Some Dagorís and non-Dagor Dagorís I have loved... RLP (really long post)
Funny how your lens kit gets built. And added to continually. I started out like most folks willing to pay the extra bucks for the showier lenses. Dagorís whether right or wrong get valued something like this:
Kern Gold Dot MC,
Kern Gold Dot SC,
Goerz Optical Co. and American Optical Co. SC Gold Rim, or ďGoldenĒ,
American Optical Co. SC,
and all the rest.
(notable exceptions are ANY Dagor 16" and longer, and Zeiss WA f9 which are through the roof!)
Lately the prices for anything ďgoldĒ have gone sort of crazy.
Iíll share a few things Iíve learned. In my kit I have several Dagor types that get used regularly.
355 Kern GD Schneider; is just superb. The excellence is in the contrast, not the resolution.
12Ē f6.8 American Optical Co. SC: This lens lives on the 7X17 camera. Itís excellent, but not spectacular. Certainly delivers nicely for contact prints.
10 ĺĒ f8 Kenro K2. Built by Goerz Optical Co. and has the 8300000ís serial #. I only paid about $70 bucks for it. It will just cover the 7X17 with a little movement.
9 ĹĒ f6.8 Iíve had several. The one Iíve kept and use is not on the list of valuable Dagorís. Itís probably from the late 1920ís but thatís just a guess. Itís non-US but Goerz factory made. It has the pot metal barrel that the black paint didnít stick very well to so itís ugly. Somebody mounted it in a Wollensak chrome shutter. I paid $78 bucks for it, serviced the shutter, and itís a solid excellent performer.
225mm f9.5 This is the wierdest of them all. It is cells from 2 early G-Claron lenses that somebody mixed up. The front is from a 240mm and the back is from a 210mm. I bought it from a fellow in the UK that was very apologetic about selling this lens that had no value. He realized it was mis-matched but didnít know what the rear cell was. I surmised, ďwhy not?Ē Schneider sold itís early Symmarís exactly the same way. The triple convertible Symmars of about 1951 vintage are non symmetrical dagor type cells. I paid $49 bucks. In use, it is more spectacular than any of my normal Dagorís except the 14Ē Kern. Resolution and contrast is identical to the Kern GD. And the extra 15mm made a huge difference in 8X10 coverage. I never seem to get in the edges. And yes, G-Claronís in the 10 and 11,000,000 serial noís are Dagor type.
8 ľĒ f6.8 This is an early brass barrel lens from perhaps 1910 or so. $56. It lives in the case with the Kodak 2D that has the Packard shutter. I use it all the time and itís just incredibly sharp and contrasty.
6 ĹĒ f8 American Optical Co. WA SC. Embarrassed to admit Iíve never even used it. How dumb is that.
150mm f9 Schneider G-Claron dagor type. The only drawback is that I havenít yet got filters set up for the tiny 30.5mm front thread. In service, itís just as nice as the 225mm and the 14Ē above. It covers 5X7 with generous movements.
4 ľĒ f8 American Optical Co. non-coated WA. Havenít used.
110mm Zeiss f9 WA Dagor. Awesome little lens. Too bad theyíre so pricey. Iíd adore having the 18cm. Again, filters are difficult because itís SO tiny.
My point if there is one is that some of the $50 - $80 lenses make photos just as good and often a lot better than the $2200 bells and whistles versions.
Originally Posted by jimgalli
I don't own any Dagors. Not sure I ever will but I do, certainly, agree with your point. Like the old saying goes, "a picture is worth a thousand words", you point has been well demonstrated by the photos posted here and elsewhere by you and a host of others. Still, the prices for some "desireable" lenses continue to climb - almost inexplicably. It is an interesting phenomena to ponder. Thanks for your post and thanks even more for all of the photgraphic "evidence" you've supplied over the years.
Originally Posted by jimgalli
The best Dagor I have ever owned is the 210mm f/9 G-Claron Dagor type that I bought, or obtained in trade, from you. This little baby had it all over three other Goerz America Dagors of the same focal length to which I compared it. Some A** H*^% engraved his name on the shutter, which I guess detracts from its value, but for performance in the 210mm range, this is the one for me.
Just wondering, have you ever compared the 355 G-Claron of Dagor and plasmat design to see if one offers greater coverage?
Jim i bought a 305 Claron from you that i use on my 11x14. The lens delivers and all but I would like to get something in the same focal length with a larger image circle. Any recomondations would be appreciated.
I bought a C. P. Goertz AM. OPT. Co. Dagor 12 IN F 6.8 Gold Ring with supposedly 560mm Image Circle at the LFVC conference from Jeff at Quality Camera.. It is in an Ilex #4 shutter. I did this because I had discovered the fine art of vignetting with the 305mm G Claron in my new to me 7x17.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
What differences are there in a Dagor design vs. a plasmat? Aren't both constructed along a 6 cell-4 group configuration?
PM me John when you get some negs developed, I would like to know how the lens is working out for you. I tell yah no matter how carefull I am I end up cutting at least one corner.
Originally Posted by jp80874
A Dagor is 6 elements in 2 groups, each group in a (+-+) order.
Originally Posted by dmax
A Plasmat is 6 elements in 4 groups, each cell in a + (-+) order - an "airspaced Dagor".
My only Dagor is an "original" - a 1912-ish "CP Goerz Berlin Doppel Anastigmat Serie III (Dagor) 18cm f:6.8". Nice enough, but not great.
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
Happy to do so. Jeff said it might have a little less contrast than my next steps up, the 450mm Nikkor M and the Fuji 600mm C. I can of course address that by staying a few seconds longer in the Jobo. I just have to experiment to find a time/temp.
Originally Posted by Mike A
Thanks for the clarification. Now for another question: I have heard of Schneider Angulons being referred to as "reversed Dagors", apparently because Schneider at that time wanted to circumvent applicable design patents. What exactly does the phrase mean in terms of construction?