Which 12" lens to keep?

Discussion in 'Large Format Cameras and Accessories' started by Tom1956, Aug 11, 2013.

  1. Tom1956

    Tom1956 Inactive

    Messages:
    2,057
    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    The attached photo is of 2 lenses I recently acquired on ebay. I had waited a long time for a poor-man's deal to come along. Bothwere $140+ or -. The black one is a Bausch and Lomb, stamped 1912 on the back. I bought it first, with a non-working shutter. When it came I got apprehensive about my ability to repair the shutter, and the Ilex one showed up in the listings, so I bought it too, just in case. As it turns out I got the Betax shutter working beautifully, and the glass is absolutely flawless. The Caltar/Ilex had no shutter issues, but does have nicks in the back glass--we'll call them scratches. So which is the better lens? Which has more coverage? Which one to keep, and which to list on ebay? Thanks PS I might mention for the purpose of this post, I just slapped them down on the flatbed of my copier and imported them through the Fiery.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Dan Fromm

    Dan Fromm Member

    Messages:
    3,979
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Tom, without shooting them against other -- that's really the only way -- the Ilex looks the better proposition. Understand, though, that all f/6.3 Tessars in good order are fine lenses regardless of age and coating. Ilex Caltars are supposed to be clones of Commercial Ektars, which many say were the best f/6.3 Tessars.

    You'd best ask the lenses.
     
  3. Fotoguy20d

    Fotoguy20d Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,234
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I have an 8" Ilex Acutar, which is just an earlier version of the caltar lens you have, albeit shorter. I dont know if its really a clone of a C-E or how it would stack up against one, but its a fine lens. One consideration is that its a coated lens, which your B&L is not. I have several B&L Tessars and they're good lenses as well. As for scratches and nicks, my opinion is that they often dont matter. As Dan said, let the lenses speak for themselves.

    What format are you planning on shooting? 8x10? For sharpness, plan on stopping down to f22+, particularly for the corners.

    Dan
     
  4. Tom1956

    Tom1956 Inactive

    Messages:
    2,057
    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    8x10 and X-Ray film This particular Caltar is going back because it has a little nick. But this nick is nearly dead center and gleams like a little diamond when the light hits it. But an identical one opens up tomorrow, so I'll leave this thread open for smarter minds to tell me what I've got. I realize the B&L is 101 years old and has that crazy 5-speed shutter, but the glass is flawless. Not even a "cleaning mark".
     
  5. barzune

    barzune Member

    Messages:
    121
    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Location:
    Ontario
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Tom, all other details being equal, a "nick" in the centre of the lens is easily dealt with: cover it with a drop of acrylic flat-black model paint, or India ink, or some such.
     
  6. E. von Hoegh

    E. von Hoegh Member

    Messages:
    3,879
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Location:
    Adirondacks
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    So put some black paint in the nick. I use a 9 1/2" Dagor with a 3/8" gouge right in the center of the rear glass. I filled the gouge with India ink and comparing it with another 9 1/2" Dagor of the same vintage with flawless glass, there is no difference.

    By the way, that 1912 is likely a patent date, the shutter looks 1920s. The B&L is uncoated, the Ilex is coated. I'd keep the Ilex nick and all.
     
  7. Tom1956

    Tom1956 Inactive

    Messages:
    2,057
    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    This Ilex is going back. The EBAY seller maintains he has a no-return policy, so I bullied him. It's going back. Sellers can't leave bad feedback these days, so he can't play the feedback-revenge game. That nick gleams like a diamond when the light hits it. And I plan to use it at f/32 a lot. At that stop, about the only glass there is left is that nick. No way.
     
  8. Tom1956

    Tom1956 Inactive

    Messages:
    2,057
    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Thanks, everyone. This whole thread is moot now, as I sent the Caltar back, and lost the auction on the identical model. So I'm back to the original B&L in the Betax shutter. I'm happy enough for now. The glass is beautiful and I did a fine job on the shutter. The thing is, nobody can tell me that lens nicks, especially dead center like that; don't mean anything. I've spent nearly my whole life wearing glasses, which are usually dirty. I just live with spots most of the time, and it DOES matter.
     
  9. E. von Hoegh

    E. von Hoegh Member

    Messages:
    3,879
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Location:
    Adirondacks
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Tom, it's apparent that no one can tell you anything.:wink:
     
  10. Tom1956

    Tom1956 Inactive

    Messages:
    2,057
    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Sorry, didn't mean to be hard-headed. I'll continue to keep my eyes open for another one. I guess what I didn't like was the ebay seller saying "nicks in the back glass". It wasn't "nicks", it was ONE, dead center. Not exactly the kind of truth I care for in an ebay ad. I thought for sure I'd win the duplicate Caltar. I want it because it has X sync, more than anything. Till then, this B&L should muddle me through.
     
  11. TheFlyingCamera

    TheFlyingCamera Membership Council

    Messages:
    9,178
    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Tom- just for some perspective on marks in the glass, if you dig through the archives here, a few years ago Jim Galli started a thread about a Cooke portrait lens he bought. It was a rare lens, worth multiple thousands of dollars in good condition. This example looked like someone had hit the front element with a sledgehammer. Literally, a forking crack the whole way across the front element. He shot it for giggles, and other than some contrast loss, it produced good images. So a little nick in the rear element won't do jack to an image.
     
  12. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser

    Messages:
    19,311
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    hi tom

    no need to bully sellers .. if a seller says no returns, just contact paypal because THEY maintain there is a 45day return policy.
    just call them whatever ... they will mediate a return. and they will also allow you to get shipping both ways returned to you.

    good luck with your lens!
     
  13. Fotoguy20d

    Fotoguy20d Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,234
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
  14. Tom1956

    Tom1956 Inactive

    Messages:
    2,057
    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Oh, well--it's done now. Just as well. Soon as I see a refund, then the urologist can get it. For me, everything is in that context. This Bausch and Lomb on the old Betax shutter isn't so bad. More than what I had 2 weeks ago. You guys are AOK. Thanks.