Eurygraphe Serie VI (not IV)

[ntenny]

Gentle Readers,

I've finally gratified my longstanding desire for a casket set, and picked up a Berthiot Trousse-Eurygraphe No. 2; cells of length 230, 305, and 390, to cover 13x18 cm. It's a very nice-looking little set and promises to be useful, but in sorting out the apertures I realized they were slightly different from the ones listed in the Berthiot catalog at collection-appareils.fr, and on closer inspection I found that my set is Serie VIc rather than the more common Serie IVc.

I can figure out the apertures in real time, so it's not a practical problem, but I have no idea what the difference between the series of Eurygraphes might be. In the catalog Serie VI is used for the Perigraphe lenses only, and Google doesn't turn up much evidence that there ever was a Eurygraphe Ser. VI---but there it is written plain as day on the barrel.

What have I got here? Is it essentially the same Dagor-type design as the Ser. IV, and if so, what changed to make them roll the series number? Ideas welcome.

Thanks

-NT

 

[ntenny]

No one has any idea, really? I figured for sure the title was Dan Fromm-bait at least.

-NT

 

[Dan Fromm]

Nathan, all of my Berthiot catalogs list Eurygraphes as Ser. IV. With respect to your casket set, I smell an engraving error. If any of the lenses has a serial number, please post it. This will let me date it.

I don't look at this part of APUG very often, nothing much happens here.

Your set is No. 2 in the 1936 catalog, 230, 305 and 390 mm single cells. The single cells are all f/12.1. 390 + 305 makes 180/6.9, 390 + 230 makes 145/7.2, 305 + 230 makes 135/6.7. I don't know why, but I can't paste the catalog page in.

 

[ntenny]

Thanks Dan. I usually come in through the "new posts" link and I forget that people read by category...

If that's the catalog at collection-appareils.fr, it's the same one I was looking at. I don't have the set at hand, but it has a serial number somewhere on it---a rigorous few minutes with Google suggested that the number was from the very late thirties, IIRC. The labelling is SOM Berthiot, the diaphragm is in mm, and the engraving has a sort of clean modern look, with white fill in the lettering.

One other oddity---if you look at that catalog page, it shows the barrel sitting longitudinally in the casket, so that the "pipe" runs left/right as you face the box. Mine doesn't fit that way; to get the barrel into the box, you have to orient it axially, front/back. (I suppose I can't swear on my mother's grave that it's the original box, not least because she's still alive and might object, but it *looks* like the one in the catalog.) So *something* is different.

(Why isn't the 180mm combination f/7.1? The 305mm cell should have a 25.2mm aperture, and 180/25.2 is about 7.14. Mutatis mutandis for the other combinations. I have the feeling the answer is obvious.)

-NT

 

[Dan Fromm]

If that's the catalog at collection-appareils.fr, it's the same one I was looking at.

One other oddity---if you look at that catalog page, it shows the barrel sitting longitudinally in the casket, so that the "pipe" runs left/right as you face the box. Mine doesn't fit that way; to get the barrel into the box, you have to orient it axially, front/back. (I suppose I can't swear on my mother's grave that it's the original box, not least because she's still alive and might object, but it *looks* like the one in the catalog.) So *something* is different.

(Why isn't the 180mm combination f/7.1? The 305mm cell should have a 25.2mm aperture, and 180/25.2 is about 7.14. Mutatis mutandis for the other combinations. I have the feeling the answer is obvious.)

-NT

I have the catalog you're referring to in hard copy. The one I answered from is not that one and shows the lens in its box oriented front-to-back as you described. Its the original box.

Pupillary magnification, perhaps. Remember that the f/ number is focal length/entrance pupil's diameter, not focal length/diaphragm's diameter.

I've been thinking about Eurygraphe casket sets for a while, haven't been able to convince myself to pay the going rate and haven't been to buy one for less. After you figure out how to shutter yours and have used it, please tell us all how well it shoots.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Pardon me for reviving an old discussion. I recently published an article on Berthiot's LF anastigmats -- this includes Eurygraphes -- on the French LF forum. See http://www.galerie-photo.com/berthiot-anastigmats-en.html
For those of you who want to go crazy looking at catalogs, it contains links to all of the Berthiot catalogs I've found on-line.
http://www.galerie-photo.com/berthiot-anastigmats-en.html
I found no evidence at all for Ser. VIc casket sets. Berthiot first used Ser. VI with no suffix in 1910 for the Graphor, a triplet. Starting in 1912, they used Ser. VI with suffixes for Perigraphes. Ser. VIa was always f/14 extreme wide angle lenses, Ser. VIb was always f/6.8 wide (according to Berthiot) angles.