>>3321408I have 3 from an old projection TV that were on the CRTs like in
>>3321411 Mine are something like 46mm FL and f/0.6 but require the liquid/oil element on the CRT to achieve the f/0.6. Mine has 4 elements inside, but only 1 is glass, the rest are cheap plastic. The glass double convex lens is 65mm FL f/0.75, but again without the liquid/oil part, you can't realistically get the f/0.75. So, having it wide open without an aperture looks like a complete mess.
For these images, I made a paper aperture and taped it to the camera flange mount to simulate an f/8 aperture. I rolled the lens up in a cardboard tube and held it in front of the camera's paper aperture. The lens isn't perfectly aligned or centered in most of these, hence the smearing sections in some. It isn't perfectly calculated, but here's the rubber band results in the photos. Top two are of the lens and setup. The rest are macro (flipped the long end of the cardboard tube around) and normal stuff.
As you can see it is a chromatic aberration bomb. The ghosting blob in the center of the one of the hillside is from the light bouncing around in cardboard tube. In a proper barrel with lens hood that low contrast blob wouldn't be there. Also, there's tons of light leakage from the sides hitting the lens from the back and doing weird things. With a proper setup it'd have a lot more contrast, less distortion, and be an "okay" lens for some sort of special effects art type lens.
I've been playing with this one lens from time to time over the months figuring out the best way to mount it to a D3400 and focus it. I'll eventually get it mounted sometime. I'll use one of the unopened CRT lenses for the final model since those aren't covered in blemishes from being handled so much.
