Autologic 6.54inch f2.3

<p>i was wondering if someone knows about this Autologic 6.54inch f2.3 lens and help me how to use it on Speed Graflex 4x5 because i found that this rear diameter lens is 4.5inch<br />Thanks.<br /><br /></p>

<p>I have never heard of the lens but assume from the spec it is from an aerial camera. It is not impossible to make a 2-step adapter consisting of 2 boxes, one of which fits at the back onto a regular SG panel and projects at the front beyond the front standard while the second wider box fits on top of the first. there are however certain practical problems - the front of the adapter would need to be at least 5.25 inches or so wide, this would mean you would need clearance of 2.6 inches between the lens axis and the camera baseboard. Secondly you would need a mounting flange if you haven't got one, I would guess someone like SK Grimes would charge $80 to 100 for this, and thirdly the aerial lens would much heavier than the SG front standard was designed for.<br>

ps - finally found a reference - lens seems to be from a phototypesetting machine.</p>

<p>Thank you so much for your help Mr.David. I'll try to do as what you said.<br />To be honest i dont have any idea about this lens, i just randomly bought this lens because it has f2.3 aperture.<br />I really appreciate for your help.<br>

Best regards,<br />Rif</p>

<p>I'm sorry, but if the information here http://web.archive.org/web/20160408130534/https://www.etsy.com/listing/255005312/huge-lens-654-166mm-f23-autologic-rare is correct the lens can't be used on a Speed Graphic. The etsy listing says that the lens back focus is 2 inches. The Speed Graphic with the shortest flange-to-film distance is the 2x3 Miniature Speed Graphic, 2 5/16 inches. The 4x5 Speed Graphic with the shortest flange-to-film distance is the Anniversary Speed Graphic, 2 9/16 inches. Add the adapter suggested and you're well and truly cooked.</p>

<p>Images in the etsy listing show that the lens to be used at a magnification of 2.66x. This will require more extension that a 4x5 Speed Graphic offers. And it suggests strongly that the lens (a) should be reversed if shot at magnifications < 1x and (b) will perform poorly at distance.</p>

<p>About mounting it. I've had SKGrimes mount several aerial camera lenses whose barrels' rears were threaded internally on 2x3 Pacemaker Graphic boards. They made stepped bushings. The large end screws into the back of the lens, the narrow end passes through the lens board and is held to the board by a retaining ring. It appears that this can be done for y'r Autologic lens. I don't know why you'd spend the money to have it done, but that's your problem.</p>

<p>Buy in haste, repent in leisure.</p>

<p>Hello Dan,<br />Thanks for your information. yes i think its my bad which always buying those unusual lens without any knowledge haha. But i'll try to figure it out how to put this lens on SG 4x5, maybe it will took a long long time to do and success or maybe it cant be used for SG. I just doing a gamble for this lens but i wish it can be use.<br /><br />mistakes gives new experiences. <br /><br /></p>

 

Autologic is now an AGFA company. The lens was used in electronic imaging systems projecting images from CRTs to graphic arts film or RC paper. They usually had 4" mounts.. Some have an iris.F stops are not detented/ It was optimized for flat-field, taking an image from a 10" CRT and projecting it on to an 18" wide film. Resolution across the field is about 5,700 lines-per-inch.The IBM1410,, APS-4 and APS-5 systems that used these lenses were replaced with laser imagers in the 1980s although some might have remained in use until 1999.

I was thinking of making a rear-projection viewer for the eclipse with a lens like that.

A resolution of 220 lppmm across a 46 degree field!? That's pretty unbelievable. Especially from such a long focal length lens.

 

Only with near-monochromatic light I suspect.

 

It's also hard to believe that a CRT spot could be made fine enough to require such resolution.

 

This would be for generating microcircuit masters, right?

Hmm. The IBM 1410 is a computer. APS-4 and -5 are Autologic phototypesetters that were driven by a variety of computers, but not, as far as Google can see, a 1410. Are you sure the 1410 belongs in the same sentence with them?

If the old Dialyte and Tessar f/9 lens designs were good enough for dot-for-dot copying, why would a CRT projection lens need a resolution of 5700 line-pairs per inch? Just to engrave a bit of type. And which end of the conjugate focii is that resolution measured at? Small end I presume. Edited June 25, 2017 by rodeo_joe|1

Speed, RJ, speed. f/2.3 is a tiny bit more luminous than f/9.

I do appreciate that the lens is faster Dan, which makes the claim of 5,700 line pairs per inch resolution over a 46 degree field even more incredible.

 

I didn't ask why it needed a wider aperture, just why on earth it would need that sort of resolution for type-setting.

 

In fact a bit of blur to mask the CRT scan lines might be an advantage.

Speed, RJ, speed. The devices wrote many, many lines/unit time. Look up the APS-5.

Resolution = speed then? How's that work?

Resolution = speed then? How's that work?

Fair question. Damfino.

 

Since the lens doesn't seem to be usable as a photographic objective, this discussion seems moot and poorly anchored in reality.

I have the remains of one of those lenses...kind of a walnut-burgundy anodized color...attractive. Luckily I only paid $5 + postage (2004 postage according to a question I posted about it). Heavy amber surface coating (not yellow glass) on the front & rear elements. Focus was 1" behind the lens (4" diameter end). The 'front' was about 5" diameter. Since it was a sort of projection lens, it was awkward. Reversed, with the aperture ring on the back it was a few inches.

 

Mine had bad 'front' surface damage. I wrestled the retaining ring out and couldn't get the lens out...very tight fit...hair dryer trick (heat until it expands enough for the element to fall out...with a vacuum sound. Back focus increased to several inches. Heavily colored images...I concluded monochromatic...also based on the original application.

Declared useless, I attempted disassembly---too massive to use hairdryer on inner elements...I took a hacksaw to it and eventually got one half to unscrew. Nice iris (19 blade?) . Had to press elements out the fit was so tight. The two on either side of the iris were very thick, semi-hemispherical but negative diopter value. Still useless even disassembled. Tried to put it back together & chipped one of the semi-hemi elements.

 

I don't know how many elements are in it right now but I kind of like the look of lightbulbs projected onto a groundglass...so I may yet figure out a way to mount it onto something.