Any inherent value?

[Randy H]

Just kinda putting feelers out on this.
I acquired a Goerz Dagor Series III f6.8 7-inch recently with some other items. It is in an Optimo shutter that will work with the cable release, but not the button. Serial number on lens places it in the 1910 production series. Front and rear cells are matching numbers. NOW for the question..... Kinda.
"IF" I were to place this thing for sale, is there any chance in h e double hockey sticks that it would bring enough to buy another longer focal length lens? Not a Dag or Scheidly obviously. But some bottom-feeder lens maybe?
My cameras are (obviously) the 8X10 Century (that I have obnoxed the heck out of everybody with) and a Conley 5X7 with 28 inch bellows. The Dag does indeed cover the full 8X10, but with bellows closed up to 7 inches.... DANG! If it left enough for any movements, you'd never know it by me. Same with the Conley. I am needing somewhere between a 12-15 + inch lens. Stupidly, I gave up a 12/18/24 convertible about a year ago, cause I didn't need that much lens. Oh well......

[C. D. Keth]

Probably. People see "dagor" lately and loose all sense of sensible spending.

[Ash]

That's almost the same lens I have in a plain barrel. mine was a III/2 160mm

[Rob_5419]

"IF" I were to place this thing for sale, is there any chance in h e double hockey sticks that it would bring enough to buy another longer focal length lens? Not a Dag or Scheidly obviously. But some bottom-feeder lens maybe?

Hard to say, although prices for 6x9cm format lenses can rake in as much as a neglected Victorian whole-plate lens (which most likely can cover 8x10 too). I'm guessing your 7" will cover at least half-plate format or possibly 5x7 comfortably with full movements"?

If you market it for sale to UK buyers with attractive postage options, it shouldn't be a problem raising the funds for your 12"+ standard lens although you might not be able to afford to get one supplied in a shutter....

[Randy H]

I'm guessing your 7" will cover at least half-plate format or possibly 5x7 comfortably with full movements"? ....

Yes. I put it in the 8X10 just out of curiosity. It filled the glass corner to corner. Wide open! And at 7"!! I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it. I just don't have anything to focus that short. My 4X5 has a 6/10/14 convertible on it, but it just does cover 4X5 with movements. The 5X7 has a Versar landscape/portrait on it. And I have various other bottom-feeder lenses of questionable parentage, just nothing of decent length for the 8X10.

[Rob_5419]

Sounds like you're not going to be happy living with the front standard (rear tilt) and rear standard (front tilt) in permanent lock with such a big camera. Alternatively - how about a recessed lensboard?

I guess you're probably not going to be happy with a bottom-feeder lens for your beautiful Century - it deserves a signature lens.

Failing that, a pinhole. Go for it. :)

[Randy H]

Alternatively - how about a recessed lensboard?
I guess you're probably not going to be happy with a bottom-feeder lens for your beautiful Century - it deserves a signature lens.
Failing that, a pinhole. Go for it. :)

Did consider recess. Pinhole? Nah. Got an 8X10 Photogravure Process, 4 foot long pinholer. Bottom-feeder lens? If it shoots decent. When inside lookin pretty? The big Tasope that is temp'ed on it right now.

[Ash]

Keep the lens. Maybe Scott -- could mock you up a recessed lensboard, or at least follow his lead and make a recessed one yourself?

I did it once. If *I* can hammer a few bits of cheap ply together, I'm sure you can make yourself a beautiful large recessed lensboard for corner-to-corner 7" on the 10x8 :D

[Randy H]

Scott is/will be working on a more authentic lensboard for me.
By the way Ash, any more pictures from the camera? Looking forward to getting this beast out and see what she'll do.