PDA

View Full Version : Are all Goerz Double Anastigmats Dagors?



Dan Fromm
30-Jan-2017, 11:56
Some people think so. See http://web.archive.org/web/20170130185207/http://www.ebay.com/itm/Goerz-Double-Anastigmat-Lens-TYPE-B-Focus-4-3-4-w-ZEISS-Cover-No-Reserve-/381940550573

I looked up the patent. The lens offered is a dialyte type. The VM says that the Goerz Type B double anastigmat's trade name is Celor.

Re the seller, there's one born every minute.

Steven Tribe
30-Jan-2017, 12:50
He doesn't actually say it is a Dagor - just quotes an intersearch which mentions the series iii and series iv which are normal dagors and wide-angled dagors. He is faithful in giving the actual rim engraving.

Dan Fromm
30-Jan-2017, 13:16
He doesn't actually say it is a Dagor - just quotes an intersearch which mentions the series iii and series iv which are normal dagors and wide-angled dagors. He is faithful in giving the actual rim engraving.

He strongly hinted that it is a Dagor. If you'd read the listing to the bottom you'd have seen:


----- Some info I found on the web:

Goerz Double Anastigmat was designed by von Höegh and introduced in 1892, from 1904 it was known as the Dagor. It proved very successful and was widely copied. The series III is a general purpose lens working at f6.8 in the shorter lengths and f7.7 in longer lengths. Available in sizes of 1 ⅝ - 35" (in the UK in 1900). The series IV was a modified design for copying and architectural use, working at f11 it was introduced in sizes up to 47".

A wink's as good as a nod.

Xipho
3-Feb-2017, 12:55
The Dagor is certainly a Dagor type, but Celor and Syntor are 4/4 DA, as the later Dogmar!

The very first DAGORs "Doppel Anastigmat GOeRz" were only called Doppelanastigmat Goerz...

The Series III DA is a Dagor!

pkrpkr
22-Dec-2019, 10:29
My Goerz catalog under "Goerz-Double-Anastigmat" lists:
Dagor, Celor, Syntor, Alethar, and Hypergone. The Celor is in Series Ib/c/d. The Dagor is in Series III and IV, Syntor is Series Id, Alethar is Series V, and Hypergone is Series X. And then there is a bunch of other non-DA types like Lynkéioscope etc.

Mark Sawyer
22-Dec-2019, 11:09
My Goerz catalog under "Goerz-Double-Anastigmat" lists:
Dagor, Celor, Syntor, Alethar, and Hypergone. The Celor is in Series Ib/c/d. The Dagor is in Series III and IV, Syntor is Series Id, Alethar is Series V, and Hypergone is Series X. And then there is a bunch of other non-DA types like Lynkéioscope etc.

The Hypergon is a symmetrical two-element design. I don't see how it could be corrected for astigmatism.
:confused: :confused: :confused:

Dan Fromm
22-Dec-2019, 11:32
The Hypergon is a symmetrical two-element design. I don't see how it could be corrected for astigmatism.
:confused: :confused: :confused:

More to the point, I don't see how a single Hypergon cell can be an anastigmat.

Mark Sawyer
22-Dec-2019, 23:21
More to the point, I don't see how a single Hypergon cell can be an anastigmat.

Quite true. And yet they're engraved "Doppel Anastigmat". I don't see how a simple meniscus can be corrected for astigmatism...

pkrpkr
23-Dec-2019, 01:12
198706

Dan Fromm
23-Dec-2019, 06:12
Yeah, I've seen that. Marketing fluff until proved otherwise.

pkrpkr
23-Dec-2019, 09:05
What they say in another catalog is that the Hypergon is distortion free but not corrected for "aberrations spherique et chromatique". Their argument is that it's not necessary to correct because the effects are insignificant given the large angle and small aperture used in practice (if I understand correctly).
The drawing of the glass doesn't show combined lens elements, just 2 symmetrical solid pieces of glass.
198713198714

Dan Fromm
23-Dec-2019, 09:32
That's all the Hypergon is. A pair of very deep meniscii.

Jim Noel
23-Dec-2019, 14:59
After having to turn down a chance to buy one on an 8x10 Kodak years ago I have wished that someone would make this lens once again. The view through that one was magnificent. The price was little more than the value of the camera, but in those days I still had 4 children at home.

Drew Wiley
23-Dec-2019, 15:30
Dagor design implies a symmetrical pair of cemented triplets. According to Kingslake, there were a couple of ways to do that (original vs reversed Dagor), but these did NOT include anastigmats, dialyte Celors or Alethars, early Angulons, etc, because all of those had airspaced elements, which Dagors did not. Hypergons are another kind of animal entirely, double extreme meniscus. Fun stuff. Kingslake's History of Lenses has kept me sane on more than one long boring airline flight.

Mark Sawyer
23-Dec-2019, 22:40
That's all the Hypergon is. A pair of very deep meniscii.

Definitely. Is a small aperture and wide field enough to correct astigmatism? Or does that combination make astigmatism irrelevant regardless? Or did engraving it on the lens just sell more lenses?

Math says a single meniscus lens has astigmatism. But half a Hypergon is a pretty extreme single meniscus.

I dunno...

Mark Sampson
24-Dec-2019, 08:44
It may be that the Goerz' customers didn't care much about the label. If they needed that ultra-wide field of view, the Hypergon was their only choice.

Luis-F-S
24-Dec-2019, 09:19
Double Anastigmat GOeRz = Dagor

David Lindquist
24-Dec-2019, 13:03
C.P. Goerz American Optical Company revived the Hypergon name circa 1960. A June 1, 1960 price list shows the "Goerz Hypergon F:22 or F:32 Fixed Stop" described as "A special lens for mapping, plotting and rectifying equipment, for military and industrial applications." Available in focal lengths of 127, 135 and 168 mm plus "Special sizes to order." "Prices on request." No indication if this revives the original design. Stated coverage of 90º is much more modest than claimed for the original Hypergon. The same price list asserts 100º for the "Wide-Angle Golden Dagor." The Hypergon is not shown on a March 1959 nor a December 1964 price list.

David

Drew Wiley
24-Dec-2019, 13:47
I thought the corrected aerial mapping versions were called Metrogon.

Tin Can
24-Dec-2019, 13:59
Glennview with Hypergone story and Image (http://www.glennview.com/note1.htm)

I believe Glenn as we have had a few in person discussions

Dan Fromm
24-Dec-2019, 14:52
I thought the corrected aerial mapping versions were called Metrogon.

Metrogon is a B&L trade name. Metrogons are (choose both) copies of and variations on CZJ's Topogon. Basically 4/4 double Gauss types.

Dan Fromm
24-Dec-2019, 15:05
Hypergone on Glennview with story and image he shot (http://www.glennview.com/index.htm)

I believe Glenn as we have had a few in person discussions

This http://www.glennview.com/note1.htm is the link you meant to post.

Tin Can
24-Dec-2019, 15:21
Yes, thank you. Glenn is an amazing fellow.

David Lindquist
24-Dec-2019, 16:03
Thank you, yes, 140º. I knew the original Hypergon covered rather more than the 90º cited in this 1960 price list. Also I see in my circa 1934 Carl Zeiss Jena catalogue this: "The Hypergon is recommended for use in those cases only where an angle of more than 100º (even up to 140º) is required..."

The same catalogue says that "(B)y stopping down" their f/9 Dagor will cover "almost 100º".

David

Dan Fromm
24-Dec-2019, 16:40
The same catalogue says that "(B)y stopping down" their f/9 Dagor will cover "almost 100º".

David, I have a 45/9 CZJ Goerz Dagor. It is just barely usable on 2x3, I much prefer my 47/5.6 SA. The SA has more coverage and center filters are available for it.

Some modern lenses really are better than revered oldies.

David Lindquist
25-Dec-2019, 13:10
David, I have a 45/9 CZJ Goerz Dagor. It is just barely usable on 2x3, I much prefer my 47/5.6 SA. The SA has more coverage and center filters are available for it.

Some modern lenses really are better than revered oldies.

Oh, say it isn't so! I'm certainly guilty of having acquired more than my share of "revered oldies" (like that term a lot) over the years. While I use them from time to time, I'm much more apt to take my 200mm Nikkor M, my 120mm Super Symmar HM and my 65mm Nikkor SW (and end up using only the Super Symmar) when I go out to photograph.

The 4.5 cm f/9 Dagor isn't shown in my circa 1934 CZJ catalogue, it looks like it came out later. Hartmut Thiele shows one batch of 25, serial numbers 1,844,852-1,844,875. Production of this batch started 29 April 1937. In Thiele's Fabrikationsbuch Photooptik II Carl Zeiss Jena this date is in the column marked "Fertig." for "Fertigung". Once more I want to thank Arne Croell for his help in translating Thiele's terms.

It looks like my CZJ catalogue is from 1933, you can see this catalogue here: https://www.cameraeccentric.com/static/img/pdfs/zeiss_3.pdf
Mine is a nicely done spiral bound reproduction and includes a price list date May 7, 1934.

David

Tin Can
25-Dec-2019, 14:02
David, fascinating reading the CZJ catalogue which is lesson itself.

Thank you!

Dan Fromm
25-Dec-2019, 14:35
David, thanks for the info. When I got my little 45/9 I asked Arne Croell about it. He told me that according to Thiele mine is one of a batch of 25 lenses made in 1937 to a design dated April 9, 1934 and that Thiele lists one other 45/9 CZJ Goerz Dagor made in 1930 to a design whose date is unknown.

The lens was eventually cataloged, see https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00498/00498.pdf. Apparently intended for 6x6.

Cheers,

Dan

David Lindquist
26-Dec-2019, 15:30
David, thanks for the info. When I got my little 45/9 I asked Arne Croell about it. He told me that according to Thiele mine is one of a batch of 25 lenses made in 1937 to a design dated April 9, 1934 and that Thiele lists one other 45/9 CZJ Goerz Dagor made in 1930 to a design whose date is unknown.

The lens was eventually cataloged, see https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00498/00498.pdf. Apparently intended for 6x6.

Cheers,

Dan

Good, you found the catalogue. I have a hunch the "H. VIII. 39-Aooo" on the back page dates this to 1939. Thank you for making me aware of the extensive trove of catalogs, especially those covering the "revered oldies", available on Pacific Rim Camera's website. I notice that while they were in production by then, neither the 4.5 nor the 6 cm f/9 Dagors are shown on the May 1939 CZJ price list for the U.S. They are on the December 1940 price list.

David

Dan Fromm
26-Dec-2019, 16:45
You're welcome. If Thiele is right, that batch of 25 lenses in '37 was all CZJ made. I'd thought they were made to order for a client who had a special need. I can't imagine offering tiny w/a lenses in barrel to the general market. On the other hand, there must have been a good commercial reason for cataloging the thing and putting it on a price list.

I wonder which camera(s) shot 1 3/4 x 2 3/8.

Oh, and by the way, my lens was made to be shot stopped well down. Near wide open mechanical vignetting by the barrel is severe.

Greg
26-Dec-2019, 17:59
Me thinks it might be very helpful if some knowledgable member pipes in on how to difinitively recognize a Dagor optic, most probably by the number of internal reflections. In the way/far past, had once acquired a lens that had the Dagor formula but was not branded "Goerz", "Double Anastigmat", or "Dagor".

Mark Sawyer
27-Dec-2019, 00:43
The Dagor is a cemented triplet front and rear, only two internal air-glass surfaces to reflect. But there are other lenses with multiple cemented elements and only two internal surfaces, so don't jump to conclusions too quickly.

Tin Can
29-Dec-2019, 10:10
I may have asked this before...

Is this a Dagor?

I definitely see 2 bright reflections and I think 2 weak ones in both elements which look identical.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49293225938_3abf23392b_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2i6SEHQ)Symmar 300mm f6.8 # 204310 (https://flic.kr/p/2i6SEHQ) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

karl french
29-Dec-2019, 11:16
Yes, it's a Dagor copy.

Tin Can
29-Dec-2019, 11:17
Thank you.


Yes, it's a Dagor copy.

Drew Wiley
29-Dec-2019, 16:02
Like the tessar design, the dagor concept was both early and enduring, so it stands to reason that competing manufacturers designed workarounds to the Goerz patent.