Carl Meyer Anastigmat 12"
theo
an Ilex 5 shutter or a 12" f6.3 in an Alphax shutter (looks a lot newer).
Anybody have experience with these, or can direct me to site with additional
info? What can I expect to pay for these? Any problems shooting headshots
in 4x5 format with these lenses? Thanks...
Sandy King
Both of these lenses are Tessar formulas I believe. I would go for the
f/6.3 lens. Much lighter and you don't need the extra speed with view
camera work. Also, f/6.3 Tessars tend to be better performers that the
faster versions.
Don't know about price. I would guess a little over $200, if the glass is
clear and clearn and the shutter working as it should.
Sandy King
Steve Hamley
What camera are you using? The Ilex 5 is very large (intended for 8x10
boards), so you should check the required lensboard hole and to see if
the shutter will hit the standards. If you're using large lensboards
and not Technika boards, you're probably O.K.
Also, check the size and weight of the lens. Lenses faster than f 5.6
300mm and above get very big very fast, so think about having 3-4 lbs
of glass hanging on the end of your camera.
Thanks!
Steve
"theo" <the...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<fE5K9.327458$NH2.22946@sccrnsc01>...
Thor Lancelot Simon
Avoid Carl Meyer lenses.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon t...@rek.tjls.com
But as he knew no bad language, he had called him all the names of common
objects that he could think of, and had screamed: "You lamp! You towel! You
plate!" and so on. --Sigmund Freud
Michael Gudzinowicz
> I have the opportunity to choose between a Carl Meyer Anastigmat 12" f4.5
> newer). Anybody have experience with these, or can direct me to site with
> additional info? What can I expect to pay for these? Any problems
> shooting headshots in 4x5 format with these lenses? Thanks...
2. Don't buy either one.
Eric
I was given a 12" f/4.5 Carl Meyer Anastigmat for free and I wouldn't even
use it if I didn't have any other lenses. It's utter crap. Seriously. 8x10
negs taken with that lens and contact printed look worse than enlargements
from a disposable.
I would assume the 6.3 would be just as crappy, given the whole "Carl Meyer"
story, which can probably be found in google archives.
eric
Aaron van de Sande
might be an excellent lens for headshots. I would only buy one with a
guarantee that you can return it without questions. The ilex 5 shutter
if in excellent shape is worth ~150$ (your mileage will vary), the
elements are worthless.
--Aaron
"theo" <the...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<fE5K9.327458$NH2.22946@sccrnsc01>...
Howard Lester
Thor Lancelot Simon
Aaron van de Sande <aa...@post-modern.net> wrote:
>The quality of these lenses are quite variable, but you never know, it
>might be an excellent lens for headshots. I would only buy one with a
Yeah, and it "might" be an atomic weapon, sufficient to establish one
immediately as a major global power in one's own right. It "might"
also be a loaf of bread, or a carbon-fiber wheel for a motorcycle.
But so what? What it's very _unlikely_ to be is a photographic lens
of even vaguely acceptable quality, as even a slight familiarity with
the history of the "Carl Meyer" lenses would illustrate.
You can find the (ugly) details with a quick Google Groups search;
I won't waste your time or mine typing them in _again_.
Richard Knoppow
news group.
"Carl Meyer" is a trade name made up by Burke & James for
lenses it assembled from surplus parts (combined from Carl
Zeiss and Hugo Meyer both respectible companies). There are
many problems with these lenses as there are with the
"Berlin" Dagors, also assembled by B&J from captured or
surplus parts. While some of these lenses may work OK, in
general they should be assiduously avoided. to put it
bluntly they were scams.
Sandy King
<dick...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
A comment and a question.
First, I am aware of the Cary Meyer story and agree that one should be
very careful in buying these lenses. On the other hand I have owned and
used two of these lenses in the past, a 300mm f/6.3 and a 210mm f/6.3,
both I assume of Tessar design, and a 300mm f/6.8 engraved as Dagor type.
All three were very good lenses, the two Tessars easily competitive with
most other Tessars I have used from the period. And the 12" Dagor type was
at least as good as several other 12" real Dagors I have used. So in spite
of the fact that these lenses were assesmbled by B&J from captured or
surplus part the performance of the lenses I have used of this name was
quite competitive with that of other similar lenses of the same period.
Second, people may be confused by the nomenclature of Berlin Dagors and
assume that any Dagor with the name Berlin on it is one of the B&J lenses.
In fact there are quite a number of Dagor types lenses out there that are
original Berlin Dagors, either actually manufacturered in Germany or in
the United States. Most of the lenses manufactured in Germany are called
Doppel Anastigmat, but I am not entirely sure about those made in this
country.
Sandy King