restrictive) so I was wondering if in this kind of shots could I cover 20x24 inches. As I told you, it´s hard to find many people using it. I just noticed about this gentleman shooting portraits in this size. Plus this info:
"with a negativ lens -1 dioptrie behind the camera lens you can expand the focus to 1200mm= f:18"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks