Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,936   Posts: 1,585,628   Online: 766
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21
  1. #1
    JPD
    JPD is offline
    JPD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    773

    Zeiss Doppel-Amatar on the auction site

    There's a camera with the rare Carl Zeiss Jena Doppel-Amatar 6.8/135 mm on that auction site, item nr 130677974196 It also includes the similar six element ICA Maximar lens 6.8/90 mm.

    I only post this because the Amatar has been up for discussion a couple of times, and they are quite rare. I have no connection with the seller in Germany.
    J. Patric Dahlén

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    671
    Hi JPD - Did you end up purchasing the camera? Looked like a beauty, although I must confess I was not familiar with either lens.

    J

  3. #3
    JPD
    JPD is offline
    JPD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    773
    Quote Originally Posted by jon koss View Post
    Hi JPD - Did you end up purchasing the camera? Looked like a beauty, although I must confess I was not familiar with either lens.
    No I already have a Doppel-Amatar. It was Zeiss answer to Goerz Dagor in the 1910's and quite rare. The ICA Maximar is of a similar design, and the 9 cm focal lenght can be used for 6x9 or as a short lens for 9x12. Both lenses are uncoated but since they only have four glass to air surfaces they give good contrast and can also be used for colour.

    The Amatar has been discussed here, and I thought that maybe someone here was interested. If I wanted it I would have kept silent.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails doppel_amatar.jpg  
    J. Patric Dahlén

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,686
    The Amatar was a reverse Dagor. Since the Amatar construction is covered in the Goerz patent, anyone who wished to make it without paying royalties had to wait for the patent to expire. The miscaptioned diagram in the above post is that of a Dagor, not an Amatar.

  5. #5
    JPD
    JPD is offline
    JPD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    773
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    The Amatar was a reverse Dagor. Since the Amatar construction is covered in the Goerz patent, anyone who wished to make it without paying royalties had to wait for the patent to expire. The miscaptioned diagram in the above post is that of a Dagor, not an Amatar.
    The illustration is from the Carl Zeiss booklet "Photographic Lenses and how they are made" together with illustrations of the Tessar, Double-Protar, Planar, Tele-Tessar.

    http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/zeiss_10.html

    It's possible that they made a mistake, even though I doubt it. I can hear with Zeiss.
    J. Patric Dahlén

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,686

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    659
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    I see the reverse Dagor design in the Kingslake book you linked, but didn't find a mention of the Amatar there; is there one? I couldn't find much of anything in my books about it; Henney and Dudley mention the lens, but don't reference a diagram of it.

    I'm curious how you know the design? And I wonder how old that Zeiss book is that had the illustration. Zeiss was said to have tried (unsuccessfully) to patent a lens virtually identical to the Dagor, maybe they used an illustration of the original intended design.

    BTW, any connection with von Hoegh, or maybe just an admirer?

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Crabtree View Post
    I see the reverse Dagor design in the Kingslake book you linked, but didn't find a mention of the Amatar there; is there one? I couldn't find much of anything in my books about it; Henney and Dudley mention the lens, but don't reference a diagram of it.

    I'm curious how you know the design? And I wonder how old that Zeiss book is that had the illustration. Zeiss was said to have tried (unsuccessfully) to patent a lens virtually identical to the Dagor, maybe they used an illustration of the original intended design.

    BTW, any connection with von Hoegh, or maybe just an admirer?
    The Amatar is a reverse Dagor. So is an Angulon. Von Hoegh first showed his design for the Dagor to Zeiss. They sent him packing, and he not only sold it to Goerz, but was hired as their lens designer. Zeiss tried to beat Goerz to the patent, but Goerz secured priority.

    The only connection I have with E. v. H. is that I use Dagor lenses, I like to know about things I have and use. The original US patent is easily searchable. And, it's fun. I can tell whippersnappers that I'm 147 years old.

  9. #9
    JPD
    JPD is offline
    JPD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    773
    Since I don't want to take the cemented elements of my Amatar apart I have sent an email to Zeiss. They have forwarded it to their museum in Jena. Hopefully they can settle the question and send me a scan of the design.

    I have a Steinheil Orthostigmat and an Opt.-Werke Rüdersdorf Iricentor, and they should be reverse Dagors.
    J. Patric Dahlén

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,686
    Quote Originally Posted by JPD View Post
    The illustration is from the Carl Zeiss booklet "Photographic Lenses and how they are made" together with illustrations of the Tessar, Double-Protar, Planar, Tele-Tessar.

    http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/zeiss_10.html

    It's possible that they made a mistake, even though I doubt it. I can hear with Zeiss.
    If you read that booklet, you will see that it was published by Zeiss' agent in NYC, not Zeiss themselves.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin