Goerz-Dagor 1:9 f-10cm Carl Zeiss Jena

[ajmiller]

Has anyone any experience of this lens.
Is it any good?

Will it cover 4x5 - I want to use it on my Wista 45DX?

any info about the lens would be great.

Thanks

-Tony

 

[Dan Fromm]

The VM says it covers 100 degrees, so it should cover 4x5 with room to spare.

Cult lens, so usually costly, said to be very good.

Go shoot with it and be happy.

 

[ajmiller]

Thanks Dan - I was given it by a elderly photographer who I've become friendly with. Can't wait to try it now.

- Tony

 

[Doug Webb]

My 100mm 6.8 dagor covers 4x5 with lots of room for movement, as in I can set front rise as far as it will go at this focal length on my Wista 4x5 and not run out of coverage. Your f9 should have at least as much coverage. All of the information I have seen on the CZJ 10cm f9 says it's not coated, not sure if that applies to yours. My 100 6.8 is not coated but that has been no problem with black and white film. Would like to hear how this lens is working for you. I like my 100 6.8 better than my 90 angulon in situations when I need more movement, my 90 angulon is coated. Haven't tried my 100 6.8 on my 5x7 yet, possible that it would at least hit the corners of 5x7. Good luck with your lens.
Doug Webb

 

[David Lindquist]

Also see the 1933 Zeiss catalog here:
http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/zeiss_3.html
In particular see pages 14, 15 and 28.The table on page 28 indicates the 10 cm f/9 Dagor covers an image circle of 8 3/4 inches "at small stops". Also the catalog recommends stopping down to at least f/18 after focusing. One buying guide I have shows Zeiss still offering Dagors as late as 1939-1940. I've never heard or seen any evidence that Zeiss (in either East or West Germany) resumed production of Dagors (or Protars) after World War II so I wouldn't expect any Zeiss made Dagors to be coated, unless it was done after market.
David

 

[ajmiller]

Thanks for all the useful info. I'm fairly new to LF so haven't used the lens to any great extent yet. What little I have has shown me how it can be difficult composing at f9 on the GG.
Thanks again.

- Tony

 

[Ian Grant]

Should be an interesting lens. f9 shouldn't be too bad with the Wista, assuming you have the combo screen, a plastic screen/fresnel with a cover sheet, I think that was standard and is an excellent bright screen. It's the best screen I have on a 5x4 camera by a long way.

Zeiss (West Germany) never made WA Dagors like yours after WWII, they had much newer Biogon designs, and they never sold lenses independently only for Zeiss Ikon cameras or to other manufacturers, CZJ (in the East) had enough problems getting specialist optical glass after the war and had quality issues and Rollei stopped using them, few of their LF lenses left the Eastern Block, they to had their own wide angle desigh the Germinar W

Ian

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ian, are you sure that the Germinar W was the CZJ (DDR) anti-Biogon? I always thought that for photogrammetric and aerial cameras their Lamegon was the anti-Biogon and that the Germinar W was more of an anti-Gerogon or -G-Claron.

 

[Ian Grant]

Dan, I wasn't implying the Germinar W was the Biogon equivalent rather that it's the more common East German wide angle.

Ian

 

[David Lindquist]

Also see the 1933 Zeiss catalog here:
I've never heard or seen any evide...made it into the general market place. David

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ian, please see http://www.largeformatphotography.info/docter-optik.html

I don't think many of us would consider a wide angle process lens to be a wide angle lens for general use.

 

[Ian Grant]

I've seen Arne Croell's page Dan, unfortunately details on East German CZJ lenses are rather sketchy and scarce. Kerry Thalman & Chris Perez wrote about Germinar W's as taking lenses a few years later, they mention having Multicoated versions.

You and I have our own opinions on "Process lenses" for camera use, I'll see my 150mm G Claron in a couple of days

I've found it near impossible to get details on my early 1950's CZJ T (coated) 150mm f4.5 Tessar, it's a n excellent lens better coating than the equivalent Xenar's of the 50's & 60's.

Ian

 

[Dan Fromm]

A question, Ian, and a suggestion. What angle must a lens cover to be called "wide angle?" Re y'r early '50s CZJ Tessar, I'm not sure there's much to know about it. The one question it raises for me is whether that focal length/speed of Tessar was redesigned post-WWII. I b'lieve that Arne Croell has addressed the question of which post-WWII CZJ Tessars were unchanged from pre-war.

Re using process lenses, well, some are very useful. Others, not so. I thought we agreed on this, also that the only way to know for sure whether one would do is to ask it.

 

[Ian Grant]

Dan, I guess that a lens with a coverage of more than 60° would conventionally be termed Wide angle, so with a 35mm camera that's a 35mm focal length lens (63° diagonal), manufacturers termed a 40mm as wide standard lens, a 28mm lens has 75° diagonal Field of View.

Translating to LF isn't quite as simple as usually we want an image circle that allows movements, so a typical standard is usually assumed to be a 150mm lens on 5x4, but on 5x7 it's a wider angle.

Taking simple designs as a base and assuming that a 150mm Tessar is equivalent to a 50mm standard lens on a 35mm camera then:

90mm Angulon 81° equivalent to a 28mm on a 35mm camera
150mm Tessar/Xenar 62° is equivalent to a 50mm on a 35mm camera

On that basis a lens with coverage of around 70° is equivalent to a 35mm wide angle. So as a Germinar W has approx 10° more coverage than a Tessar it's a moderate wide angle lens. Arne Croell doesn't list the Docter 150mm f9 Germinar W, Kerry Thalman says it's a 6 element Plasmat with 70° coverage and Multi coated so it's a different lens to the Apo Germinar W.

We do agree about process lenses

Ian

 

[ajmiller]

Some interesting and 'wide' information here, thanks.
I've just used the lens and dev'd the film so will be posting some contact prints later.
Thanks for the input.

- Tony

 

[Ian Grant]

Tony, you can get an idea of the age of the Dagor from here. Remember the shutter has a serial number as well although sometimes they can be a year or two older than the lens, bought in advance & sat on the shelf awaiting the lens cells

Ian

 

[ajmiller]

Cheers Ian, good link. the lens serial is 2214722 so it looks like circa 1913 I think.

 

[Ian Grant]

Put you glasses on Tony !!! it's in the 2 millions not the 200 thousands so 1937

Goerz was still an independent company in 1913, they only merged with Ica, Zeiss, Ernemann etc in 1926. Also the early Compur shutters were Dial set unlike the later rimset version, which is like all modern shutters.

I have a very nice 165mm Tessar from 1913

Ian

 

[ajmiller]

Put you glasses on Tony !!! it's in the 2 millions not the 200 thousands so 1937
Ian

heh! cheers Ian!

 

[Mark Layne]

Somewhere I have the Zeiss booklet listing all the Zeiss Dagors and their coverage

 

[David Lindquist]

Somewhere I have the Zeiss booklet listing all the Zeiss Dagors and their coverage

The 1933 Zeiss catalogue I referenced above on the cameraeccentric website has this information.

Tony, is your Dagor in a rim set Compur shutter? (I suspect it is). I'd say you have a very very nice example of a relatively late Zeiss made wide angle Dagor. There is a 10 cm f/9 Dagor currently listed on Ebay here with an asking price of $875. as I recall. (In my opinion this seller usually has rather high asking prices). Also this lens looks like it is in a barrel front mounted in a No. 1 Compur.
David

 

[ajmiller]

Thanks David - just had a look on the 'bay and seen it. Here's mine:

cheers

Tony

 

[Ian Grant]

Your supposed to be in the darkroom making prints to show us, not posting images of the lens

It's in very nice condition, you've done well there. There's 3 or 4 on ebay one at a low price at the moment but they are Goerz Am. Opt, not German lenses.

Ian

 

[David Lindquist]

Thanks David - just had a look on the 'bay and seen it. Here's mine:

cheers

Tony

Oh that's nice. Now if I saw that on ebay....

Thank you for providing the serial number and thereby the production year of 1937. I've seen assertions both in print and on the internet that Zeiss got rid of the Dagor line about two years after acquiring it circa 1926. This is one more piece of evidence that that statement is incorrect.
David

 

[ajmiller]

(there was a url link here which no longer exists) - contact printed as I haven't a LF enlarger but hopefully you get the idea. I'm liking the lens already but have to get used to 10 cm focal length.

Thanks

- Tony