Dagor 8.25 on 8X10

[Smitty]

Anyone know if a Dagor 8.25 inch will cover 8x10?
Thanks, Steve

[Mark Sawyer]

Yes, but with not a lot left for movements and the older ones will be a little soft in the corners. If it's late enough to be coated, it will be better there.

[Smitty]

It I think is a gold ring, brass mount on front element. American Optical, definitely coated.

[Dan Fromm]

It I think is a gold ring, brass mount on front element. American Optical, definitely coated.

Not this Internet canard again. There was never a connection between Goerz American Optical Company of various locations in and around New York City and American Optical Company of Springfield, MA.

[David Lindquist]

Not this Internet canard again. There was never a connection between Goerz American Optical Company of various locations in and around New York City and American Optical Company of Springfield, MA.

Dan I'm afraid this is never going to go away. In addition to being stated from time to time on various internet photography forums, this error was also asserted in View Camera magazine in a series on the history of lens design, in particular the January-February 1996 issue.

I sometimes wonder if C.P. Goerz American Optical Co. changed their name to Goerz Optical Co. to get away from this.

BTW I have a 21 cm Zeiss Goerz Dagor (F/6.8), circa late 1920's-early 1930's that covered 8 X 10 O.K. I did not enlarge my 8 x 10 negatives.

David

[Andrew Plume]

if you can find the Goerz Berlin f6.8 version, this will definitely cover 8 x 10 and without any vignetting

andrew

[karl french]

Pretty much any 8 1/4 inch Dagor will cover 8x10 with some room for movements. Polished brass does not equal a "Golden" Dagor. Real "Gold Ring" Dagors had anodized front trim rings and generally start around serial number 790,XXX. I was previously using a 8 1/4 Dagor as a moderate wide angle on 8x10, but found the 21cm Schneider Angulon provided better coverage and produced a similar feel to the image.

[Mark Sawyer]

Pretty much any 8 1/4 inch Dagor will cover 8x10 with some room for movements. Polished brass does not equal a "Golden" Dagor. Real "Gold Ring" Dagors had anodized front trim rings and generally start around serial number 790,XXX. I was previously using a 8 1/4 Dagor as a moderate wide angle on 8x10, but found the 21cm Schneider Angulon provided better coverage and produced a similar feel to the image.

There's still some question about what constitutes an official "Golden Dagor". All the coated Goerz Dagors had similar excellent performance. The Angulons were either Dagor copies or so close many knowledgeable people still consider them Dagors.

[Smitty]

Mounted in a Rapax shutter, came on an early 50's 5x7 Deardorff...

[Luis-F-S]

Pretty much any 8 1/4 inch Dagor will cover 8x10 with some room for movements. Polished brass does not equal a "Golden" Dagor. Real "Gold Ring" Dagors had anodized front trim rings and generally start around serial number 790,XXX.

The lowest non Golden coated Dagor I have is a 12" Ser #77617x. The lowest # Golden Dagor I have is an 8 1/4" Ser # 784195 with an anodized aluminum front barrel. The Golden Dagors thus start a bit lower than 79xxxx and probably in the low 78x xxx's. I also have a non-coated 8 1/4" Dagor, Ser # 770769 in Acme #3 whose rear element sticks out about 3/8" less from the shutter than the Golden one. I point out to show that the design changed somewhat over the years and thus you would expect somewhat different coverages. I would think this older lens would have less mechanical vignetting and be better for 8x10. L