Ricochetrider Posted June 3, 2023 Share Posted June 3, 2023 Looking thru a photo book of work by Harry Callahan the other night I came across this. What a LENS! Anybody know anything about it? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Michael Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 Does the text in the book give at the least, context, if not some vague description? In any case - I think the camera is an Arriflex 35mm Cine Camera. Probably circa 1960~1965. The lens (my best guess) would be an adapted "Long Lens" for a 35mm still camera, as differentiated from a "Telephoto Lens". That is to say the "long lens", physically, is the actual length of the focal length of the lens. My guess is 800mm, maybe 1000mm. I expect that, considering the platform and the OoF background, it is at a sporting event (or similar). The lens itself: could be a Soligor, Pentax, Tokina - I recall they all made 800mm F/8 long lenses - sue as eggs other manufacturers did too. WW 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 More like 2000 mm Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Michael Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 You really think so, or is that meant as hyperbole? I don't recall any 2000mm 'long' lenses from that era, not even telephoto 2000mm lenses from that era - I will research it though: there were some mirror lenses about that FL: maybe my dating of the image is incorrect, but even so, a 2000mm lens of any style, is pretty rare, I think; whereas 800mm long lenses were relatively popular. Anyway it is an interesting image - maybe the OP will reveal the book's title and other details for us. WW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn McCreery Posted June 6, 2023 Share Posted June 6, 2023 (edited) If I assume that the man is 5'8" tall (1.73m) and scale the length of the lens (3.4" on my screen) to the man's height on my screen (4.5"), I calculate that the lens is about 1.3m long, or 1,300mm. If the lens has a long lens hood, the last 0.5" on my screen, that cuts the focal length down to about 1,100mm. If the guy is a little shorter, then maybe 1,000mm. In any case, A very long lens, indeed! My guess is that the event is a football game, but that is just a guess. Edited June 6, 2023 by Glenn McCreery 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochetrider Posted June 6, 2023 Author Share Posted June 6, 2023 (edited) Hi guys. Gotta apologize; in the back of this book, Harry Callahan, Color, 1941-1980- are synopses of each photo. In the process of carrying on with my friends while glancing thru this book, I forgot to seek out the shot. I’m sure intrigued by the lens tho. How wide a field of view would this have had? . Edited June 6, 2023 by Ricochetrider Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samstevens Posted June 6, 2023 Share Posted June 6, 2023 Are you sure that was the book? It’s one of my favorites. I have the hardcover, signed, 1st edition (my brother worked in a high end bookstore back in the day). That image of him does not appear in my copy and there are no photo synopses in the back of the book. Thought I might be able to help you with info, but it’s not there. 1 "You talkin' to me?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted June 6, 2023 Share Posted June 6, 2023 (edited) My guess is that it is a special lens for covering a sports event or similar, so not necessarily a lens that a photographer would know about unless they were a cinematographer. My thought is that the Leica 800mm Telyts (simple 2-element achromats) were long, but not nearly as long as that. Edited June 6, 2023 by Robin Smith Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen_h Posted June 7, 2023 Share Posted June 7, 2023 On 6/5/2023 at 5:43 AM, William Michael said: (snip) The lens (my best guess) would be an adapted "Long Lens" for a 35mm still camera, as differentiated from a "Telephoto Lens". (snip) Somewhere I learned about, as you note, "telephoto" lenses being those that are much shorter than the actual focal length. Well, often that happens when you put a tele-extender on another lens. Mostly I remember learning about it, when learning about retrofocus wide-angle lenses. When I bought my Nikon FM, I bought it with the AI 35/2.0 lens, and no 50mm lens. But everyone call them telephoto, if they are long and even if they don't have the negative lens in the back. -- glen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochetrider Posted June 7, 2023 Author Share Posted June 7, 2023 On 6/5/2023 at 10:54 PM, samstevens said: Are you sure that was the book? It’s one of my favorites. I have the hardcover, signed, 1st edition (my brother worked in a high end bookstore back in the day). That image of him does not appear in my copy and there are no photo synopses in the back of the book. Thought I might be able to help you with info, but it’s not there. Ah hmm… Well I thought I had the book title but I guess not. This book was smallish- 10” X 10” maybe, and square, contents of all color photographs. Now I’ll have to look at the books again to find out what’s titled as what! 😊 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samstevens Posted June 7, 2023 Share Posted June 7, 2023 Mine’s … er … bigger. 14x14. 1 "You talkin' to me?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochetrider Posted June 9, 2023 Author Share Posted June 9, 2023 Hi Sam i know there’s a second edition to his color works (but forget the date range)… perhaps that’s the book I found this in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted June 9, 2023 Share Posted June 9, 2023 There have been really LONG lenses for a long time. Here from 1954-11 Popular Photography Many of these lenses made it into surplus and were adapted for small image cameras like 4x5 inches. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin O Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 This thread reminded me of the 2019 documentary 'Apollo 11' directed by Todd Douglas Miller. Highly recommended if you haven't seen it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochetrider Posted June 21, 2023 Author Share Posted June 21, 2023 (edited) OK FINALLY got together with my buddy and we pored over his not insignificant pile of photography books looking for THE ONE where I found this photo. SO, my bad I was completely mistaken the photographer was Ed Van Der Elskin! I'll post some phone pix but it seems the photo was taken at the Mexican Olympics? The text, inconveniently is in Dutch, so unsure exactly what it does say. I'll post the phone pix, maybe someone can interpret for us. edit; here are the pix, well one of them. Stand by please Edited June 21, 2023 by Ricochetrider Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochetrider Posted June 21, 2023 Author Share Posted June 21, 2023 here’s the one with the text. Together both files exceeded the 4mb limit (so it seems?) can anyone translate? I kinda think the upper paragraph describes the content of the photo; the lower the details of the shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin O Posted June 21, 2023 Share Posted June 21, 2023 13 minutes ago, Ricochetrider said: can anyone translate? On the left during the Olympics in Mexico a film cameraman, who I later learned is one of the famous Samuelson brothers from London, with super long lens on Arriflex camera. The photo next to it, dogs doing it in Hong Kong. In Mexico I worked with the Nikkormat and a 500 mm f/5 Pentax lens. I should never have sold that lens with my crazy head. But yes, then you need money once and there it goes. So Samuelson with the 500, 1/250th at f/5 on Ektachrome. The dogs just with the Leica and a wide angle. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
httpwww.photo.netbarry Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 On 6/5/2023 at 5:43 AM, William Michael said: Does the text in the book give at the least, context, if not some vague description? In any case - I think the camera is an Arriflex 35mm Cine Camera. Probably circa 1960~1965. The lens (my best guess) would be an adapted "Long Lens" for a 35mm still camera, as differentiated from a "Telephoto Lens". That is to say the "long lens", physically, is the actual length of the focal length of the lens. My guess is 800mm, maybe 1000mm. I expect that, considering the platform and the OoF background, it is at a sporting event (or similar). The lens itself: could be a Soligor, Pentax, Tokina - I recall they all made 800mm F/8 long lenses - sue as eggs other manufacturers did too. WW William, do you think it's using a C-mount lens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJG Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 If if's an Arriflex it won't be a c mount lens. They are all bayonet mount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now