Goerz Dagors...What's so special?

One reason is that a Dagor lens projects a large circle of good definition.

Take a look here: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum44/...agor-s-i-have-loved-rlp-really-long-post.html

 

There are several explanations.

One is that the lens has few surfaces
and not prone to flare. So the lens
gives good contrast, even uncoated.

Another is that the front and rear
elements are symmetrical; you can
dismount one or the other and lengthen
the lens's focal length.

Another is the lens has a good deal of
coma and, if shot wide-open, will give
some slight glow to highlights as a
result.

Another is their deserved reputation in
the market as first-rate lenses.

And, as already noted, they cover a
wide circle, making them desired as
wide-angle lenses, and for working in
ultra-large formats -- they are small
and light for what they can shoot.

 

Sanders has just about said it all.

My 10x8 Agfa Ansco came with a coated 12" Dagor, it was the best lens available in the late 30's when the camera was made. The seller said it wasn't worth using he'd fitted a 300mm f9 Nikon M instead. I tried the Dagor and found it to be an excellent lens, very sharp, wonderful tonality so despite already having a 300mm f9 Nikon M myself, and the camera coming with a board for it, I've continued using the Dagor in preference.

Good Dagors are quite sort after which is why they fetch high prices, particlarly the longer focal lengths and the late CP Goerz Am Opt, and Schneider Kern versions.

Ian

 

Speaking of Dagors, is it normal for them to be a little soft wide open? I have an unnamed goerz lens that I think is a dagor but it is slightly soft wide open. Perhaps it is a trigor instead?

 

Or a Dogmar

If it's a Dagor it'll be marked as Dagor, or Double Anastigmatic Goerz in English or German depending on where it was made. There are unnamed Goerz lenses on some of the German company's plate & roll film cameras, these would have been the budget versions, the Dogmar and Dagor were used on the top of the range cameras.

Most LF lenses aren't designed for use at full aperture, Tessar's & Tessar types are soft at the edges & corners until stopped down to f16/f22.

Ian

 

Yes, i have 4 Dagors, all coated and i do find them slightly soft wide open and in addition they have a little glow in the highlights due to less than perfect correction for coma. This is one of the signatures that makes the Dagor so special.

 

Personally I kinda like the glow at f6.8, as well as the sharpness stopped down. What great lenses!

 

If they made a 900mm it would be very rare, and likely fetch a lot. I've heard there were some dagors (or double anstigmats) made above 600mm but they rarely are seen, so it's anyones guess how much

 

If its a Trigor it will be marked Trigor with a blue dot. It will also be a f11 lens. The largest Dagor I've seen is a 24". Their literature lists a 30 and 35". The 35" will cover a plate 34x44 sharp to the corners stopped down to f32. I have a 16 1/2" that the serial number dates back to 1903 before the name "Dagor" was used. Naturally it is uncoated and I prefer it that way. It takes great pics.

 

Economics 101

Low supply

Larger demand than supply

Capitalism

I love it.

Sorry to see it go...........

 

The Series IVs I have seen are also f/11...I have owned a 19" and a 30" series IV and regret selling both.

 

Its been a while since I've seen a 19 or 24" Dagor but the ones I saw I'm pretty sure were f7.7 like my 16 1/2". I know the 19 and 24" Artars are f11 and my 30" Artar is f12.5. What were the exact differences in the series III and series IV Dagors? Apparently the series IV Dagor was an f11 lens so the ones I've seen must have been series III.

 

Injecting US politics into a non-Soapbox thread??? Oh, wait, post dated April 1. Must have been an April Fools joke...

 

The Series IV was a wide angle lens. IIRC, Goerz claimed it covered 100 degrees, but I can't seem to find the brochure on Camera Eccentrics site although the Series IV is mentioned in passing in the earlier Goerz catalog. I think Tracy saaid the 19" covered 20x24 wide open - which I can't test - but the small size and large coverage are very attractive to owners of older banquet cameras like the 8x20 and 12x20 Koronas that might gasp and die with a f:7.7 Dagor attached to it. A picture of my 19" Double Anastigmat Series IV is attached, mounted in a Copal #3 on a Linhof Technika board.

Cheers, Steve

 

Has there been any current lens manufactures that have tried to duplicate these lens. They seem to be a basic lens formula, and so sought after it would be a money maker.

 

As someone previously mentioned, the Schneider XXL series is based upon the basic Dagor design with modern coatings entered into the lens equation.

Talk to a lens designer about a Dagor and you hear that you can easily do technically much better for the dollars expended in producing it. As Jim mentioned the market for 19" to 24" Dagors (or their modern equals) is very limited and one would have to produce many (hundreds) to keep the price within the range of the photographers that would want to use them. Look at the suggested retail price for the Schneider XXL series (the 550 mm and the 1100 mm) and you will get a sense of the numbers I am making reference to.

That is what makes them scarce commodities in the used market.

 

Thanks Michael, I thought about the need for a new lens being made now after I posted. Just wasn't thinking faster than my fingers . It does make sense that a manufacture would not produce something that had limited use. To bad if the market was flooded with them they'd be a lot less costly. Thanks for the response

mike c..

 

No problem. I must admit that after acquiring an older 12 and 14" Dagor and shooting with them I was surprised that they do far better in the visual department than I expected based upon when they were manufactured and the production techniques from that early era. Of course if you are contact printing ULF as opposed to enlarging a smaller format the visual criteria you could be considering would likely be significantly different. In a different arena is the cult like respect afforded these unique lenses.

 

Yes I do see the difference between contact printing an enlarging,I was able to use an old Kodak D2 8X10 with a 12" Bush&Lomb lens. and was very impressed with the contacts prints the negs produced. There is a certain quality that I can't get enlarging negs for my hasselblad . Hope to invest in a LF in the future some time and have fun using those lenses,I'll get there some time.

mike c.