Carl Meyer Lenses?

[fretlessdavis]

Hey all,

Recently picked up a Burke & James press camera in rough but serviceable shape. Really psyched to strip it down and use as a field camera. My plan for this one is to take it rock climbing and canyoneering, where movements should help a ton. I cannot stand the thin DOF of climbing closeups that seem to be standard-- really distracting foregrounds and loss of the background that would give the viewer some sense of scale. Same thing with shots from far away, with long lenses, seem flat and uninspired, etc. With some movements I'm sure I could capture what I want.

Anyways-- I had been planning on picking up a Symmar 150mm, and likely a Super Angulon 90mm f/8, or Fuji SW 75mm f/8 (would need a recessed board), but the lens that came on the front of the camera is intriguing me.

I have never heard of Carl Meyer lenses (assuming it's a mash up of Carl Zeiss and Hugo Meyer... so cheap lens trying to seem nice). It's a 90mm f/6.8 Hugo Meyer Wide Angle. It's got some seperation around the edges, and is a bit hazy. From what I can tell, it's pretty crappy wide open, but the edges get better once it's down to f/16 or so. Not much room for movements, though.

I have seen references to Carl Meyer lenses being rebadged Optars. Any thoughts on this? Is this just a rebadged Optar Wide Angle 90mm? I can find info on many other focal lengths, but not 90mm...

Is it worth keeping around? Should I toss it? Use it with my Calumet C2 as a normal lens with movements?

I may take it out and take a few snaps with it and see how it does.... In the meantime I'd still like to find out something... anything about it?

 

[Dan Fromm]

I have never heard of Carl Meyer lenses (assuming it's a mash up of Carl Zeiss and Hugo Meyer... so cheap lens trying to seem nice)

Carl Meyer was Burke & James house brand. B&J bought up numerous odds and ends, cleaned 'em, if necessary mounted 'em, and engraved them "Carl Meyer." Internet scuttlebutt is that they're all terrible, so they tend to sell for little. But and however, one of my friends who collected Zeiss lenses bought a couple of Carl Meyer Sonnars and told the that they were very good, all that Sonnars should be. If you can afford to take a chance on a Carl Meyer, why not?

What I think is the Hugo Meyer lens you have is described here: http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/meyer_3.html. It seems to be a dagor clone. I b'lieve the coverage claimed is considerably exaggerated.

Since you have the lens already, try it out.

The 90/6.8 Wolly you mentioned is described here: http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/wollensak_5.html . 4/4 double Gauss type.

 

[fretlessdavis]

Thanks for the info. It seems to cover 4x5 stopped down... I'll have to test it further. It's about the size, and seems comparable to the Optar Wide Angle 90mm f/6.8. Maybe it's just a clone or rebadge of that. Seems more likely that they bought locally in the US to throw on their cameras. Doesn't seem at all like an angulon 90mm 6.8, and that Meyer seems very rare.

Anyways, it was essentially free. I guess I'll play around with it for a bit before junking or tossing it.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Thanks for the info. It seems to cover 4x5 stopped down... I'll have to test it further. It's about the size, and seems comparable to the Optar Wide Angle 90mm f/6.8. Maybe it's just a clone or rebadge of that. Seems more likely that they bought locally in the US to throw on their cameras. Doesn't seem at all like an angulon 90mm 6.8, and that Meyer seems very rare.

Anyways, it was essentially free. I guess I'll play around with it for a bit before junking or tossing it.

If the lens is engraved Hugo Meyer it was made by Hugo Meyer, B&J and Wollensak had nothing to do with it. That it came with a camera that B&J made means nothing.

 

[fretlessdavis]

It is branded 'Carl Meyer'.

I guess I'll hope it's a rebaged decent lens, but It's probably going into the junk drawer.

 

[paul_c5x4]

I had been planning on picking up a Symmar 150mm, and likely a Super Angulon 90mm f/8, or Fuji SW 75mm f/8 (would need a recessed board), but the lens that came on the front of the camera is intriguing me.

If you're looking for a lightweight rig, you won't be wanting to lug either an SA 90mm or a Fuji 75mm as well as an LF camera. Mind you, if you're looking at Fujinon lenses, the 135mm f/5.6 is a cracking little performer.

 

[Dr Croubie]

(assuming it's a mash up of Carl Zeiss and Hugo Meyer... so cheap lens trying to seem nice).

It'd be more interesting if it were a mashup of Carl Zeiss and Oscar Meyer (wieners). At least, given what I've just googled about how well they perform, being half-sausage would explain a lot.

To echo Paul, if you're looking for "light" and "movements", then "wide" doesn't really fit at the same time.
My 90mm f/5.6 SWD is a fair bit larger than my 90mm f/8 SA, all for an extra 20mm shift on 4x5 (and brighter focussing).
Comparatively, my 90mm Angulon is smaller all up than the rear elements of the two big boys, but no movements whatsoever.

But if you go up a bit in focal length, even the humble 120mm f/6.8 Angulon has as much image circle as the 90/8 SA (I don't have one, but I'm presuming it's not as huge as any SA), or the 135mm Fuji W look about halfway in between size-wise for the same coverage.

 

[shutterfinger]

From A Lens Collectors Vade Mecum: Carl Meyer: This was a trade name devised by George Drucker about 1927 and used by his firm on a series of lenses offered by Burke and James.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I have a 360 Carl Meyer process lens in barrel which I sometimes enlarge with when I want a little bit "off" look to a black and white portrait,
that is, not clinically sharp like a modern lens would provide - a nice complement sometimes to dagor lens images, with their slightly "rounded"
edges. If I had a shutter for it, I'd try it in camera too. Sometimes these second-string lenses are capable of interesting results.

 

[lxdude]

It'd be more interesting if it were a mashup of Carl Zeiss and Oscar Meyer (wieners).

I never sausage a thing.

 

[fretlessdavis]

It'd be more interesting if it were a mashup of Carl Zeiss and Oscar Meyer (wieners). At least, given what I've just googled about how well they perform, being half-sausage would explain a lot.

So I puled it apart last night-- I'm about 90% sure it's a rebadged uncoated Optar. Not sure how they get away with wide angle on it, as it *barely* covers at f/16, and has room for about 2mm in any direction of movement at f/32!

Interestingly, it's seems that it performs better with the front cell missing, racked out to about 180mm. Sharper, and much more coverage, lol. Maybe they just put this thing together from buckets of elements and sausages.

Anyways,

Thanks for the tips on lenses everyone. I forgot to clarify that when I would be using lots of movements with the 75mm, I would probably be using a rollfilm back, getting a similar view as my 50mm ETRS lens. From the price of 'em, though, sounds like I should just snag a nice 135mm for that purpose. In reality, how close are 135 and 150? I've so far only used a 90mm and a 127mm. If I do snag a symmar, should I snag the 180mm if I'm planning on getting a 135mm?

For the record, my favorite 645 lens kit right now is a 40, 50, and 75, and 100, with 75 being the least used, and my 100 and 50 getting the most.

In addition to climbing, this will end up being my backpacking rig, as it's surprisingly light. To my surprise, for $20, the bellows are fantastic and there are no leaks anywhere. The viewfinder and rangefinder are toast and are coming off, it's missing the back half of the sports finder, and the folding focusing hood is in 13459355 pieces of smelly fabric on the floor (should be easy to sew another).

 

[shutterfinger]

I'm about 90% sure it's a rebadged uncoated Optar

Optar is a trade name copyrighted by Graflex Corp. Graflex did not make lens, they bought them from Wollensak who relabled their Raptar lens as Optar for those sold to Graflex.

Not sure how they get away with wide angle on it, as it *barely* covers at f/16, and has room for about 2mm in any direction of movement at f/32!

Angle of view has little to do with image circle formed. Angle of view and magnification determines if it is wide angle, normal, or telephoto. Image circle is determined by what format the lens was designed to cover. A wide angle lens will have little wiggle room as movements were not considered necessary during design. Many/most 90mm f6.8 wide angles of the 40's and 50's just cover their stated format of coverage.