I own a 355mm Plasmat-type G-Claron, and I would be really delighted to get a Dagor-type one. So I was happy to see the good news that those do exist. But.... That's what I found checking the list:-
(1) " # 10 737 773 yes http://www.largeformatphotography.in...mm-f9-G-Claron "
No data at all on that particular lens. Though the thread itself ends with "no one has yet come up with an early one that is not a plasmat".
Should I belive any lens not proved to be a plasmat to be a dagor?
Should I assume a statement that no one has yet come up with an early 355mm G-Claron that is not a plasmat to be a proof that dagor-type 355mm G-Clarons really exist?
Sorry but I'd better not.
(2) " # 10 737 xxx yes http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ate-Casket-Set "
No data at all on that particular lens... NOW. But the thread originally contained pictures that are now gone, and what those pictures were showing was most probably a 355mm Plasmat.
(3) " # 11 708 xxx. yes http://www.largeformatphotography.in...gor-Type/page4 "
proof positive: NO. See message #32:
Jon Wilson 2-Jun-2008:
My 355mm G-claron <...> has 4 strong reflections, i.e., 2 large and 2 smaller ones, but all strong reflections, and thus must be the plasmat. The 355mm's sn11708xxx.
(4) " #11 737 xxx yes http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ate-Casket-Set"
# 11 737 xxx is never mentioned in the thread.
# 10 737 xxx is mentioned; its the same lens mentioned in the thread #63200 above, and again no data at all is published on it.
That's it. After 10 years of the quest, the 2008 statement "no one has yet come up with an early one that is not a plasmat" is still valid. And the list above is the evidence... And no I am not too happy with it. I would be glad if anyone came up with at least ONE 355mm Dagor-type G-Claron.
P.S.: I didn't check the data on shorter focal length G-Clarons because I am not interested in those.
P.P.S.: I'm sorry. Really.
Bookmarks