collecting for stupid reason....

[Emil Schildt]

I wonder whether I am the only one that have this feeling:

IF I were rich, I'd proberly be a collector of lenses (and cameras..)

But what lenses to collect?

I have a weakness for names on lenses! Great names, that sounds good when you mention them. it's like one can taste the words....

Pinkham&Smith (strong, very american sounding)
Nicola Perscheid
Dallmeyer (I love the sound of that name)

Darlot
Jamin
Derogy
Hermagis
Lerebourg et secretain

(have to be pronounced as french sounding as possible..)

Taylor, Taylor and Hobson (Sounds like a big law firm)
Cooke (short, and to the point)

Oscar Zwierzina

..and proberly a lot more..

Good thing I am not wealthy...:rolleyes:

[Dan Fromm]

One of my neighbors collects photographic equipment. Zeiss, mainly 35 mm, but also lenses for larger formats. He has two rationales. To learn about and document the equipment. To have good equipment to use. He and a friend went so far as to write and publish a book, the Zeiss-Ikon Compendium.

He used to give me hell for what he saw as mindless accumulation, i.e., accumulation with no obvious rationale. After I explained why I did what I did he subsided. I have one rationale, to get good equipment to use without spending too much money. So I'm not really a collector, I'm a user with not enough money to buy the latest most expensive (and certainly very very good) and be done with it.

When I was accumulating macro lenses it wasn't clear which were really good and which weren't. I bought, tested, and knew. Same idea with lenses for shooting at distance. When I started it wasn't clear which of the lenses I could afford were any good at all. So I bought, tested, and knew.

What would be your rationale for accumulating lenses? "For their names" seems a little weak. You might as well set the names to music. Much less expensive than acquiring the lenses.

Cheers,

Dan

Um, er, ah, in the context of photographic objectives Cooke is a brand name of Taylor, Taylor, & Hobson, later Rank Taylor Hobson, and now Cooke Optics. For most of its history Cooke was not the name of a company.

Lerebours et Secretan. If you can't spell the makers' names correctly you'll have a hard time finding their lenses.

[Steven Tribe]

Personally, I always thought that Pinkham (Pink'em) & Smith sounded more like Undertakers (Funeral Parlour Directors/Morticians).

If we go the way of philatelists we will end up (when we are past just buying user objectives) collecting theme lenses:

- National (Suter/Swiss or Grubb/Irish). There is already a group with the early American retailers/makers as a special interest. Whenever I bid on a Suter I am terrified that some Banker in his mountain chalet will sweep me of the board.

- Pictorial. This is really a growth area already. Even just one of everything will take a hefty investment of time and capital.

- Mistakes in engraving. These are either from the makers side ("Cook patent" on early German Triplets) or from the individual engraver working under candle or gaslight.

- Engraving styles. Early Voigtländers ( and the smaller makers at Braunsweig) had superb copperplate. Lancaster is very distinctive too - in a rather squat way. Any others?

There are (un)fortunately too few nice/spectacular trademarks and Swift's swift is very discrete - English understatement?

[Emil Schildt]

[QUOTE=

Lerebours et Secretan. If you can't spell the makers' names correctly you'll have a hard time finding their lenses.[/QUOTE]

spelled after memory (which is bad...)

maybe I can't spell it - but I love to pronounce it!;)

[CCHarrison]

When I started camera collecting back in 1992, I had no plan as to what to collect...I had $ 20 Kodaks mixed with a $ 3500 Walker American Challenge Camera. A few years later a wise, and experienced collector told me to focus on one aspect of cameras and dont stray.... this helps from accumulating junk, taking up space in ones home and keeps the hunt even more exciting.... So, I only collect 4x5 or smaller, pre 1890's, American made wood cameras. This narrow focuses causes me to buy one or two items per year....very selective..... and when I find a rare item, I may sell off an item in my collection thats not as rare, to help fund the purchase and keep my display cases small, but to the point.... this has worked for me !

Dan

http://antiquecameras.net/images/406_aoc5.jpg

http://antiquecameras.net/images/375_web8.jpg

[Steven Tribe]

Dan, the tone of your contribution in a thread entitled "collecting for stupid reason" seems somewhat misplaced. Emil has had great success in finding the lenses he wants to use and knows the TT&H, Cooke, CTS, H.D.Taylor and triplet story as well as you.

[CCHarrison]

PS - I love the trade names Heliar, Summicron and Lucidograph !

Perhaps one could collect lenses beginning with the letter "V" made by Wollensak

Verito
Velostigmat I,II,III,IV
Vitax
Versar
Voltas
Vesta
Veritar
Varium

[Emil Schildt]

PS - I love the trade names Heliar, Summicron and Lucidograph !

Perhaps one could collect lenses beginning with the letter "V" made by Wollensak

Verito
Velostigmat I,II,III,IV
Vitax
Versar
Voltas
Vesta
Veritar
Varium

Funny you say that..

My girlfriend apparently has a weakness for lenses (brands and trade names) beginning with the letter "D"...

Dallmeyer
Derogy
Darlot
Dagor

and so on

(PS also love the name Heliar - tastes much better than Dynar...)

[MIke Sherck]

I don't think I have what it takes to collect cameras and lenses.

Photographs, on the other hand...

:) Mike

[Emil Schildt]

What would be your rationale for accumulating lenses? "For their names" seems a little weak. You might as well set the names to music. Much less expensive than acquiring the lenses.

Cheers,

Dan

.

IF I wanted to collect music, I'd choose "Summertime" ...

In the collection in the Danish radio, there are more than 1200 different versions of this alone....

getting those wouldnt be cheap..:o

[Steven Tribe]

Just looked up the Lucidograph as I didn't know it. What a elegant design - must have been the impetus for the self-casing cameras that followed later!

[CCHarrison]

Lucidograph is "Light-Writer' in Greek.

See my friend Rob's site where he has a nice article on the Blair Lucidograph

http://antiquewoodcameras.com/luci01.htm

Dan

[Steven Tribe]

That was the photo and write-up I found!

[Emil Schildt]

Lucidograph is "Light-Writer' in Greek.


Dan

are you sure?

many, many names comes from a mix between Greek and latin, and I found this info:

"Lucido, from Latin lucidus ‘lucid’, ‘shining’."

[Richard K.]

How about futuristic sounding names:

Protar, Xenar, Apo-Lanthar, Hyperion, Artar, ...

[Stephanie Brim]

See, this is why not having disposable income is so much better; I can only buy what I need. Heh.

If I did, though, I'd probably be more apt to collect based on two things: focal lengths that I'd actually use and names I find interesting. I really love trying lenses, so I'm not really opposed to spending money on something that is a little...odd.

[CCHarrison]

Lucidograph = Light Writer.

I am only sure of this to the extent that the Blair Camera company has published this "fact" in its catalogues c. 1890.

Dan

[Peter K]

How about futuristic sounding names:

Protar, Xenar, Apo-Lanthar, Hyperion, Artar, ...
Protar from profession

Xenar a derivation from Xenon, another Schneider lens, named after the in 1898 discovered noble gas Xenon. Schneider was founded in 1912

Apo from apochromatic "without colors" or "free of color seams"

Lanthar from lanthanium a glass-additive

Hyperion is another name for the god of the sun

Artar a lens for the graphic arts

Peter
(from latin petrus the rock) :cool:

[GPS]

No Peter, petrus comes from the Greek, not latin... but it still means rock.

[r.e.]

No Peter, petrus comes from the Greek, not latin... but it still means rock.

I thought that it was a French word for a wine that I can't afford.

[Nathan Potter]

I think lens names are a good source for baby names and had I known, my daughter would be named Darlot and my son Voltas.

Nate Potter Austin TX.

[Wayne R. Scott]

Hey Dan,

What is the lens on the top camera in your post? Is it a Waterbury Lens?

Wayne




When I started camera collecting back in 1992, I had no plan as to what to collect...I had $ 20 Kodaks mixed with a $ 3500 Walker American Challenge Camera. A few years later a wise, and experienced collector told me to focus on one aspect of cameras and dont stray.... this helps from accumulating junk, taking up space in ones home and keeps the hunt even more exciting.... So, I only collect 4x5 or smaller, pre 1890's, American made wood cameras. This narrow focuses causes me to buy one or two items per year....very selective..... and when I find a rare item, I may sell off an item in my collection thats not as rare, to help fund the purchase and keep my display cases small, but to the point.... this has worked for me !

Dan

http://antiquecameras.net/images/406_aoc5.jpg

http://antiquecameras.net/images/375_web8.jpg

[CCHarrison]

American Optical 76 Camera with Scovill Waterbury lens

[Paul Ewins]

For me, I collect "user" lenses and my "collectible" lenses are intended as users. I have a few soft focus lenses (Cooke knuckler, Verito, Fujinon) but these were bought with the intention of making photos, not simply to own them. Likewise I have a couple of early Heliars (1903 & 1904) but these were also bought to be used. On the other hand I started out with a couple of Symmar convertibles which has led to me getting nearly every focal length in the Symmar and Symmar-S range plus whatever of the D.A. and triple Symmars I could find. Fortunately my willpower is strong enough to prevent me buying APO Symmars, Super Symmars and Macro Symmars.

[goamules]

I think if you have 10 collectors, you'll have 10 different reasons why. Disregarding the tongue in cheek talk about names, the original poster sounds like he is really collecting older, respected companies, which is fine. Others may like to collect obscure, not well known makes. Sleepers, if you will. Most of us photographers may go by function somewhat. Soft, or fast, or wide. An antique enthusiast may go for just the oldest. Some concentrate on one maker. It's all good, but I've always been interested in what makes us collect? If a man decides to get a camera, soon he wants another. A mountain bike? How about all the colors made. A gun? I need one in each caliber. Nobody can eat just one.

[Emil Schildt]

I think if you have 10 collectors, you'll have 10 different reasons why. Disregarding the tongue in cheek talk about names, the original poster sounds like he is really collecting older, respected companies, which is fine. Others may like to collect obscure, not well known makes. Sleepers, if you will. Most of us photographers may go by function somewhat. Soft, or fast, or wide. An antique enthusiast may go for just the oldest. Some concentrate on one maker. It's all good, but I've always been interested in what makes us collect? If a man decides to get a camera, soon he wants another. A mountain bike? How about all the colors made. A gun? I need one in each caliber. Nobody can eat just one.

all true, except that I am actually not collecting. (my girlfriend claims that what I am doing is to save the lenses from the evel collectors.....:D )

But ifI had the money, I'd be collecting.

as it is now, I don't want a lens I can't use..

[Robert Hughes]

I'm just waiting for some of these lens collectors to die off - your widows will be selling off those Heliars and Pinkham & Smiths for pennies on the dollar! Bwahahahaha...

[Dan Fromm]

Robert, as it happens I know a collector who's more-or-less on his deathbed. I've talked things over with him and his executrix (daughter, not wife). Unless there's some unforeseen catastrophe, his good stuff -- mainly Zeiss -- will be consigned to Westlicht. Pennies on the dollar isn't likely. Some collectors think of their heirs and assigns.

[cowanw]

The reason I have collected a bunch of lenses is so that I know that if I ever take a picture it will be a picture as good as AA or ES or you name em did.
I don't actually take the picture, so I will never be dissillusioned.:o
Best at takeing pictures in my mind
Bill

[William McEwen]

I've never been a collector of lenses (books + photographs are another matter) and have always purchased only what I needed. However, I've always wanted to have a Kodak 8x10 2D, not to use, just to have, only because that's what Stieglitz used.

[eddie]

i "collect" the little or less known stuff. the dallmeyers, darlot, and P&S are just to valuable for me....too expensive to keep. i have shot many of the big names (still need to try a P&S)....great lenses...all of them. nice build, great in their respective attributes....

now that derogy and hermagis seems to be in the lime light more i am switching to a "new" name lens....but i am not saying who till i find a few gems......:)

my "keeper" lenses are similar to ghandofi.....while he keeps his from collectors i keep mine form the trash! har har har! i have the orphan lenses that i use most. most have little or no value. most all have all kinds of blemishes..... spots, fungus, chips, real deep scratches, blotches, broken and missing parts, missing elements, dents, cracked brass etc etc (some just have the usual: dust & cleaning marks)....but they all shot to some extent....no one wants these babies but me...:)

eddie

[Jim Galli]

I am not a collector. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :D:D

I DO shoot with almost all my lenses. There are perhaps a half dozen that haven't been used for their first photo yet, but they are waiting patiently for me to pick them up......which I will.

As Eddie says, there are a few gems that are undiscovered.......but I stress, few.

I've only gotten lucky, really lucky, one time. There is a reason that folks are willing to pay the big bucks for the knowns. That's it. Everyone knows (thanks partially perhaps to web pages like mine) what an Eidoscop can do. Only about 3 other lenses can make that look. And they're as bad or worse than the Eido, so people buy them if they want an image that has that look.

Like Eddie, I'm just a guy making wages. So if I have two of something and one is pristine, and one is all beat up, I'll sell the pristine one and keep the beater. I'm interested in the images. Which brings me full circle. I am not a collector. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it. :cool:

[Emil Schildt]

I'm not a collector either. (I try to use my lenses.)
but only because I don't have the money for it....

I once had the idea to collect ugly cameras... could have been fun..

[ederphoto]

I'm on the other page .I usually keep all the nice looking ones hoping they will last longer so one day my kids can use them or sell them to pay their college ,and off course i sell all the beat up ones !:D



Just kidding !

[Mark Sawyer]

I collect lenses because it's a two-for-one proposition... with every lens I collect, I also collect some bizarre excuse or rationalization as to why I really, really need it. (And I have one heck of a collection of those!)

[community1313]

Hello, yesterday I noticed that the german artsy kid who purchased my first vintage sale, an english TTH 6 inch petzval already had bought 5 or 6 more strange lenses, as for me it's a long list, there is something addictive about old glass, the magic, "through a glass darkly" and the fact that nice new cameras are produced but lenses are better found second hand, it's like treasure hunting! Among my favorites a perfect schwarz 12 inch Voigtländer Heliar from 1930, never used before, how, why? and an 14 inch brass Hermagis petzval, same thing, in a box and unused, a bit moldy but now cleaned and like new..both lens purchased for less than 300$..and my Nicolas Persheid camera with the 480 mm was bought by a Russian immigrant who flew the communists and got it in Berlin on his way to Paris to be a cinematographer, never used the camera and it was sold to me by the son of the founder of this cinema company, the oldest in France..great bargain too..I mostly use what I buy and resent people who are collecting to sell and make a profit..I am trying to work doing old school large format portraits, I am not into being an antic dealer, some of the stuff reaches ridiculous prices but there is hope to find something according to your budget ant I think thats part of the magic too, understanding what's precious about a device that was used when Verlaine and Rimbaud where getting drunk and fighting over nothing!