Grubb Lens Dublin

Hi,

I recently acquired a Grubb brass bound lens and I wondered if anyone could date it, I assume it is a Petzval type but would like to know a bit more.  It is engraved “A2 Grubb Dublin 993” . I have put a couple of photos of it at http://tinyurl.com/hnh7nqq . It came with one stop and no flange. It seems to have a fairly short focal length and suffers with some separation of the front elements and "cleaning" marks.

Thanks

Nigel Richards 

You need to be a member of British Photographic History to add comments!

Join British Photographic History

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • Thanks
  • Late to this topic but in case its still of interest here are my comments. You appear to have a Grubb made 'Carte de Visite or Portrait Combination' Petzval lens designed to cover or 4" x 3". Each (front and back) lens diameter should be 1 7/8". Its probably circa 1858/60 although exact dating is not currently possible. Grubb seems to have made lenses almost on a 'bespoke' basis and the mechanical designs of earlier lenses vary considerably although the Petzvals were relatively conventional.

  • And this from 

    The Camera 1916 Frank Chambers Ed. Pg. 338:

    The earliest form of a landscape achromatic lens used for photography,
    consisted of a bi-convex lens of crown glass cemented to a bi-concave flint.
    The Grubb lens, which is interesting as being the first so-called aplanatic lens,
    was formed by cementing a concavo-convex flint to a meniscus crown. It was
    found to work with a larger aperture and with less distortion, but of course
    was not as correct in this particular, as more recent lenses of the aplanatic
    form, which are not single corrected lenses, but compound ones. This sub
    ject of distortion will need another chapter to make it clear to you.

  • And whater this means from Neblette 1931 I think that is a British patent no.

                       2574 - 1857 Improved achromat lens.

    Grubb, Thomas

    Grubb Aplanat

  • If it is a "C" lens, it existed in 1861.

    Another reference:

    The Photographic Journal may 1861 pg 187

    day, or to some other convenient time.
    First, then, as to the apparatus.—My nega
    tives are all on 12 by 10 plates, and, with the
    exception of one (which was previously men
    tioned in this room, and was taken with a
    Ross's 8£ by 6% orthographic lens), wore aD.
    taken with a Grubb's C lens—a lens which is
    intended to cover merely 10 by 8 ; and I
    think it will be allowed that the definition even
    to the margin is all that can be desired. At
    this point I may be permitted to observe that
    I believe the landscape lensjw excellence is
    that known as the single lens, and that, for
    this purpose, it is superior to all tho new
    lenses, whether orthoscopic, orthographic, or
    triplet. I do not mean, in speaking of Mr.
    Grubb's lens, to disparago the landscape lenses
    of Mr. Ross, Mr. Dallmeyer, or any other
    maker of eminence ; I am merely mentioning
    tho fact that my pictures were taken with a
    Grubb's lens, and that I think as highly of it
    as possible for landscape work. My camera is
    a folding one ; and although somewhat heavier,
    I consider it superior to that known as Captain
    Fowke's and to Mr. Kinnoar's, inasmuch as it
    is firmer and more rigid. The tent which is
    before you is that known as Smartt's ; and I
    must say that, for field work, I know nothing
    so efficient and convenient. I have arranged
    in it some special fittings and contrivances of
    my own, to which I will refer presently. I
    used Ponting's collodion only, and a bath made
    after his formula.

  • I found this in the Journal of the Birmingham Photographic Society Thom. Sutton Ed. Vol III 1858 pg 154 

    This may or may not help.

    I am looking for more.

    Cheers.

    --Dick Sullivan

    Mr. Grubb, of Dublin, has patented a new
    view-lens. In its outward form it resembles
    the ordinary view-lens, that is to say, it is
    nearly plano-convex, with a stop in front,
    and the crown and flint lenses are cemented
    together ; but the inner curve, instead of
    dividing the compound lens into a double
    concave of flint, and a double convex of crown
    glass, divides it into a meniscus of crown,
    and a concavo-convex of flint glass ;—the
    crown lens being that on which the rays are
    incident. In this arrangement, as in the old
    form, the conditions of achromatism are
    satisfied, and the radius of the field is the
    same, but the new lens has less spherical
    aberration than the other, and is therefore, in
    an important particular, superior to it. It is
    not a little remarkable that the problem of
    the single achromatic view-lens should admit
    of two, and only two, solutions, and that the
    wont of the two should be that which has
    been adopted for a number of years. We
    have had our controversies with Mr. Grubb
    on some points of theory in optics, but in
    the matter of this new lens we fully appreciate
    the improvement which he has suggested.
    Unfortunately, however, it comes too late.
    The Orthoscopic lens of M. Petzval accom
    plishes what no single view-lens can do, viz. :
    it gives an image i'BEE from distoetion.
    The question between this and a single viewlens, of any form, is not one of rapidity of
    action, or size of the stop ;—it lies far deeper,
    and is of far greater moment ; it is a question
    of DISTOETION OF THE IMAGE,—of TBUE OE
    false febsfective. We cannot insist too
    strongly upon this. Photography fixes the
    images of the camera, but of what value is
    the process if those images are false and
    distorted ? Photography then becomes merely
    the instrument of an untruth. The first
    consideration in investigating the merits of
    a lens is that of feeedom fbom distoetion.
    Now, in the single view-lens with a stop in
    front, the oblique pencils have great excentricity of incidence, and the distortion is very
    great, straight lines are curved inwards at their
    extremities, and the objects at the margin of
    the picture are diminished in size as compared
    with those in the centre. These evils
    exist to precisely the same extent in Mr.
    Grubb's new lens, as in the old one. %Ye
    advise our readers therefore, to have nothisg
    more to say to the single view-lens of any
    form, but to use the Orthoscopic lens, ui
    that only, for views ; and with respect to tit
    size of the stop, we advise them on til
    occasions to use the smallest stop possible,
    because solarization is better avoided in thii
    way, and a cleaner and better picture produ
    ced. Besides, with an exposure of three
    seconds, every moving figure produces a bin;
    on the picture, while with an exposure 4
    three minutes, a regiment of cavalry maj
    gallop before the camera, and no effect be
    produced upon the picture. If a view canoe*
    be taken instantaneously, it matters but
    little how long the exposure 13, within i
    reasonable limit. A great deal too much is
    made of the comparative rapidity of processes,
    when absolute instantaneity of exposure is no;
    achieved.
    With respect to Mr. Grubb's patent, ■
    believe it will not hold good. In No. 33 of
    this Journal, page 305, we have given tie
    formula for a view-lens. It is immaterial u
    that formula, whether the crown or flint gbus
    receives the incident rays, but when recein^
    upon the flint lens the formula gives the
    ordinary view lens,—when received upon lis
    crown, the lens of Mr. Grubb. Both m
    included in that formula, and it only aduitf
    of those two solutions.
    In a letter just received from Mr. Ross, h
    says, " with respect to my paper on the Petri*
    lens, I can only apply myself to it at leism'
    moments ; but will do my best to let JW
    have it for No. 55.

  • Hi Michael, Thanks, when I search the web I find references to dates and serial numbers but can't find the actual lists. I was hoping that someone in this group might have access to the data.

    Thanks

    Nigel 

  • There's nothing in the lens vademecum that helps with dating unfortunately. 

This reply was deleted.