Jump to content



Photo

Eyemo lenses


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4077 posts
  • Other
  • Right on the edge in London

Posted 18 January 2006 - 06:25 AM

I have come into possesion of a few lenses for an eyemo, but sadly do not own an eyemo myself.

Can anyone explain to me how the lens mount works? It appears to me from the lenses I have that perhaps focussing might be partly a function of the mount itself, as I can't work out how focusing works looking at the lenses.

Can anyone tell me more about the lenses for the eyemo cameras generally? Your own experiences etc?

In fact any information is good! ;)

love

Freya
  • 0

#2 dd3stp233

dd3stp233
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Other

Posted 18 January 2006 - 08:00 AM

I think in most of the standard Eyemo lenses that the focus ring moves the whole len, back and forth. There is a metal prong in the camera's lens mount that inserts into a hole in the back of the lens. This keeps the whole lens from rotating. If I remember correctly, there is also a pin that comes down, on the top of the camera lens mount, that holds the lens in place.

What lenses do you have fro the Eyemo? Maybe I could give you more info.
  • 0

#3 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 18 January 2006 - 01:01 PM

I think in most of the standard Eyemo lenses that the focus ring moves the whole len, back and forth. There is a metal prong in the camera's lens mount that inserts into a hole in the back of the lens. This keeps the whole lens from rotating. If I remember correctly, there is also a pin that comes down, on the top of the camera lens mount, that holds the lens in place.


---Older Arri standard mount lenses work the same way, though the dimensions are different. I came across an Arri mount Astro-Berlin where the lens screwed completely out of the focusing mount like the Eyemax on my Eyemo.

---LV
  • 0

#4 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4077 posts
  • Other
  • Right on the edge in London

Posted 18 January 2006 - 05:22 PM

What lenses do you have fro the Eyemo? Maybe I could give you more info.


I have an Ilex cinemat 75mm F2.9 (A metric eyemo lens! Does this mean it's more recent?)
A Carl Meyer Cine Telephoto 6 inch F4.5 (who are Carl Meyer?)
An EyeMax Telephoto Type V 6 inch F4.5
An Eyemax 2 inch F2.8 lens

love

Freya
  • 0

#5 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4077 posts
  • Other
  • Right on the edge in London

Posted 18 January 2006 - 06:11 PM

I think in most of the standard Eyemo lenses that the focus ring moves the whole len, back and forth. There is a metal prong in the camera's lens mount that inserts into a hole in the back of the lens. This keeps the whole lens from rotating. If I remember correctly, there is also a pin that comes down, on the top of the camera lens mount, that holds the lens in place.


I thought it must be like that as all the lenses seem the same in this regard. I suppose it is a good way of doing things as it must save money in the lens manufacture. It made me wonder about a system where the camera might even have its own apeture and you just stuck a bit of glass on the front! ;)

Then again, there is a lens behined the apeture too of course.

love

Freya
  • 0

#6 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4077 posts
  • Other
  • Right on the edge in London

Posted 18 January 2006 - 06:28 PM

---Older Arri standard mount lenses work the same way, though the dimensions are different. I came across an Arri mount Astro-Berlin where the lens screwed completely out of the focusing mount like the Eyemax on my Eyemo.

---LV


But the focussing mount was a part of the actual camera?

love

Freya
  • 0

#7 dd3stp233

dd3stp233
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Other

Posted 19 January 2006 - 03:25 AM

On the topic of Eyemo lenses, I was wondering which ones are better then others. For instance how do the Cooke lenses compare to the Eyemax lenses? Or how about General Scientific Lenses? Any opinions?
  • 0

#8 Robert Hughes

Robert Hughes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Sound Department
  • Minneapolis

Posted 19 January 2006 - 01:39 PM

Generally, the newer lenses are clearer than the older lenses, and coated lenses exhibit less flare than their uncoated brethren. First generation Eyemos (back in the '20s) shipped with Cooke lenses; I have an early Cooke Speed Panchro 25mm that is hazy and exhibits vignetting. Bausch & Lomb Baltar and Super Baltar lenses were sold in both Mitchell and Eyemo mounts, so the same lenses shooting "Gone With the Wind" were available on Eyemos. General Scientific lenses were made for the US Gov't; Army Air Force, NASA, etc. The late GS 150mm telephoto is a dynamite lens. Ilex was a competitor to GS; my Ilex telephoto is pretty awful. Bell & Howell Eyemax lenses (some were repackaged Baltars) were also for military use, some focussable, others not; the American B-17 bomber crews used non-focussable Eyemax lenses on their Eyemos.

All these lenses are at least 40 years old; don't expect them to cut seamlessly with modern Zeiss or Cooke prime lenses. But if the lens elements aren't scratched they can give very sharp focus, and the later, coated lenses can provide a relatively high-contrast, flare-free image.

Eyemos are a great, inexpensive way to shoot 35mm movie film. The look is completely different from 16mm, and it's exciting to see your images without needing a magnifier. Don't expect to shoot sync sound; use it as intended, as a portable, wild silent camera, and you'll love it.
  • 0

#9 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 19 January 2006 - 02:31 PM

On the topic of Eyemo lenses, I was wondering which ones are better then others. For instance how do the Cooke lenses compare to the Eyemax lenses? Or how about General Scientific Lenses? Any opinions?


My 50mm Eyemax is an uncoated triplet.
The General Scientific Miltars come out in the early to mid-50s, so are among the latest Eyemo lenses.

The lenses for the Technicolor three-strip camera were designed by Cooke & the 25mm is one of the first reverse-telephoto lenses.

---LV
  • 0

#10 Robert Hughes

Robert Hughes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Sound Department
  • Minneapolis

Posted 19 January 2006 - 03:11 PM

I've got 3 50mm Eyemax lenses, one is f/4.5 non-focussable, uncoated - remarkably sharp, considering. And two f/2.8 focussable, one uncoated, the other coated; the later (coated) lens is definately preferable.
  • 0

#11 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4077 posts
  • Other
  • Right on the edge in London

Posted 19 January 2006 - 05:20 PM

I've got 3 50mm Eyemax lenses, one is f/4.5 non-focussable, uncoated - remarkably sharp, considering. And two f/2.8 focussable, one uncoated, the other coated; the later (coated) lens is definately preferable.


I think one of the 6 inch lenses is coated, maybe both.

They all have focussing numbers printed on them, is this the difference between focussable and non focusable lenses?

Nobody has heard of Carl Meyer then? Coincidently I have a carl Meyer lens on my filmo too!

I heard that some people liked uncoated lenses for a different look?!!

Presumably the Eyemax lenses were made by different people at different times (whoever B&H were pals with at the time!). Is there any way to know who made what eyemax lens?

love

Freya

All these lenses are at least 40 years old; don't expect them to cut seamlessly with modern Zeiss or Cooke prime lenses. But if the lens elements aren't scratched they can give very sharp focus, and the later, coated lenses can provide a relatively high-contrast, flare-free image.


Well yeah, I understand what you're saying but I just got so bored with just shooting on my cooke S4's all the time so I just put them out with the trash and got these Eyemo lenses instead.

Hopefully now I will have a whole new look! ;)

Out with the new, in with the old...

love

Freya

Edited by Freya, 19 January 2006 - 05:21 PM.

  • 0

#12 dd3stp233

dd3stp233
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Other

Posted 19 January 2006 - 09:43 PM

I have a General Scientfic - 35mm Miltar lens f2 - f22. A Cooke Deep Field Panchro 100mm - f2.5 - f32 and a Cooke Cinema lens 47mm f2.5 - f32. Is anyone familiar with these and what would be your opinion of them.
  • 0

#13 Robert Hughes

Robert Hughes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Sound Department
  • Minneapolis

Posted 20 January 2006 - 11:25 AM

IIRC, Carl Meyer was a camera supply house in LA; whether they manufactured their own optics or rebranded others, I don't know.

Miltar lenses are fine, especially their late telephotos. The wide angle 25mm lens exhibits vignetting on some cameras, the 35mm seems bright all the way to the corners. A lot of older wide angle lenses (Cooke Speed Panchro I, Miltar, B&L, etc) exhibit severe optical distortion in the corners; that's part of their "character". If you require perfect corner-to-corner sharpness you'll need newer lenses.

Non focussing lenses don't have a focus ring, just a hard mount. They focus to infinity, for those crystal clear shots of Dresden getting blown to smithereens that we've seen in the old newsreels. Some medium and wide angle lenses may be focussed to somewhat short of infinity to allow for greater DOF.

Some Eyemos have been refitted with Nikon F mounts to allow for more modern lenses.

I am amazed at the tolerance of 35mm for lens imperfections. I got an Eyemo 71K a year or so back with a Bausch & Lomb 25mm lens that was cracked right through the front element. Of course it's not right, but the resulting image is still acceptably sharp for general use. Lots of haze near the highlights, though, like a mist filter.

I suspect that much of the use of Pro Mist and fog filters is a workaround for getting the scenic look that older lenses provided for free.
  • 0

#14 Red Goanna

Red Goanna

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Other

Posted 18 March 2006 - 07:10 PM

I have just bought two Eyemo 71K cameras. I want to try shooting a few TV commercials so I'd like nice lenses but I'm not prepared to modify what has become a vintage camera!


I have these lenses:
1. A very old-looking (Brass-front disk) Bausch & Lomb VICTOR Symmetrical 4X5 (for Still cam?)
2.Taylor-Hobson COOKE 47mm f/2.5
3.COOKE 6'' Telekinic Anastigmat f/4.5
4.General Scientific MILTAR -EFL 152mm f/3.5

My main question is eyepieces for these. Where do I get them? How can I comensate for parallax?

Are there reflex lenses? For example, my Bolex's 12-120 reflex lens changed my whole life!

Also, are coated wide lenses available, say 25-35mm? Are all of them prone to vignetting?

Is there a ground-glass prism I can fit to the film gate to check through-the lens sighting?

Steve

Attached Images

  • Cooke50.jpg
  • victor.jpg
  • Cooke150.jpg

  • 0

#15 Clive Tobin

Clive Tobin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 402 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Spokane Valley, WA, USA

Posted 18 March 2006 - 07:45 PM

...My main question is eyepieces for these. Where do I get them? How can I compensate for parallax?


If you can't find an Eyemo finder lens, you can use one from a 16mm Filmo. A 25mm Filmo finder lens seems to be the same (apart from the engraving) as a 50mm Eyemo finder lens. I don't know if this is universally true, but it was the case for the ones I looked at. I don't remember now if this was for Academy or silent "super 35" aperture. The same finder lenses are also used on the B&H 200 magazine cameras, and some Revere and Wollensak cameras too.

There is very little parallax unless you have the Spider (wide) turret.
  • 0

#16 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4077 posts
  • Other
  • Right on the edge in London

Posted 19 March 2006 - 02:02 PM

Are there reflex lenses? For example, my Bolex's 12-120 reflex lens changed my whole life!

Also, are coated wide lenses available, say 25-35mm? Are all of them prone to vignetting?

Is there a ground-glass prism I can fit to the film gate to check through-the lens sighting?

Steve


I think you have got a little confused by the thread! :)

I've no idea what coated lenses are available but they tend to be rarer because coating lenses is a more modern thing, and eyemo lenses tend to be quite old, like the eyemo itself.

When you mention vignetting I assume you are reffering to the optical distortion at the edges of the frame that someone mentioned. This may not be vingetting which is more of a masking effect but is more that the image itself is more distorted at its extremes. This is not related to coated lenses, in fact coated lenses probably are less likely to "suffer" from this as they are more modern lenses. It's just to do with the optics of the old lenses.

The eyemo is a non-reflex camera. I'm not sure what you are refering to with regards to the bolex 12-120 reflex, but a number of manufacturers made dogleg c-mount lenses that provided a reflex viewfinder with the lens itself. There is nothing like that on the eyemo. I suspect you are confusing this with when we were saying that some of the eyemo lenses were foccusable. What we meant is that some of the lenses are fixed at infinity and you can't focus them at all.

I've never heard of a prism like you describe, however, I hear that some eyemo's have a critical foucussing device like on the filmo, where you can rotate the lens out the way and check your foccusing by looking through the lens at a tiny spot at the center to check your focussing is right. This is something built into the camera however and not available as an add-on.

love

Freya

Edited by Freya, 19 March 2006 - 02:03 PM.

  • 0

#17 Hal Smith

Hal Smith
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2280 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • OKC area

Posted 19 March 2006 - 02:47 PM

love

Freya
Well yeah, I understand what you're saying but I just got so bored with just shooting on my cooke S4's all the time so I just put them out with the trash and got these Eyemo lenses instead.

Hopefully now I will have a whole new look! ;)

Out with the new, in with the old...

love

Freya

Do I risk making a gender and/or sexual preference faux pas by inquiring as to whether you're also considering re-doing your hair and makeup? :)

Edmond, OK
  • 0

#18 Mike Rizos

Mike Rizos
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Other

Posted 19 March 2006 - 04:22 PM

Hi.
Is this an Eyemo lens?. The barrel rotates during focusing and the mount looks like Arri standard. It says it's made for 35mm. Focal length is 25mm T2. There is a light purple tint to the glass so I assume it's coated. I got it through a photo shop along some c-mount lenses and never knew what it was.
  • 0

#19 dd3stp233

dd3stp233
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Other

Posted 19 March 2006 - 10:32 PM

Hi.
Is this an Eyemo lens?. The barrel rotates during focusing and the mount looks like Arri standard. It says it's made for 35mm. Focal length is 25mm T2. There is a light purple tint to the glass so I assume it's coated. I got it through a photo shop along some c-mount lenses and never knew what it was.



I have one of those same type lens for an Eyemo. As far as I can tell from the picture, it is for an Eyemo. If it says "for Bell and Howell Co." on the lens barrel then you can be sure.
  • 0

#20 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4077 posts
  • Other
  • Right on the edge in London

Posted 20 March 2006 - 08:09 AM

Hi.
Is this an Eyemo lens?. The barrel rotates during focusing and the mount looks like Arri standard. It says it's made for 35mm. Focal length is 25mm T2. There is a light purple tint to the glass so I assume it's coated. I got it through a photo shop along some c-mount lenses and never knew what it was.


Yes! That definitely looks like eymax mount for the eyemo! :)
General Scientific supplied a lot of lenses for Bell and Howell.
That is a great score!
It looks like a very nice lens, very modern looking and cosmetically great condition from the photo too. :)
I assume it was very cheap if you didn't even know what it was when you bought it! :)

love

Freya

Edited by Freya, 20 March 2006 - 08:11 AM.

  • 0


Glidecam

Visual Products

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Pro 8mm

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Quantum Music Works

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Metropolis Post

CineTape

ZoomCrane

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

Pro 8mm

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

ZoomCrane

Quantum Music Works

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery