Velostigmat Series II; Info and Images

[Andrzej]

Hello Mark.
Did you check if the modified lens is faster than f4,5? Moving the front element makes the lens FL shorter. Is it faster? My modded Industar 300mm becomes 230mm with the same entrance pupil, or even a bit bigger. Thanks

[Mark Sawyer]

Yes, the modified lens is indeed a bit shorter in focal length. My 12" (300mm) Velostigmat Series II goes down to 9.5 inches (240mm), so about an f/3.6 at full soft. For that reason, it's good to use the 15-inch to 19.5-inch if you're doing very soft portraits on 8x10. Good point!

[Tin Can]

That is very good to know Mark!

WP or 5X7 may be good

Thank you

[Mark Sawyer]

The 12-inch will still cover 8x10 at full soft. The 9.5-inch Velostigmat Series II will also cover 8x10 at infinity (barely), but not at modified full soft.

A 9.5-inch Series II in a Studio Shutter was my only 8x10 lens back when I was a college student in the '70s. I still use it from time to time! But of course, longer lenses provide a more pleasing perspective for portraiture...

[Tin Can]

May as well put this here

3 Rembrandts, one arrived today, the nicest, a 4X5, but 2 are same size, both can use 5X7 and smaller, I have a few backs. 8X10 may get Whole Plate

On the left SF 12" Radar not 'fixed' yet, middle 240 Xenar, right, 360mm Imagon

All run on synced Packards, as designed in 1951

Rembrant 3 by TIN CAN COLLEGE, on Flickr

[Andrzej]

That is my observation, too. I have tried to buy longer Velo for a year, not a chance. So I have bought Tessar 360mm and modified it for portraits (ca. 300mm. But I like sf lenses in the field. I have bought 300mm industar - which is quite easy to modify - it would be used for landscapes on 4x5 camera, so ca 230mm is fine.The rear element is not so big and fits in Sinar Shutter.

[Dugan]

This is great information, thank you for bringing it up.

[Mark Sawyer]

As a general note, I did use the 12-inch for several portraits early in the thread, along with a 15.5, and it can still yield fine results even at a 9.5-inch "actual" focal length on 8x10. But maybe that's just how I see them after using that original 9.5-inch for a lot of years. 14 to 18-inch is usually the conventionally-preferred focal length for 8x10.

And part of the issue is that temptation to use the lens all-the-way-soft or all-the-way-sharp. It gives nice results in-between too!

[Andrzej]

You are absolutely right. Aperture gives additional control. For landscape max soft + stopping it down a bit works fine. This is great as most lenses as for instance Verito doesnt give this option.

[Randy]

I have this image elsewhere on the forum a couple years back - just found this thread. 9.5" V-II with the stop removed. Just an enjoyable lens all around. Shot on Graflex Series D 4X5. Based on some other comments, is it safe to assume that this lens was made late 20's to early 30's?