Hugo Myer Triple Conv Plasmat

[ronald lamarsh]

Am contemplating purchasing this beast, combined focal lenght is 113 cm, rear cell is 172mm and front is 220mm. Anybody out ther know what the coverage might be particularly the 113m focal length? I know, I know, its not a modern lens but is it at least comparable to say a 50's vin tage convertible symmar?

[Kevin Crisp]

Ron: I can't help you on coverage, but I have used two of these sets in different focal lengths. If the combined focal length is 113, then I think covering even 4X5 might be dicey. The usual 4X5 set is a 153mm or something like that combined. Used combined, it is decently sharp edge to edge and acceptably contrasty when stopped down. No, it isn't as good as a Symmar. (My luck with older Symmars has been excellent, with performance the same or better than the APO versions of the Symmars. They are a bargain. I am sure the newer lens would be superior with the sun in the composition.) What is interesting is that the lens is quite atmospheric and can produce an interesting effect you may or may not like when used wider open. Hard to articulate but smeared highlights comes close. This goes away stopped down. The individual cells are usable for some when used stopped way down. The edges will not do as well as the middle, not even close, and the performance of the single cells I have used doesn't come close to a converted Symmar. The single cells don't perform in the same ballpark as a single protar element either, especially at the edges. Again, the effect may or may not suit you and/or your particular composition. With a strong central subject the falloff in sharpness might be just fine, but I would count on it being there even when stopped down.

[ronald lamarsh]

Thanks Kevin!