| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Murray@uptowngallery.org
Joined: 03 Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Location: Holland MI
|
 Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 6:07 am Post subject: Wray Special Copy Lens 127 mm f/4 - 16 |
 |
|
Anyone know anything about this lens...what might have made it SPecial as opposed to an 'ordinary' copy lens or CRT copy lens?
Thanks
Murray
_________________
Murray |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2146
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Vade Mecum says: "3.0, 5.0in. These were made for printed circuit reduction at 10:1 and 25:1 in each size. This was the beginning of the business all makers have (or seek!) in reduction of master drawings
for printed circuits and more recently for chips and integrated units."
If you're going to use it for general photography, i.e., with subject larger than the negative, reverse it. Or use it mounted normally for high magnification photomacrography, if you can get the extension needed. Should be very sharp at its intended magnification (subject 1/25 the size of the image on film). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Murray@uptowngallery.org
Joined: 03 Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Location: Holland MI
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 12:21 pm Post subject: Wray |
|
|
Thanks Dan...it kind of irritates me to have the f-stop ring inside the bellows...I haven't figured out a way around that yet...
_________________
Murray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2146
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Um, Murray, if the front of the lens is threaded for a filter, perhaps you can cobble up or buy (horrors!) a double-threaded ring that will screw in. If so, then attaching the lens to a board is pretty trivial.
Or perhaps you can cobble up a clamp that will hold the lens and that can be held, somehow, to the board. This is basically how my 1.75"/2.8 Elcan is attached to a board.
Good luck, have fun,
Dan
Now do you understand why I've never chased a Wray Special Copying Lens? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Murray@uptowngallery.org
Joined: 03 Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Location: Holland MI
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 3:49 pm Post subject: why |
|
|
No, I must have missed sumthin'...
Now, fromyour previous details, wouldn't it also make a usable enlarger lens for large ratios, oriented 'conventionally'?
The only lens I have ever dealt with that mounted normally was the Xenar 135 that came with my Crown.
Murray
_________________
Murray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2146
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 4:52 pm Post subject: Re: why |
|
|
| Murray@uptowngallery.org wrote: | No, I must have missed sumthin'...
Now, fromyour previous details, wouldn't it also make a usable enlarger lens for large ratios, oriented 'conventionally'?
The only lens I have ever dealt with that mounted normally was the Xenar 135 that came with my Crown.
Murray |
No no no. An enlarging lens, like the typical taking lens, when mounted as intended wants a big (image in) front and a small (image) behind. Y'r little doorstop --if it is much like the roughly comparable S-Sonnar it weighs > 20 pounds -- wants a small (image in) front and a large (image) behind. And it probably has minimal coverage.
To put it another way, your elephant of indeterminate color was made for reductions, not enlargements.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Les
Joined: 09 May 2001
Posts: 2682
Location: Detroit, MI
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Fromm wrote: | The Vade Mecum says: "3.0, 5.0in. These were made for printed circuit reduction at 10:1 and 25:1 in each size. This was the beginning of the business all makers have (or seek!) in reduction of master drawings
for printed circuits and more recently for chips and integrated units."
If you're going to use it for general photography, i.e., with subject larger than the negative, reverse it. Or use it mounted normally for high magnification photomacrography, if you can get the extension needed. Should be very sharp at its intended magnification (subject 1/25 the size of the image on film). |
Dan,
Now you've got me confused. if this is a reduction lens, then shouldn't the subject be 10 times (or 25X) the size it is on film? Big in front, small in back. ??
_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2146
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Les, think of enlarging. Small negative, larger print.
Now think of reducing. Large microchip template, small image on the silicon.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
