The 150mm was definitely labeled no.1. And the no. 3 matched the logical progression (the third one matching yours). The number sequence would match the usual European progression of lens numbering.
But the lengths/numbers you quote does seem to suggest the reverse was the case (or became the case at some stage) in which case yours would become No.3 again! But did the 635mm become no. 0 - or perhaps abandoned because of insurance claims! Very very strange! I dare not quote more from VM!
I have checked other European auction sites and the french soft lens website (is found here). The black Berthiot seemed to have only been made in 275/375/480mm. And the black 375mm was called no.2. I take it yours is the objective from our Australian friend? These Berthiot versions are claimed to have been made up to the 40's so there were a lot of opportunities for changing the model range (the "odd" 420mm?)
They are triple convertible, however the front and rear (at least on the two samples I have owned) are the same FL.
I have never compared results (print to print), but the Eidoscope is the same design as the Busch Nicola Perscheid, two symmetrical achromats. I do not currently believe that they are Aplanat/Rapid Rectilinear design lenses, although I would be open to arguments proving otherwise.
For what ever it is worth, I love mine.
Steven,Originally Posted by Steven Tribe
Mine is engraved No.3, and is said to be "less than 300 mm". OK, I don't have it in my hand's yet, so it's probably not officially mine and therefore I can't check for focal length, but here is photo of engraving from dealer's web (and is not from Australian frend). They also have Berthiot of 275mm in stock which is engraved no. 3 as well. And contrary to Hermagis, Berthiot is engraved with both number and focal length.
Jason, quite few "I love mine" sentances from this site were the reason, I pulled the trigger on this one. So it'll be great if we manage to get as much data as possible together for future reference. When I get it I'll probably start image thread as well.
Cheers,
Marko
Last edited by Marko Trebusak; 13-Jan-2010 at 23:03. Reason: well, I can't learn English THAT fast
A few years back, I asked a French friend, Jimmy Péguet, if he could track down any information about the Eidoscope. He asked Patrice-Hervé Pont, a well known french collector and author, about the lens, and I received this response from M. Pont.
"... En ce qui concerne l'objectif de votre ami américain, il s'agit d'un Hermagis Eidoscope à portrait ouvrant à f/5 et fabriqué aux alentours de 1935. Sa formule est différente de celle d'un Petzval : c'est un rectiligne modifié de manière à conserver un résidu d'aberration sphérique et par là à donner du flou - flou réduisible en diaphragmant - sans pour cela souffrir d'un "foyer chimique" comme c'est le cas avec les objectifs à portrait classiques qui ont un résidu d'aberration chromatique et nécessitent par conséquent une correction de mise au point.
Hermagis est un très grand fabricant français qui a commencé son activité en 1845 ou 1855 (selon les sources). Sa production a été variée et considérable. Il a fini par être absorbé en 1934 par SOM Berthiot, qui a conservé son usine de Dijon (he wrote here "Dijou", maybe a typo, I must check), dans laquelle bien plus tard ont été fabriqué les Pan Cinor. Le nom d'Hermagis a survécu longtemps après la guerre dans les catalogues Berthiot..."
I won't belabor my awful French by translating. Anyhow, google can translate as well as I...
Jason that was very informative, thank you. I remember a thread, where Eddy asked about Hermagis serial number list, but it didn't reveal anything regarding Hermagis. Do you happen to have Hermagis serial number/production year list somewhere? Or are you able to tell the period when lens with serial number 46XXX could be produced? Also in your French friend's friend's reply there is mention of "modified Rapid Rectilinear construction". You wrote: "I do not currently believe that they are Aplanat/Rapid Rectilinear design lenses, although I would be open to arguments proving otherwise", so what do you think this construction is based on?
Cheers,
Marko
J-G-M - it was Dijon. Hermagis for a period was "à Paris et Dijon". Logic says "Give up the high value plant/high labour cost when times became difficult in the Depression".
Marko, you caught me looking the fool, or at least contradicting myself. Several years ago, when I purchased my first Eidoscope I compared the reflections of an Dallmeyer Rapid Rectilinear and the Eidoscope. They both had the same number of reflections, showing that both are 4/2 designs, but the Eidoscope's reflections moved in opposite directions than the RR's, suggesting that the curves are different. Since I know of only two significant 4/2 designs--the RR and the periscopic--I thought that the Eidoscope must be the latter. The Nicola Persheid is a good example of a 4/2 periscopic (a Verito is a 3/2 periscopic), while the Pinkham and Smith Series IV is a 4/2 RR. In retrospect and in face of my conflicting reports I should go back and try the reflection test again.
Numbers work backwards on Eidoscop. 0=24" 1=19" 2=14 3/4" 3=11" 4= etc.
Sorry, I don't have a serial number correspondence, although I would love to see one.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks