PDA

View Full Version : Mystery Dagor...



Embdude
22-Apr-2019, 16:24
190410
Mystery Dagor...
Anyone recognize it?
No external marks to Id it...
I can say that it is: 12” (300mm) 6.8 Goerz Double Anastigmat type...
In Koilos shutter...
On a grey metal lensboard, screwed into a wooden one, screwed into a small box, screwed into a graflex lensboard... the box is probably to allow focus at max graflex bellows...
Shutter and lens-boards are most likely not original to the lens... in fact the more I look at it it seems maybe it is adapted from an old brass lens...

190409
190411
190412

Luis-F-S
22-Apr-2019, 16:32
If you take the shade off, is there any writing on the barrel?

Embdude
22-Apr-2019, 18:49
The aluminum top does not come off... it is secured to the brass barrel... with lacquer maybe? both it and the side of the bras barrel are painted black on parts so perhaps something exists below the black paint... I can unscrew the top portion of the barrel and remove the front element, this is how I know it is a Dagor type... 3 cemented elements... Anyway once removed there is no where else for a beauty info ring to be...

Dan Fromm
23-Apr-2019, 04:40
No external marks to Id it...
I can say that it is: 12” (300mm) 6.8 Goerz Double Anastigmat type...

If there are no external marks, how can you say more than that the aperture scale starts at 6.8 (does it?) and that at least one cell is a cemented triplet?

Tin Can
23-Apr-2019, 06:30
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?12499-Symmar-Doppel-Anastigmat-6-8-300mm

I have this with markings.

Embdude
23-Apr-2019, 10:04
If there are no external marks, how can you say more than that the aperture scale starts at 6.8 (does it?) and that at least one cell is a cemented triplet?

The Koilos shutter has all the markings for shutter and aperture... 6.8 being the largest. My lens has 2 identical cemented triplet cells. Since the 12in. DAGOR (an acronym for Double Anastigmat Goerz) was a 6.8 and also the originator of this design and by far the most prolific maker of this type (especially in the early brass lens time) it seems the most likely place to start...

Of course I do not know what it is for sure... That is the best I can deduce so far... I am hoping by sharing it here I may be further enlightened...

The Koilos shutter is European dates to around 1909 and if original to the lens might indicate a European lens...

Embdude
23-Apr-2019, 10:24
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?12499-Symmar-Doppel-Anastigmat-6-8-300mm

I have this with markings.
Looks like a very nice lens! A dagor type that dates to around 1920... I'll add it to the list of possibilities...

Tin Can
23-Apr-2019, 10:28
And nice for 7X17. I don't have that lens, but of the same production.

They seem fairly rare.


Looks like a very nice lens! A dagor type that dates to around 1920...

Dan Fromm
23-Apr-2019, 10:31
P-H Pont's chronology says that Koilos shutters with air brakes were made from 1906 - 1910. I asked why you think it is a Dagor because many European makers made 6 elements in two groups double anastigmats in that period. Some had f/6.8 maximum apertures, others were faster, still others slower.

domaz
23-Apr-2019, 10:53
P-H Pont's chronology says that Koilos shutters with air brakes were made from 1906 - 1910. I asked why you think it is a Dagor because many European makers made 6 elements in two groups double anastigmats in that period. Some had f/6.8 maximum apertures, others were faster, still others slower.

Just pointing out that putting lenses into an existing stock of older shutters probably did happen back then. So a 1920s era lens very well could be in a 1910 shutter.

Dan Fromm
23-Apr-2019, 12:15
Looks like a very nice lens! A dagor type that dates to around 1920...

If you don't have the serial number, how can you date it?

Embdude
23-Apr-2019, 13:11
P-H Pont's chronology says that Koilos shutters with air brakes were made from 1906 - 1910. I asked why you think it is a Dagor because many European makers made 6 elements in two groups double anastigmats in that period. Some had f/6.8 maximum apertures, others were faster, still others slower.
It was my understanding that Goerz first produced and patented the DAGOR type and also licensed it out... I am basically just using DAGOR as a general descriptor...
190452

Embdude
23-Apr-2019, 13:16
If you don't have the serial number, how can you date it?
Oh I was referring to Randy's 300mm Schneider that he mentioned... I'll go edit it to make it more clear... Can't really date mine unless someone recognizes it...

Embdude
23-Apr-2019, 13:20
Some of the Ensign Anastigmats look similar and they used a Kilios shutter too but I did not see a 12in 6.8 one...

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/koilos-shutter-ensign-anastigmat-5in-306463216

Embdude
23-Apr-2019, 13:23
Lens housing adapter to accept an 11 1/2" (292mm) F4 Wollensak Verito looks similar to this one glenview has...
http://www.glennview.com/shutters.htm

Dan Fromm
23-Apr-2019, 13:48
It was my understanding that Goerz first produced and patented the DAGOR type and also licensed it out... I am basically just using DAGOR as a general descriptor...

Correct. But other makers designed and made 6/2 double anastigmats without, it seems, licenses from Goerz or suits for patent infringement. For example, Berthiot introduced anastigmatic Eurygraphes in 1896-7, some with maximum apertures of f/6.8.

I'm sure you mean well, but I've seen enough inaccurate, possibly dishonest, eBay listings to want people not to use Dagor as a general descriptor. "Dagor type," ok, no possible attempt to cheat there. "Dagor" when not clearly made by Goerz or a licensee and not clearly a Ser. III double anastigmat, cheating galore.

I was once taken by a person who sold me an f/6.8 Goerz Double Anastigmat as a Dagor. I asked the person to count reflections, it assured me that the lens was a Dagor. I received one of Goerz' low end dialyte types. I hope you understand why I'm sensitive about "Dagor, I think,. I wish, I hope, well, perhaps."

Embdude
23-Apr-2019, 21:49
Correct. But other makers designed and made 6/2 double anastigmats without, it seems, licenses from Goerz or suits for patent infringement. For example, Berthiot introduced anastigmatic Eurygraphes in 1896-7, some with maximum apertures of f/6.8.

I'm sure you mean well, but I've seen enough inaccurate, possibly dishonest, eBay listings to want people not to use Dagor as a general descriptor. "Dagor type," ok, no possible attempt to cheat there. "Dagor" when not clearly made by Goerz or a licensee and not clearly a Ser. III double anastigmat, cheating galore.

I was once taken by a person who sold me an f/6.8 Goerz Double Anastigmat as a Dagor. I asked the person to count reflections, it assured me that the lens was a Dagor. I received one of Goerz' low end dialyte types. I hope you understand why I'm sensitive about "Dagor, I think,. I wish, I hope, well, perhaps."

I totally agree, if listed for sale it needs a proper description... I have never sold a LF lens and don't intend to start. I am merely entertained by the mystery of the lens and the challenge of figuring it all out, including shooting with it eventually... If it turns out to be a good lens I plan to put it on my 13x18 Bermpohl Naturfarbenkamera...

linhofbiker
10-Aug-2019, 16:59
I am clearing out my collection of LF lenses from the last 20+ years. If they won't cover 5x7 and 4x10 then they must go. Two of my lenses are Symmar Doppel Anastigmats f/6.8 in shutters 240mm and 270mm. Both are 80 degree lenses and should cover OK. Since they may be almost 80-90 years old I will use them only for B/W which goes without saying since color in 5x7 is hard to find, although I do have some 8x10 Provia to be cut down to 4x10. Anyone know of the color capability of these old lenses?

Dan Fromm
10-Aug-2019, 18:15
Y'know, Schneider's serial number sequence is known. What are your old Symmars serial numbers?

Dagors of all ages are good for color. Why should dagor-type Symmars be different?

linhofbiker
10-Aug-2019, 19:23
Y'know, Schneider's serial number sequence is known. What are your old Symmars serial numbers?

Dagors of all ages are good for color. Why should dagor-type Symmars be different?

Dan:

The 24cm is in a #4 Acme Synchro, there is no number on the front element, but on the rear is 1787168 (about 1942).
The 27cm is in a dial set Compur with the number 243371 on both elements (about end of 1928).

The dates are from Schneiders website.

I don't understand why the 24cm has no number.

linhofbiker
15-Aug-2019, 05:11
In my search for a "good" old lens for watercolor reproduction I tried a "Berlin" Dagor which was pretty accurate. Then, about twenty years ago I came across a set of Zeiss Protarlinses with 2 41cm, 1 35cm, 1 29cm and 1 22cm cells in a compound shutter. A was using a very old 5x7 Linhof Kardan with 4x5 back to make watercolor copies. After much trial and error I had settled on using Fuji 64T with two tungsten broad lights (rated at 3100K) shooting late at night when there was no other light source. Then I tried the Protarlinses in several combinations and took several 64T slides. When compared with an old Symmar 135 the colors of the Protarlinse where not as accurate, particularly in the blue/green range. This was according to the color expert, the watercolor artist. I gave up further search of the "classics" and settled on a more modern Componon-S 135 in a shutter. This lens was used for about 15 years until the artist (my wife) retired from her watercolor portrait business. I have several hundred 64T transparencies of her work, many of which have been used to make "giclee" copies of the original watercolor painting. The artist printer preferred working with my transparencies than making his own 4x5 digital copies of the original painting using his expensive back on the enlarger.

So Dagor's and even Zeiss Protarlinse's have their followers, but for my particular purpose the Plasmat (in enlarging configuration), i.e. the Componon-S was better for reproducing the fine colors of a watercolor painting.

Jim Galli
15-Aug-2019, 12:03
I think the Voigtlaender Collinear had a 6.8 series that was 3 - 3 and very different from Dagor. I never liked them much. And of course lots of folks paid the license royalty and made Dagor type lenses. I have at least 2 mystery no name 3-3 lenses. Any of them were a great improvement over the more common at the time Rapid Rectilinear. Gundlach made some 3 - 3 lenses that were just RR's with a bit of extra glass. Rapid Rectigraphic. It quite literally could be anything. I'll bet it can take some pictures though if you put it on a camera. The Earliest Dagor's had a distinctive shape and machining that is very recognizable. The glass was set in them so they looked sort of bug-eyed.