J, I had a little time to kill tonight and am very glad I found these tests, especially the last 3. No need to pick a favorite, I love them all. The color is the same but I was interested from a saturation standpoint. The Pinkham VQ in the previous group has less color saturation. Interesting. Also the less light, longer exposure seems to have enhanced saturation. They start out looking like 3 clear lamps and end up looking like 3 christmas tree ornaments. Very excellent work indeed. The square vase is also lovely. Where can I get a photo shop filter like that?

Hey

I vue these three as 3 Pinkhams, even though one has another name on it. The lenses have differences, but there is a 'commonality' here as you can see, a strong one.

The lighting scheme and intensity of illumination either crowds this glass into a corner or sets 'em free.

The Vase is a straight shot, yet when I uploaded this to the Chinese 'Paowang' site, the first comment about the shot hinted at Photoshop. The stuff you see in the glass is really there. If there's ever a get together so we can compare lenses and 'what nots' sometime in the future, I'll bring the vase so you guys can see for yourselves.

Looking from the side the vase, the glass looks continous and smooth, shine a light through the thickness of the glass at one end, and look at the vase from other end, and these patterns/lines form.

Take care

J, did you see the 2 Pinkhams on Ebay. Same seller. A IV and a I. Just $5179.00 each or some such. Maybe he'd make a package deal for you! Both for a cool 10 large. Cheers my friend.

Hey

The only place these are gonna go at these prices is to China... My page w/these Pinkhams has two other lenses... This guy is asking $1,000 for a SUTER landscape meniscus!!! A SUTER!!!!!!

The other lens is a 305 Kodak Portrait and the asking prices is $1,000, the box in the pic looks exactly like mine. I'd check my serial #, only I have the shutter and adaptor ring at grimes, mine is the same year at this one in the pic. I've got the actual glass on my other #5 Ilex shutter, but the barrel/glass doesn't have the ser. #.

I look at these prices w/sadness, even though I don't think these folks will get this kind of money. Pinkhams should be used, but from 2 grand on, it's collector money, a reasonable figure for the Kodak is $500.00, which is ironic as it is every bit a Pinkham as the Semi-Achromatic Ser.1 he's asking #5 grand for. The Bi-Quality should be no more than a 2 grand lens.

It would be so sad for someone to take this glass out of circulation to rub on the lens w/a rag and stare at it.

I see a big mistake in logic from the folks who suggest that these lenses were used differently when they were first made, as some kind of invalidation of what we're doing w/them now. There's still work to be done w/this glass, I just wish they'll go to folks who'll use 'em.

I Keep dreaming that somebody will find a SA Series III in a junk bin covered w/hardened mud and sell it for $20.00.............and whoever buys it from him, turns around and sells it for 10 grand, and he gets it. If that actually happens, I really don't want to know.

Ciao

OMT.............The Chinese are very aware of this glass now, and they discuss this glass at length.