The more I play with this lens, the more I learn about how it "thinks."

The Verito, and probably a lot of other "soft focus" lenses, reacts most favorably to high contrast situations. Subtle shadings don't allow for the coma to shine out. Here is a shot taken in a very high contrast environment -- in a pine forest where there was dense foreground against very light background. I opened the lens to it's maximum (f/4) and held a Kodak 6-stop ND filter in front. The neg is thinner than I anticipated, but the stuff is there none-the-less. 8x10 Arista 200 (aka Foma 200).

To me, this is a keeper.

George

The Veritar is the Verito's coated brother.  This was shot with the 10" version.

Same location, different tree.  Not quite high-noon, but damn near, which caused some very high contrast lighting -- these SF lenses love contrast!!

George

Same tree as "Them" below, but with better light.

Same Chatham Rectilinear at f/8. The jpeg is showing up dark on some monitors. This coma in this one not so in-your-face. Gives a subtle 3d look.

George

I've had a little Waterbury Meniscus lens from the 1880's laying in a drawer for a few years.  Waterbury was a cheap camera for the masses made by Scovill.  They're usually 5X8 inch.  The lens is a single achromatic doublet at the end of a brass tube.  It is about 10" focus which is what you'd expect with a cheap 5X8 camera.  The one I have had a disc that throttled it back to about f12, the place where the mfr felt it was sharp enough to be respectable.  I used it several years ago for this page.  This weekend I got tired of trying to figure out how to use it unstopped where it would be soft.  So I did the bad bad thing and put a 1 1/4 inch socket down the throat and smacked it with a hammer.  No more disc.  Now it's an f6 Waterbury and ready for action.  As usual I was pleasantly surprised.  It is far sharper even wide open than I would have expected.  Here are 3 shots on 5X7.  I think it has a fine look to it!

The Edsel had shown up in a friends driveway and proved to be a fine test.  Can't afford a Pinkham, the little Waterbury's go cheap.  No Pinkham but still a nice old lens with some hoootzpah.

....to have enough knowledge NOT to buy.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=400035967946&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1123

This a Bausch & Lomb product.  It may have been sold at Pinkham & Smith, the establishment just as they were sold by Sears, Monkey Wards, and a host of other photo retailers 100 years ago but it is not a Pinkham Smith built lens.  It is a decent ordinary Petzval if you fell like owning one that says Pinkham & Smith. 

I'll bet a Hamburger and Beer that it goes over $2200.  It's a $300 lens.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

At least you guys will know.  I don't plan to post this at LFForum.