JPD,
I see you posted a bit ago, but how do you like this camera? Do you have any images to share made with it?
About 4 months ago I bought one just like this one, in great condition. The lens and shutter are quite large, but when folded up this camera is quite compact. Certainly fun to shoot with.
This beauty arrived yesterday. A Rodenstock 9x12 (rebranded Welta Watson) with a 150mm f:3,5 Eurynar. It was an impulse buy, because it isn't everyday you see these fast Eurynars. The #2 Compur works on all speeds, and the lens elements cleaned up nicely. I have fourteen fitting plate holders, and like a miracle the same amount of 9x12 film sheaths. Maybe I should try it before I try to find fitting filters and hood?
I am still hunting for a good plate camera. How is this camera doing for you? Can I ask how much did you paid for it?
The Eurynar is an excellent sharp lens but like all uncoated Dialytes quite low in contrast. I did a test of a number of pre-WWII lenses attached to bellows on a DSLR 3 maybe 4 years ago, a 120mm f6.8 Dagor, a 165mm f5.3 Tessar, a 135mm f6.8 Goerz-Ihagee (Dialyte) and 110mm ? Meyer WA (Dialyte). All teh lenses are in excellent optical condition the results were as expected, the fewer internal air'glass surfaces the better, the Dagor had excellent contrast, the was a drop with the Tessar, but a very noticeable drop with the Goerz-Ihagee diatye, the Meyer WA was the lowest in contrast.
I remember your interesting test. But isn't the Meyer Weitwinkel a double Gauss (Aristostigmat)?
One of my BJP Almanacs from the 1930's has diagrams of the Meyer lenses and the Wide angle is shown as have two pairs of separate elements (air spaced). My tests would indicate the same in terms of the contrast, a Double Gauss would have much higher contrast even uncoated, and that's my experience with a pre-WWII 90mm f6.8 Angulon.
Ian
Excellent information on contrast and how is Heliars compared with Dagors in terms of contrast? Are there any fast Dagor's for 9x12
Is Hekla 135 f/6.8 same as Dagor 135 f/6.8...I try to find some info Hekla lenses..
The only Meyer wide angle I know of is the Weitwinkel Aristostigmat and it's a double-Gauss. It's still a four air-spaced element lens. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/42/d9/78/42d9781b4e4da2a86632372127ada512.jpg The Angulon is a six element/four group "reverse Dagor" and should have good contrast since it only has four glass-to-air surfaces.
@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?
I must get around to trying my CZJ 135mm f3.5 Tessar, it's fitted to an Jhagee 9x12 Duplex camera.
Thanks. Me thinking now, not to consider Roll-Tenax.
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.
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.
I have a 165mm f6.3 Tessar as well as the quite rare 165mm f5.3 Tessar, I'd like to get a f2.8, f3.5 and f4.5 all in the same 165mm focal length for comparison. I use quite a few Tessar and Type lenses, the Opton Tessar on my Rolleiflax Automat is superb as is the CZJ 150mm T (coated) f4.5 I use with my Super Graphic, then I have Xenar's and Ektar's etc, plus a 210mm f6.3 Congo/Osaka Commercial, the only one taht's not remotely sharp is a Linhof Carl Zeiss 150mm f4.5 Tessar which I was given for the cost of postage (it's in mint condition but useless),
Is your 130mm Dagor German or US made ? It will cover 7x5 or 13x18 stopped down my CP Goerz (Berlin) 120mm f6.8 Dagor does.
Have you tried the 6,3 Tessar? I suspect that the 165 mm ones were made for 10x15 cameras.
Not tried it yet but I have used a pre-WII 135mm f4.5 Tessar for a while on my Crown Graphic and edge/corner, coverage is poor at wider apertures, just about passable at f16 but good at f22, the f3.5 version I'd expect to be that touch softer at the corners and edges. The fast Tessar is the 165mm f2,7 not 2.8 my mistake
The 165mm f5.3 Tessar is an odd one, it appears to have been fitted to one of the larger Kodak roll film cameras, there's very few references to them anywhere and they don't appear to have been sold separately.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?