"Nameless CCHarrison

[tuant]

Well, the seller claimed that was a nameless lens, and I certainly was hoping that was a nameless lens so I could pick it up for a dime. But obviously there were too many people like me out there and this "nameless" little lens was sold for almost $1600. Dan should write to the seller and tell him that next time "If you see my name on a lens, please don't say it is nameless!" :-D


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p4340.l2557&rt=nc&nma=true&item=120701236392&si=way7w%252FvD5nfpRkfN6KWnACiDlQk%253D&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT

Tuant

[Ash]

Typical

[BarryS]

So you thought no one else would notice the radial drive or the finely engraved C.C.? :)

[CCHarrison]

That was a damn small version.... How could the seller miss "CC Harrison" on the lens when his own image showed it :)

I was hoping it would stay under a grand so I had a shot..

Dan "CC Harrison" Colucci

[Steven Tribe]

His other barrel lens - also unknown - has Ross written in pencil on the fitting side of the flange! Perhaps he has learned from experience - no sign of a real Rofs/Ross engraving though.

[Petzval Paul]

I have the same lens... it isn't a radial drive, not in the traditional sense. It uses a unique - and rather crappy - drive that was intended to simplify the manufacturing. They didn't make them for long, maybe a few hundred models were produced. The one that sold was the same size as mine, about 9" FL and f/4.5 - perfect for 1/2 plates. BTW, these Harrisons are sometimes referred to as "fat focus" models.

[tuant]

So you thought no one else would notice the radial drive or the finely engraved C.C.? :)


Barry, the Harrison lovers are all about to have faded visions now. I was just hoping....

[BarryS]

... BTW, these Harrisons are sometimes referred to as "fat focus" models. Interesting. I thought is was just a tiny Petzval with the normal size radial drive. Maybe it was a lens called "Baby's First Petzval".

@tuant -- Those geezers can spot a nice lens from a mile away--in the dark--in a thunderstorm.

[Petzval Paul]

http://www.antiquecameras.net/photographers18601900.html

Scroll down 6 pics and there is an image of a lady photographer (or one posing as one... maybe) with a Lewis style camera that has such a fat focus lens mounted on it. I'd guess that to be about the same size lens on a 1/2 plate camera. Could be wrong, but gives an idea.

BTW, the photo produced on that link (I think it was a CDV) sold on bay for $1,000, so the lens at $1557 is not really unreasonable.

[CCHarrison]

PetzvalPaul has it right...fat focus... see Milan's tutorial on this lens (http://tinyurl.com/65lseb7)... Serial number range seems to be around 2600-3200

Dan

[Petzval Paul]

That's my lens!

[goamules]

No one is mentioning the fact that this lens did not have a cemented front lens group, as petzvals do. I called the seller before he posted the pictures of the front assembly, and asked about his title "four element". As we see, it was air separated in front...and back. I recommended he post pictures and explain what he was seeing. He only did the former and the bids kept going. (oh, but he did add that it was a CC Harrison when I mentioned that was a good maker and collectible)

I have no idea if it was original, something else CC Harrison was trying...like the spiral drive focus. Or if the original cemented pair in the front was replaced at some time with the two glass pieces. All I know is that isn't a Petzval portrait. Harrison did invent a lot of things...so this could be some other design.

The key question was when I asked the seller if it would form an image (I told him how to hold it near a wall). He replied, "oh there it is....about 2 inches from the wall". Something is wrong with that, unless it's a physically 2 inch long lens....it looked like about a 6-8 inch long lens physically, and a petzval this size should form an image at about 6-8 inches. I bet someone paid big for a useless collectible.

[Jim Galli]

Seems the less you say and the more ignorant you portray, the more frenzied the bidding. I think my next ebay sale is just going to say; some kind of old camera lens??
and then a few pictures.

[goamules]

Seems the less you say and the more ignorant you portray, the more frenzied the bidding. I think my next ebay sale is just going to say; some kind of old camera lens??
and then a few pictures.

Ha! I agree, and add that it works at both ends: an auction can say nothing but "brass lens", it will get high bids if it's a decent maker. And an auction can have a page and a half of blather and subterfuge and be nothing of value and get high bids. What doesn't sell are good maker lenses, honestly described, with a BuyItNow the same price as those other two!

[tuant]

Barry was right, this nameless lens caught the attention of all the geezers here:-) They can all spot a good lens from a mile away, whether at night or in a thunderstorm:) :) I feel honored to belong to the same geezer group now!

[goamules]

More importantly, some of us carried it a bit further than merely identifying the lens, and realized there was something suspect and didn't bid. I've got about 4 CC Harrison's missing one or another piece of glass. I didn't pay $1600 for any of them either. I could be wrong...the one listed may work perfectly well...

[Two23]

Barry was right, this nameless lens caught the attention of all the geezers here:-) They can all spot a good lens from a mile away, whether at night or in a thunderstorm:) :) I feel honored to belong to the same geezer group now!


Dang, that's depressing. I spotted it right off too. I've been paying attention here! What's depressing is maybe it means I'm becoming a geezer. :rolleyes: If it had stayed cheap I would have bid. However, once it took off I had no interest. I don't bid on expensive things being offered by people who don't know anything about it. Too much at stake to deal with them unless I'm 100% positive.


Kent in SD

[Jon Wilson]

I wonder if the "winner" [and I use that term loosely] will see these posts and acknowledge whether or not he purchased a "jewel" or a "dog". I am betting the "winner" will not post here and it is a "dog".

woof, woof. Jon