Lens ID?

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I've had this lens for some time and it has just been sitting around and I was curious if anyone might know anything about it. My digital camera is down so I'll do my best to describe what I think is an enlarging lens.

The only markings on this thing are 14A/3140 Burke & James, Inc. Chicago 4, Ill.
Around the inside rim of the glass you have F/ 5.6 UU 285965 14 in.

The iris stops go from, as marked, F-5.6 to F-16. It does close down to maybe F-22 or 32. The lens is heavy, a little over 2 lbs and it is about 3 3/8 " long, front lens 3 1/4" diameter and the rear about 2 3/4" diameter. I shined a light in it and I can see 5 distinct reflections.They almost look to be in groups of two,one,two? I'm no lens expert so I thought I would ask. I'm thinking of mounting it on a board and trying a portrait with it on the 11x14. Got plenty of x-ray film so I can experiment. Thanks.

Jim

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Can't say for sure without an image, but from the description I would hazard a guess that it is a Dallmeyer designed (but not necessarily made by them) aerial lens made for the British Air Ministry during WWII.

According to the Vade Mecum these might be a Serrac, a Tessar type lens.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Can't say for sure without an image, but from the description I would hazard a guess that it is a Dallmeyer designed (but not necessarily made by them) aerial lens made for the British Air Ministry during WWII.

According to the Vade Mecum these might be a Serrac, a Tessar type lens.

Jason, thanks for the info. Yes I wish I could take a picture of it but my digital is dead. I forgot to look in the Vade Mecum. Guess I'll have to mount the thing and shoot it. Maybe I'll get lucky and it will give me some nice images.

Jim

[Pete Watkins]

Hi Jim,
I have no idea how your lens came to be marked up B&J (I'd love to know though) but I've got two similar lenses. One is a 2nd WW f2.9 - f11 14 inch lens number VV184967 with the War Department arrow engraved into it. The other is a 2nd WW f5.6 - f16 14 inch lens number UU420044 the W.D. arrow is engraved into it along with A.M. 14A/3140. The A.M. stands for Air Ministry. I understand that the VV/UU bits indicate either the mauufacturers or possibly the design company. Bearing in mind that we, as a country, were not importimg objects that could be made here I suspect that the letters indicate the manufacturers. I still haven't tried these lenses after a few years of ownership but their reputation over here is that the quality is variable.
Hope that this helps.
Best wishes,
Pete.

[Dan Fromm]

I'm with Jason. Aerial camera lens. Most likely format was 9"x9" so its probably a bit short of coverage for 11x14.

The VM says that UU and VV prefixes for Air Ministry/War Department lenses' serial numbers mean that Dallmeyer made it. 14A/3140 decodes as "product class 14A" contract 3140. 14A seems to mean optical goods.

Jim, its been a while but I think I've held an example of your monster in my hands. I unscrewed the cells from the barrel, counted reflections carefully, found 4 strong, no weak in the front cell; 2 strong, 1 weak in the rear. This means tessar type.

IMO these things are so hard to use on a camera that their best use is as paperweights. YMMV.

Cheers,

Dan

[Dan Fromm]

Pete, B&J bought scrap and surplus lenses for resale. Some are good, others aren't.

[Pete Watkins]

Thanks Dan, perhaps we had some unused examples and sold them to the highest bidder. Facinating!
Pete.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Is it coated Jim? B&J often (single) coated their surplus lenses.

[Pete Watkins]

Jason,
My two are uncoated.
Pete.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I'm with Jason. Aerial camera lens. Most likely format was 9"x9" so its probably a bit short of coverage for 11x14.

The VM says that UU and VV prefixes for Air Ministry/War Department lenses' serial numbers mean that Dallmeyer made it. 14A/3140 decodes as "product class 14A" contract 3140. 14A seems to mean optical goods.

Jim, its been a while but I think I've held an example of your monster in my hands. I unscrewed the cells from the barrel, counted reflections carefully, found 4 strong, no weak in the front cell; 2 strong, 1 weak in the rear. This means tessar type.

IMO these things are so hard to use on a camera that their best use is as paperweights. YMMV.

Cheers,

Dan

Dan & Pete thanks for the info. I have been using it for a paper weight! I thought that I would give it a try on the 11x14 due to the fact that I have about 280 sheets of 11x14 x-ray film that I have. Time for some experimentation. Maybe the thing will be funky wide open and if it is of questionable quality or unacceptable quality then it can be retired to paper weight status.

Pete the B&J information is actually a sticker that is attached to the lens. Mine does have the arrow you describe but no AM designation. Thanks again for the replies.

Jim

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Is it coated Jim? B&J often (single) coated their surplus lenses.

Jason, yes mine looks to be coated.

Jim

[wfwhitaker]

Sounds like it might possibly be an Aviar. But I say that with caution. I bought an Aviar from Jim G and it turned out to be exactly what I'd had two of at an earlier time. f/5.6 in a barrel and quite heavy. One of the others I'd had was clearly marked "Burke & James" and was coated. So, my assumption (and it is an assumption) is that since the physical characteristics are identical, the lenses are the same. They all look the same (wonderful) on the ground glass and you know what Jim's looks like from the images he's posted. Coverage is excellent and you should be able to get it around your 11x14, especially for a portrait.

But post a photo when you can.

[Pete Watkins]

Jim,
Let us know how you get on. I've got an 11x14. I might get round to making a lens board for it. It'll also sound good if I decide to sell the thing.
Thanks all for explaining the B&J thing.
Pete.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Sounds like it might possibly be an Aviar. But I say that with caution. I bought an Aviar from Jim G and it turned out to be exactly what I'd had two of at an earlier time. f/5.6 in a barrel and quite heavy. One of the others I'd had was clearly marked "Burke & James" and was coated. So, my assumption (and it is an assumption) is that since the physical characteristics are identical, the lenses are the same. They all look the same (wonderful) on the ground glass and you know what Jim's looks like from the images he's posted. Coverage is excellent and you should be able to get it around your 11x14, especially for a portrait.

But post a photo when you can.

Will, thanks. This is what I was thinking. I mean at portrait distances it will cover. I just need to see of it has a "sweet spot" or not. Will post a photo when I can.

Jim

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Jim,
Let us know how you get on. I've got an 11x14. I might get round to making a lens board for it. It'll also sound good if I decide to sell the thing.
Thanks all for explaining the B&J thing.
Pete.

Pete, will do! One of the things to try this weekend.

Jim

[Dan Fromm]

Sounds like it might possibly be an Aviar. But I say that with caution. I bought an Aviar from Jim G and it turned out to be exactly what I'd had two of at an earlier time. f/5.6 in a barrel and quite heavy. One of the others I'd had was clearly marked "Burke & James" and was coated. So, my assumption (and it is an assumption) is that since the physical characteristics are identical, the lenses are the same. They all look the same (wonderful) on the ground glass and you know what Jim's looks like from the images he's posted. Coverage is excellent and you should be able to get it around your 11x14, especially for a portrait.

But post a photo when you can.Will, I've had an Air Ministry 14"/5.6 Aviar, have held an Air Ministry 14"/5.6 tessar type. They're both monsters. But counting reflections is easy. Perhaps Jim will do that and report back. Then we'll know and be able to stop speculating.

FWIW, my 14 Aviar's s/n had the prefix TT for you-know-who done it and the 14" tessar type had the prefix UU for Dallmeyer faciebat.

As for coverage, both lenses were made to cover a 12" circle. 17" is a stretch for both of 'em, but let's not wrangle about what "covers" means.

Cheers,

Dan

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Will, I've had an Air Ministry 14"/5.6 Aviar, have held an Air Ministry 14"/5.6 tessar type. They're both monsters. But counting reflections is easy. Perhaps Jim will do that and report back. Then we'll know and be able to stop speculating.

FWIW, my 14 Aviar's s/n had the prefix TT for you-know-who done it and the 14" tessar type had the prefix UU for Dallmeyer faciebat.

As for coverage, both lenses were made to cover a 12" circle. 17" is a stretch for both of 'em, but let's not wrangle about what "covers" means.

Cheers,

Dan

Looking through the rear element I can see 5 distinct lights. Looks to be 2 close together that are small then 2 equal distance apart and the same size and one that is larger and equal distance from the second group? I hope this makes sense. It does have the UU prefix.

Like I said the proof is in the putting. I'll slap this baby on the 11x14 and burn a negative or two at portrait distance. Who knows the lack of coverage could be interesting if I focus at some distance.

Jim