@JPD I am hooked to this info and looking for plate/roll cameras that comes with Dagor-type lenses. I have also read your post on Roll-Tenax, seems they are not bad cameras to own either.
Curiously some cameras also comes with Dagor 130mm f/6.8 lens or 90mm f/6.8. My humble question is whether these lenses have the same design as of Dagor 135mm f/6.8?
Yes, they have the same design. I have the 130 mm Dagor and have installed it on a 6,5x9 Avus. I'm going to do a couple of tests this spring with this camera and lens. I plan to see if the focus plane is correct when I use a roll film holder and also test my estimates for developing times for Fp4+ in Agfa 44 1+1. So there will be three tests in one: Lens, roll film holder and developing times. It's one of those things I could have done years ago if I wasn't lazy.
The Roll-Tenax is a fun early 1920's camera. But be aware that it doesn't have a pressure plate, no cover for the red window and that modern 120-film is a little thinner than it used to be back then, so the red window may leak light onto the film. It would be a good idea to cut a piece of black paper (the photo album type) and use double sided tape to attach it to the inside of the camera back. That would give you better film flatness, and the cut out in the paper for the red window will act as a frame around it to minimize the risk for light leaks. A cover for the red window can easily be made by using black electrician's tape (with a little piece of black paper on it for just where the red window is so you don't get tape residue on it).
There is always work and fixes you need to do before using these very old plate and roll film cameras. It's not like with a Rolleiflex/cord that you most of the time just need to load with film and go out shooting. For plate cameras you need to find the correct sized plate holders and then sheet film inserts. I had to remove the velvet plus light traps, use compressed air to get rid of old dried powdery residue from the old shellac glue and then glue them back with contact cement.
I must get around to trying my CZJ 135mm f3.5 Tessar, it's fitted to an Jhagee 9x12 Duplex camera.
It could be fun to use fully open! Your 5,3 Tessar is probably sharper, and the "original" 6,3 Tessar would be best, but sometimes the shallow depth of field with a 3,5 would be more important. That's why I wanted the 3,5 Eurynar, even though I'm more than pleased with the 6,3 Dogmar.
I have three sheets left before I can fill the Combiplan tank, so my plan is to test three lenses with one sheet each. The 3,5/150 Eurynar at full aperture, and the 4,5/135 Dogmar and 4,8/120 Linear at working apertures. I wonder if there will be vingetting with the Linear on 9x12 at f:12... That one was another impulse buy, because it's interesting with its eight elements. What I have read it should behave like a Dagor, and only better if the rear lens group is used as a long lens compared to using the Dagor in the same way (which I have no plans to do).