Was the Dagor design licenced to any other maker by Goerz?
Who else made it and what did they call it?

Quote:

On 2006-12-26 13:57, primus96 wrote: Was the Dagor design licenced to any other maker by Goerz? Who else made it and what did they call it?

I've had Dagor clones made by other makers. Modern ones include early Schneider Clarons (yes! go to Schneider's site and see for yourself) and pre-WWII Symmars, also Boyer Beryl, Beryl-S, and Emeraude. I believe that Ross licensed the design from Goerz.

Y'know, you'd be much happier and in even more trouble if you bought a copy of A Lens Collector's Vade Mecum. I think that MW Classic sells it in the UK. You haven't received enough Christmas gifts and deserve another. Or buy one to celebrate my birthday, which comes in around three weeks.

Quote:

Or buy one to celebrate my birthday, which comes in around three weeks.

Hey Dan?

When is yours, mine rolls around on the 17th.

Dave

Quote:

On 2006-12-26 16:29, Rangemaster wrote: Quote: Or buy one to celebrate my birthday, which comes in around three weeks. Hey Dan? When is yours, mine rolls around on the 17th. Dave

Interesting coincidence. Primus96, please celebrate for both of us. Also for that quintessential American Benjamin Franklin.

What year, Dave? Surely not 1944.

Cheers,

Dan

[quote]


Hey Dan?

When is yours, mine rolls around on the 17th.

Dave

Quote:

Interesting coincidence. Primus96, please celebrate for both of us. Also for that quintessential American Benjamin Franklin. What year, Dave? Surely not 1944. Cheers, Dan

Hi Dan,

Nope, not quite, I will be 45, I was born in '62..

Have a good B-Day, we can share a virtual toast together!

LOL

Dave

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Rangemaster on 2006-12-26 18:21 ]</font>

45??? And I thought you were an adult

Happy birthday to you both!

Believe me Rich, I am an old 45, been beating up on my self for many years now!

LOL

Dave

Dan said: You haven't received enough Christmas gifts and deserve another.
Y'know, you'd be much happier and in even more trouble if you bought a Dagor clone..

So let's get back on topic chaps.
besides who copied the Dagor I wanted to know the name they gave it so I could get one.
The Dagor is the one they all know about, but perhaps a horse by another name is cheaper? I guess the Dagor was a successful formula loads of makers would have been interested in making.

Would you consider it sensible to have some Dagor cells mounted into a modern shutter costing up to 600 USD?
Mind you, if I had any sense I wouldn't have started exploring earlier optical designs, when I had a modern-ish Plasmat type already.

Quote:

Mind you, if I had any sense I wouldn't have started exploring earlier optical designs, when I had a modern-ish Plasmat type already.

Actually, if you had any sense, you would have a different hobby than photography!!!!


LOL

Sorry Primus, I could resist!

Dave

Quote:

On 2006-12-27 14:37, primus96 wrote: Dan said: You haven't received enough Christmas gifts and deserve another. Y'know, you'd be much happier and in even more trouble if you bought a Dagor clone.. So let's get back on topic chaps. besides who copied the Dagor I wanted to know the name they gave it so I could get one. The Dagor is the one they all know about, but perhaps a horse by another name is cheaper? I guess the Dagor was a successful formula loads of makers would have been interested in making. Would you consider it sensible to have some Dagor cells mounted into a modern shutter costing up to 600 USD? Mind you, if I had any sense I wouldn't have started exploring earlier optical designs, when I had a modern-ish Plasmat type already.

Did I really tell you to buy a Dagor clone? I thought I told you to buy a copy of the Vade Mecum. And then you'll be on the dread slippery slope.

IMO there's no great advantage to be gained, or for that matter lost, by replacing a modern plasmat type with a dagor type of any age. And I say this after shooting a 210/5.6 Boyer Zircon (6/4 plasmat) against a 210/7.7 Boyer Beryl-S (6/2 dagor). Both cover around 70 degrees and shoot equally well from f/11 down, which is where I tried them.

If you don't need the greater coverage, there's little to be gained by replacing a tessar with a plasmat. I say this after shooting a 127/4.7 Tominon, ex-Polaroid CU-5, against a 135/5.6 convertible Symmar. But remember that I shoot 2x3; on 4x5 a 135 Symmar is probably preferable to a 127 tessar but a nice 150/6.3 tessar will shoot better than either.

$600 for a remount (plus the cost of the lens to be remounted) is very hard to justify if the equivalent lens can be bought in shutter for less. I once paid $500 ($200 for a new shutter, $300 for machining) for a remount, but the lens was a 38/4.5 Biogon. I don't feel sorry for myself about that deal, the alternative was much more expensive.

If you want to chase old lenses, do so and be happy. But don't believe that you'll take better pictures with old lenses than with new. Also don't believe that new lenses shoot better than old as long as the old ones have the coverage needed. You may save money with old lenses, but that's all.

Good luck, have fun,

Dan

Quote:

On 2006-12-27 14:37, primus96 wrote: Mind you, if I had any sense I wouldn't have started exploring earlier optical designs, when I had a modern-ish Plasmat type already.

Before you go wild for Dagors, read this carefully and all the way to the end: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=13109

Wonder lenses are very uncommon.

A genuine C.P. Goerz of Berlin 150mm Dagor, if it covers 70 degrees ought to give me a circle of 210mm. My 150mm G-Claron covers 64 degrees (according to Schneider) for a 187mm circle. Maybe Schneider are being really conservative. I was thinking the Dagor would go better with my Linhof that has better bovements.

You know, when I looked at the cells of the 150mm Dagor I wasn't happy with it's condition to justify it's re-mounting.
Anyone want the thing to play with?

I once scored a CP Goerz, Berlin 130mm f6.8 "Doppel Anastigmat", and I thought that must have been a Dagor. I passed it to a forum member, cant remember who. I believe that he thought it was actually a dialyte type. Both types are double (doppel) anastigmats. It was razor sharp in the centre, but the edges..... Compared to the Tessar type 127m Ektar, the Kodak lens beat it easily.

So, i,ve found a actual 130mm Dagor in a recently CLA'd dial-set Compur.
The point is that the 130mm Dagor allows me to use the basic movements of my Graphic and with my 210mm G-Claron I have a useful 2 lens combo. The Dagor & G-Claron aren't bulky lenses either.

Quote:

On 2006-12-30 22:52, primus96 wrote: You know, when I looked at the cells of the 150mm Dagor I wasn't happy with it's condition to justify it's re-mounting. Anyone want the thing to play with? I once scored a CP Goerz, Berlin 130mm f6.8 "Doppel Anastigmat", and I thought that must have been a Dagor. I passed it to a forum member, cant remember who. I believe that he thought it was actually a dialyte type. Both types are double (doppel) anastigmats. It was razor sharp in the centre, but the edges..... Compared to the Tessar type 127m Ektar, the Kodak lens beat it easily. So, i,ve found a actual 130mm Dagor in a recently CLA'd dial-set Compur. The point is that the 130mm Dagor allows me to use the basic movements of my Graphic and with my 210mm G-Claron I have a useful 2 lens combo. The Dagor & G-Claron aren't bulky lenses either.

You sold that piece of garbage to me, you stinker and I don't think it is a dialyte I KNOW it is a dialyte.

This thread is getting better and better---soon it'll be ready for TV as a prime-time soaper!