Putting a copal 1 150mm f5.6 lens on a copal 3 shutter via adapters, what to expect?

[MartyNL]

Yes, I've seen this lens and a Xenar type D both a lot cheaper than a Xenotar!
The thing is, I have copal 3 shutters and lenses for copal 0 & 1 and I was hoping for a work around. It seems there are no examples?
Perhaps I should just find out the cost of adapters and if viable, give it a try myself. Could be fun!

[Bob Salomon]

Yes, I've seen this lens and a Xenar type D both a lot cheaper than a Xenotar!
The thing is, I have copal 3 shutters and lenses for copal 0 & 1 and I was hoping for a work around. It seems there are no examples?
Perhaps I should just find out the cost of adapters and if viable, give it a try myself. Could be fun!

How would the larger shutter make the glass larger?

[Dan Fromm]

Yes, I've seen this lens and a Xenar type D both a lot cheaper than a Xenotar!
The thing is, I have copal 3 shutters and lenses for copal 0 & 1 and I was hoping for a work around. It seems there are no examples?
Perhaps I should just find out the cost of adapters and if viable, give it a try myself. Could be fun!

Marty, what you're trying to do is impossible. That's why there are no examples.

[Dan Fromm]

How would the larger shutter make the glass larger?

Bob, the OP believes in magic. I know why I don't, for me magic is another way of saying wishful thinking. Why don't you believe in magic?

[MartyNL]

How would the larger shutter make the glass larger?

I realise it's not the same as having big glass. Although you hear of people removing the aperture insides of brass lenses in order to increase the size of the aperture and therefore using a larger portion of the existing glass/image circle.
I'm just very curious what the effect would be and if anyone has tried it before?

[Paul Ewins]

You could buy them new in a Compur Electronic 3, but that didn't change the maximum aperture. f5.6 is the maximum aperture for that design regardless of how it is mounted and a number 1 shutter is simply the smallest (and therefore cheapest) shutter that wouldn't reduce that. The example with brass lenses is more complex because the aperture excludes the outer edges of the image circle that had the worst aberrations. In more modern designs that simply isn't necessary and the shutter gives a straight through path when wide open.

[Bob Salomon]

I realise it's not the same as having big glass. Although you hear of people removing the aperture insides of brass lenses in order to increase the size of the aperture and therefore using a larger portion of the existing glass/image circle.
I'm just very curious what the effect would be and if anyone has tried it before?

It’s the diameter of the useable front element and the focal length. Nothing else. You can’t increases the speed of your lens. Stop wasting your time.

[Sean Mac]

Fast and inexpensive. Good is relative.

https://www.largeformatphotography.i...ctorial-lenses!

[cowanw]

MartyNL I expect you are referring to the practice of chokeing down something like a Cooke portrait lens to F8 or 11 to make a Rapid view landscape lens. Yes has been done but you do need the choked lens to be able to unchoke it.

[Rod Klukas]

The exit and entrance pupils inside a lens will never allow you to make it faster. They are fixed for the lens.

Also the groups are set in a collimated, setup, at the factory. Just changing shutters may lose you some of the original factory setup's sharpness. Many times lenses had carbon shims inserted behind the front group, to more perfectly set the infinity focus, and the sharpness.

It may be close but not as perfect as when checked with a collimator.

Rod