raid
Dad Photographer
http://raid.smugmug.com/Photography/Photos-of-Lense/9551533_5cFZ7#642319382_r45vk
This lens is large and could be for some type of optical application that requires a large lens. A 325mm lens with a 3.6 max aperture in not bad. Has anyone seen before such a lens?
Is it from WWII maybe, and is it an aerial photography lens? The LTM-M adapter does not fit!
This lens is large and could be for some type of optical application that requires a large lens. A 325mm lens with a 3.6 max aperture in not bad. Has anyone seen before such a lens?
Is it from WWII maybe, and is it an aerial photography lens? The LTM-M adapter does not fit!
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
I have one of them, plus some others from Zeiss and Rodenstock. As the name suggests, these are from epidiascopes - the precursor of the overhead projector, and a stock item in every lecture room from the early 20th century up into the mid eighties, with a peak in the fifties to sixties. Yours might be pre fifties, as it is still cm labelled - my later one is engraved 325mm.
These EPIS lenses have tiny DOF and big coverage, but they are rather low quality and somewhat bland - nowhere near Petzvals. And with fixed f/3.6, they are too fast for the "hand and lens cap" shutter, and too huge for the sinar/Copal and other common behind-the-lens shutters - there is not much to be done with them unless you own one of the few makes of ancient cameras that combine a big lens board (sinar/Horseman size and up) with a FP shutter...
I hope you did not pay much for it - when everybody went data beamer, gazillions of them (as well as their superior technical successors, three-tube video projector lenses) ended at technical surplus places...
Sevo
These EPIS lenses have tiny DOF and big coverage, but they are rather low quality and somewhat bland - nowhere near Petzvals. And with fixed f/3.6, they are too fast for the "hand and lens cap" shutter, and too huge for the sinar/Copal and other common behind-the-lens shutters - there is not much to be done with them unless you own one of the few makes of ancient cameras that combine a big lens board (sinar/Horseman size and up) with a FP shutter...
I hope you did not pay much for it - when everybody went data beamer, gazillions of them (as well as their superior technical successors, three-tube video projector lenses) ended at technical surplus places...
Sevo
raid
Dad Photographer
Hi Sevo,
Thanks for giving me the detailed information. So I have a paper weight that one day ends up in the garbage can or physics lab?
Thanks for giving me the detailed information. So I have a paper weight that one day ends up in the garbage can or physics lab?
tobias
Member
Hi Raid,
did you ever try using one as a taking lens? I am intrigued, and wish to give it a go. just got one for cheap, so I shall when I have the time.
Bests,
Tobias
did you ever try using one as a taking lens? I am intrigued, and wish to give it a go. just got one for cheap, so I shall when I have the time.
Bests,
Tobias
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
I tried with mine. This is no magic bullet soft lens - indeed, it is no soft lens at all, a concave inner lens and cemented rear pair make it a Tessar/Hektor derived lens. Longer ones might be Petzvals, but the short ones are too wide coverage in their intended use for that.
The resolution of mine is nowhere near my f/3.5 Xenar and Tessar LF taking lenses, and the wide coverage plus dimensions you can't attach any of my compendiums to creates a stray light issue. It is soft as in low contrast and narrow DOF, but has none of the chromatic and spheric aberrations of regular soft focus lenses. It is too big even for a sinar shutter or Thornton-Pickard, so you'll have to use a hat or other improvised shutter, which is not entirely easy with a lens that fast - it is probably better suited for slow processes like wet collodion or Ilford's new positive paper.
Personally I found it unusual enough to keep it, the more so as the shipping was the most expensive part on mine. But so far I haven't used it for anything serious.
The resolution of mine is nowhere near my f/3.5 Xenar and Tessar LF taking lenses, and the wide coverage plus dimensions you can't attach any of my compendiums to creates a stray light issue. It is soft as in low contrast and narrow DOF, but has none of the chromatic and spheric aberrations of regular soft focus lenses. It is too big even for a sinar shutter or Thornton-Pickard, so you'll have to use a hat or other improvised shutter, which is not entirely easy with a lens that fast - it is probably better suited for slow processes like wet collodion or Ilford's new positive paper.
Personally I found it unusual enough to keep it, the more so as the shipping was the most expensive part on mine. But so far I haven't used it for anything serious.
Last edited:
tobias
Member
Hi Sevo,
it sounds worthy of a try. I think I may, to start with, build a structural cardboard box on a plywood board and stick it onto a Speed Graphic. It will need a box as the whole lens will have to be in front of the board.
As for its contrast, I have boxes of Kodalith, which is rather high contrast, so it may be an interesting match.
Yea, the resolution and contrast is nice on the Tessar 165/2.7 barrel that I have, despite its age and condition.
Cheers,
t
it sounds worthy of a try. I think I may, to start with, build a structural cardboard box on a plywood board and stick it onto a Speed Graphic. It will need a box as the whole lens will have to be in front of the board.
As for its contrast, I have boxes of Kodalith, which is rather high contrast, so it may be an interesting match.
Yea, the resolution and contrast is nice on the Tessar 165/2.7 barrel that I have, despite its age and condition.
Cheers,
t