PDA

View Full Version : Dagor'S Serie's III



seawolf66
19-May-2008, 07:04
Where all Goerz Doppel Anastigmats either F-6.8 or F-7.7 weather german or swiss or american ? The reason I ask this is the one I am getting is in a Volte shutter the f-stops are in US numbers and the lowest # is us 2.9 ?

So based on that I am going to take it for granted that the US # are incorrect for this lens?

I have one coming its as follows: GOERZ DOUBLE-ANASTIGMAT. Series III no 1 FOC 6.5" S/N 150345

Just try-ing to learn about what I get and have gotten: Thanks a lot :D

Ernest Purdum
19-May-2008, 07:45
US 2.9 would be f6.8. All the Series III Goerz lenses I have run across have been f6.8 if small or f7.7 if large.

E. von Hoegh
19-May-2008, 07:51
Seawolf,

You have an F:6.8 Dagor, pre 1904(?) when they went to the Dagor acronym. Yours is marked in Uniform System stops, where U.S.16 = F:16.

Dagors 14"/ 355mm and longer were all F:7.7, F:8 for the Kern Swiss versions.

CameraEccentric has online copies of Goerz literature.


Nice lens for your 4x5.

Steve Hamley
19-May-2008, 16:04
Seawolf66,

Yes, and you may just find that it also covers 8x10 if you don't expect too much in the corners. Mine is the same in Volute, #160401 and it does 8x10 (I think) rather nicely on B&W. I wouldn't try to shoot 8x10 color calendar shots with it, although these old lenses, if in good shape, can certainly surprise you.

Cheers,

Steve

David A. Goldfarb
19-May-2008, 16:54
The ser. iii versions of these lenses usually do have more coverage than the later versions. I use my 168mm (probably the same as 6.5", no?) ser. iii for 8x10" occasionally and for 4x5" when I need all the front rise I can get.

seawolf66
19-May-2008, 18:14
I thank you all for your information and comments on this lens,Since I do not use a 8x10 and have no plan of it since 5x4 is heavy enough for me. As long it gives me corner to corner sharpness I'll be very happy, will post fotos of it and from it some time soon: thanks all

Ole Tjugen
20-May-2008, 00:07
The ser. iii versions of these lenses usually do have more coverage than the later versions. ...

I find that hard to believe - there is no difference in the construction between a "Doppel-Anastigmat Serie III", a "Doppel-Anastigmat Serie III D.A.G.O.R", a "DAGOR Serie III" and a "DAGOR" - C. P. Goerz in Berlin used all these designations, sometimes simultaneously, depending on the lens size and thus available space for text. ;)

Dan Fromm
20-May-2008, 03:08
I find that hard to believe - there is no difference in the construction between a "Doppel-Anastigmat Serie III", a "Doppel-Anastigmat Serie III D.A.G.O.R", a "DAGOR Serie III" and a "DAGOR" - C. P. Goerz in Berlin used all these designations, sometimes simultaneously, depending on the lens size and thus available space for text. ;)Ole, thanks for asking the question.

Based on what I've read in these two threads:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=36121

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=13109

I suspect that disagreements about Dagors' coverage reflect disagreements about just what "covers" means.

Cheers,

Dan

ljsegil
20-May-2008, 03:17
So will a C.P. Goerz Berlin Doppel-Anastigamat D.R.P. no.74437 Serie III No.3 f=210 m/m no. 127500 cover 8x10, and what does it all mean anyway? Why two serial numbers, a Serie III and a No. 3? Is this a spy game, or does all this convey more information about the lens (that is, convey it to someone who speaks Goerz better than I)? And how would it have ended up in an Ilex Acme #3 shutter? Does seem to take nice snaps in my limited use thus far, so I am kind of curious.
Best,
LJS

Dan Fromm
20-May-2008, 05:00
Will it cover 8x10? Depends on what you mean by cover. People claim these beasts cover 85 degrees, in which case yes. But Eric Beltrando (see dioptrique.info ) has run the prescriptions through a lens performance program and believes that f/6.8 Goerz Dagors cover less than 70 degrees. In which case, no. He got much the same results for the very similar Boyer Beryl, has told me that in his opinion the 1965 f/6.8 Beryl (last redesign) really covers only 70 degrees, and at most 50 degrees for really critical work. Boyer's propaganda claims 85 degrees.

Since you have the lens, put it on an 8x10 and see for yourself whether the detail it puts in the corners is good enough for you.

Serie III refers to the design type, No. 3 to the format covered. Look at lens catalogs on www.cameraeccentric.com, you'll see that manufacturers used to give lenses numbers that corresponded to a format, usually the one for which the lens' focal length is normal. Each manufacturer had its own system. B&L had at least two, one for lenses sold to Kodak and another for lenses sold to other buyers.

How did an old lens get into a relatively modern shutter? Someone paid a machinist ...

seawolf66
20-May-2008, 05:07
In the Goerz manual I found on cameraeccentric .com It states that a 6-1/2 will cover only 3-1/2 x 5-1/2 only but yet they state the 6" will cover a 5x4- which is use-ing it wide open at F/6.8 on both lens:

So based on their statement I will take it for granted that my lens is best used at a higher F/stop for 5x4 coverage: :confused:

the most interesting part of their lititure is that THEY state that you can use the lens as a triplet-? see page four of the 1940 booklet on camera eccentric . com goerz booklets and page 21 of the 1913 booklet:

Dan Fromm
20-May-2008, 06:30
Lauren, where did you look?

Here http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/goerzcat/dagoranasb.html doesn't mention a 6 1/2", says that the 6" will cover 4x5 wide open, 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 at f/32.

Here http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/goerzcata/page5.html, where I think you went, mentions the 6 1/2" and has to be wrong about its coverage wide open. Compare what it says about 6" and 6 1/2" at smaller apertures. You should have more faith in yourself and your critical sense. Typographical errors are an unfortunate fact of life. I bet the typesetter got a 3 instead of a 4 and no one caught the mistake.

DAGOR as an acronym for Doppel Anastigmat Goerz. Double anastigmat. Each cell is an anastigmat, the lens is convertible. The same is true of other double anastigmat types. For example, f/2.8 Boyer Saphirs (double Gauss) were sold as convertibles. Early plasmat type Symmars were sold as convertibles. And there are more.

N Dhananjay
20-May-2008, 06:32
I find that hard to believe - there is no difference in the construction between a "Doppel-Anastigmat Serie III", a "Doppel-Anastigmat Serie III D.A.G.O.R", a "DAGOR Serie III" and a "DAGOR" - C. P. Goerz in Berlin used all these designations, sometimes simultaneously, depending on the lens size and thus available space for text. ;)

Dagors were made for a long time by many manufacturers. Part of the disagreement is around judgments about what is considered sharp (by user and designer). As you stop down, the usable parts of the image circle become greater. So, it is unclear whether coverage figures refer to wide open or stopped down to some (what?) degree. Finally, it is entirely possible that some designers may have used mechanical vignetting to limit the image circle to what they considered usable. Cheers, DJ

Ole Tjugen
20-May-2008, 06:55
So will a C.P. Goerz Berlin Doppel-Anastigamat D.R.P. no.74437 Serie III No.3 f=210 m/m no. 127500 cover 8x10, and what does it all mean anyway? Why two serial numbers, a Serie III and a No. 3? ...

The "Serie III" and "No. 3" has been explained already.

I suspect the lens would cover 18x24cm (No.3 anything usually does that), but by 1910 standards of "cover". A 1930's 210mm DAGOR would not be "No. 3", and would most likely not be claimed to cover 18x24cm!

Note that a lens that covers 18x24cm doesn't necessarily cover 8x10" (20x25cm) - the 121mm f:8 Super Angulon is a good example of that.

Another example of the shifting meaning of "coverage" is the 90mm f:6.8 Angulon, which was originally said to cover 5x7" at small apertures. The current consensus seems to be that it covers 4x5", but only at small stops!

seawolf66
20-May-2008, 13:03
Dan From looking at this link and you will find they forgot the 6-1/2" lens all together ?
http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/goerzcat/dagoranasb.html

and on this page they mention 6-1/2" lens ?
http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/goerzcat/opticsoflensesg.html

and here it is as you showed me: Which I can see such an error being made , but would not wish to be on the boss'es bad side when he found that error: [LOL]

[You should have more faith in yourself and your critical sense] now that could be a book as big as ben hur: -:)

Dan, I thank you for your time in this , Lauren

E. von Hoegh
20-May-2008, 13:14
Dan From looking at this link and you will find they forgot the 6-1/2" lens all together ?
http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/goerzcat/dagoranasb.html

and on this page they mention 6-1/2" lens ?
http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/goerzcat/opticsoflensesg.html

and here it is as you showed me: Which I can see such an error being made , but would not wish to be on the boss'es bad side when he found that error: [LOL]

[You should have more faith in yourself and your critical sense] now that could be a book as big as ben hur: -:)

Dan, I thank you for your time in this , Lauren


Seawolf;

Read what's just under the table in the first link.:D

Your 6 1/2 will cover 4x5 , with movements galore. Be sure to stop down to F:16 to F:32 for best definition. Check for focus shift, too.

seawolf66
22-May-2008, 17:29
To Ole Tjugen and E. von Hoegh, I thank you both for the additional Information on this matter: Will give it a try out with my old Kodak Pony Premo # 6 four by five