Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

Rooting around my antiquities I found a 135mm Petzval lens that I bought years ago to use on a Speed Graphic--the lens has no shutter, so I could use the focal plane shutter in the camera. I had S K Grimes mount it on their Graphic lensboard, and just tried it using my Canon Digital 650D on the back of the Speed Graphic (with Graflok adapter).

Here is a quick test shot. I did a macro shot of streptocarpus leaves. I bought the lens thinking it would be worth trying for portraits, as that was the common use for such lenses in days of yore. They are pretty sharp in the central area, less so around, and this one has no aperture. I think it is around f4 or f3.5--fast in those days. The lens has no information on it. I forgot in the test that the lens has a focusing mount, and I had it set for distance--macro would no doubt be better if I at least focused at the closest setting. I used the camera rail for focus. A quick shot or two showed a decent exposure on M of 1/25 second (using the Canon shutter) with a fluorescent daylight flood (camera set for cloudy, for a warmer image). I did use a Canon cable release.

I had to use a macro test because I wanted to use the digital for instant results, and with the camera on the back of the Speed Graphic, the lens is too far from the sensor plane for distance settings--but infinity focus is easy with the film back, so it can be used for portraits or perhaps some scenics using 4x5 film. However, I found that the lens does not cover the whole 4x5 negative at 8 feet. It would easily cover 6x6 film or 6x7, so I could use that in the Graflok back. It would cover 4x5 comfortably in close focus mode or macro.

I think it is interesting to see macro with this lens. It has a pleasing sharpness, yet the microscopic textures of the leaves are softer, and I think this may have been popular for skin tones, yes? There was little editing on the digital image, a bit of cropping and standard tweaks.

We think bokeh is rendered by the shape and material of the aperture, so I will be curious to test out of focus background points of light in a lens with no aperture at all--or with only the barrel of the lens as the aperture. Here, if you magnify the leaf areas using the tool provided, you will see the leaves have thousands of tiny round lights, softly focused.

The lens is a simple design (from 1840) and this one was not expensive. I think it might be good for certain things.

(Download)


(Download)

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

This makes me want to get that digital back for my Graphic.

Nice experiment, Charles!

Andy

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

Andy, I have really enjoyed it. Now they have them marked for panoramic sequence shots for shifting the lens or back, but that can be done with the cheaper ones too. If you still use film in large format, you can take a test shot with the digital. I have a couple of other barrel lenses (no shutter) that I can use on the Speed Graphic--a 210mm Xenar and a 300mm Tessar. The 300mm requires more bellows, but I have a 5" back extension.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Charles, thanks for the samples but unless I were trying to make some old time looking images, personally I think it looks pretty horrible. I see lots of CA's and nothing really sharp. Or maybe I just don't know what I'm looking at.
I just feel if I'm gonna put in the time to take a shot, I want it the be with the Best equipment to make the
BEST image I can with what I have available. My next shot may be the BEST shot I'll EVER take, pity it not be marketable. I can always distress a shot but can never make it better than the original file!
Just saying! But it does have a little quaintness to it.
SS

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

For a vintage lens , the sample shot looks OK. Perhaps it is the Canon camera/sensor that is creating the faults.

StanMac Loc: Tennessee

Unless you’re making images to a client’s specifications and requirements, photography is about creativity, experimentation, and having fun. I think the image is perfect in that regard.

Stan

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

SharpShooter, portrait lenses traditionally are not keen on sharpness, contrast, and resolution, or not in the usual way. They are (and were) quite expensive. Often the more modern ones have deliberate spherical aberration, and sometimes this can be controlled. (Some were portrait lenses wide open or one stop down, but sharp when stopped down to typical scenes or objects, as stopping down can relieve spherical aberration.)
The only serious example still made (and it is a new model) is by Cooke in England, the Portrait PS645.
https://www.cookeoptics.com/l/largeformat.html
This site explains how it is not to be confused with pictorial lenses of old, mushy and fuzzy.
Another dimension of portrait lenses is diffusion. Some people diffuse the light with gauze over the lens, or special filters, or one man touched up an old lens with a bit of sandpaper to diffuse images. The effect of diffusion on the camera is entirely different from diffusion in the enlarger, as it would also be different depending on whether it was in the raw image or added later.
The Cooke brochure says the quality of diffusion is halfway between the ancient Pinkham & Smith soft focus lens (1890) and a modern sharp lens. (The Petzval was 1840.) The degree of diffusion is controlled by aperture. The goal is to give the photographer control over the relative degree of emphasis between bold elements of a picture and the finest details--the control need no be drastic, but is more common in portraits. (See samples in the site above--it can be used in product or scenic shots as wanted.) In the portrait shown in the Cooke site, the bold elements are very sharp, while the smallest elements are softened (but not radically). This control is not possible with sharp modern lenses--shooting through gauze is not at all the same, because it diffuses everything. Naturally people want portraits that soften their skin flaws, softness can be used in other pictures as well.
There is a modern Cooke Portrait lens on ebay for $5800, but the older brass ones for 8x10 cameras are much more than that. But if focus control is not your goal, stick with standard lenses. There have always been artists and critics who loved the sharpest oil paintings in every detail, but the impressionists treated bold elements and intricate elements with deliberate control or different emphasis.
I have found that many photographers cater to customers who want old-timey pictures in the sense of putting on costumes and backdrops from the 1800's, and taking sepia pictures. This is not about that, and it is not about fuzziness as such.

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

That's the spirit, Stan.