Historical lens manufacturers from Europe, + lesser known/smaller ones from Germany, France and the UK

[AERO]

UK...ALDIS.
I had a camera with an Aldis Uno lens..old plate job.

 

[simplejoy]

UK...ALDIS.
I had a camera with an Aldis Uno lens..old plate job.

Thank you - added it!

 

[Romanko]

Kamera Werkstätten Guthe & Thorsch

 

[simplejoy]

Kamera Werkstätten Guthe & Thorsch

Thank you! Did they manufacture lenses as well?

 

[Dan Pavel]

SWITZERLAND - Kern Paillard

 

[simplejoy]

SWITZERLAND - Kern Paillard

Thanks - that's right! I've overlooked this one because I had Kern Aarau on it. But seems like that's a completely different company, right?

 

[Dan Fromm]

Thanks - that's right! I've overlooked this one because I had Kern Aarau on it. But seems like that's a completely different company, right?

The same.

By the way, there were many lens makers in Europe in the 19th and early 20th centuries. I gave you a link to the list. Go there, look in Fabre Vol. I and look at the references in my Berthiot LF lenses article for links to photography magazines of that vintage. Also look in Eder.

 

[Dan Pavel]

Kern made the cine lenses in collaboration with Paillard, makers of the Bolex cameras. I don't know what the collaboration consisted of but the cine lenses are marked Kern Paillard and not Kern Aarau. I think that it should be either considered a different entity on the list or Paillard should be added, as well.

 

[Romanko]

Thank you! Did they manufacture lenses as well?

Yes, cheaper lenses for Praktiflex, KW Pilot and Reflex Box cameras are made by KW (at least they are marked so).

 

[Romanko]

Contessa-Nettel

Ernemann​

ICA​

 

[simplejoy]

The same.

By the way, there were many lens makers in Europe in the 19th and early 20th centuries. I gave you a link to the list. Go there, look in Fabre Vol. I and look at the references in my Berthiot LF lenses article for links to photography magazines of that vintage. Also look in Eder.

Thank you very much for all the resources you've linked to in your great document! I'm trying to look through anything relevant there. After a quick look through a couple of Fabre documents, I wasn't able to spot much in terms of lens makers not already mentioned in the list. The only new ones I've seen so far are "Hartnack & A. Prazmowski" and "M. Berthiot" (which I'm not sure about... does it have to do with SOM Berhiot / Benoist Berhiot?). Or are you mainly referring to the "Table alphabétique des noms propres" towards the end? If so, I'll still have to look up all the names there in order to determine potential lens makers among those.

I couldn't find anything on lens makers in Eder's book (Ausführliches Handbuch der Photographie)... seems like a book mainly focused on the chemical processes and other scientific aspects of photography. Or did I look at the wrong book or chapter ?

I'll take a look at your Berthiot articles and check out the links - always a joy to go there and see these wonderful lenses and your well researched articles. Thanks so much for generously sharing all that information! As I may have mentioned before, you've certainly been one of the main inspirations for me to try and do some research/write some articles about yet undocumented areas of photographic history myself.

Kern made the cine lenses in collaboration with Paillard, makers of the Bolex cameras. I don't know what the collaboration consisted of but the cine lenses are marked Kern Paillard and not Kern Aarau. I think that it should be either considered a different entity on the list or Paillard should be added, as well.

Thanks! I'll list them as "(Kern) Paillard" for now... perhaps there's a better distinction.

Contessa-Nettel

Ernemann​

ICA​

Great - thank you!

 

[Europan]

Kern made the cine lenses in collaboration with Paillard, makers of the Bolex cameras. I don't know what the collaboration consisted of but the cine lenses are marked Kern Paillard and not Kern Aarau. I think that it should be either considered a different entity on the list or Paillard should be added, as well.

Paillard and Kern had a contract for the manufacture of optical parts and lenses effective January 1st, 1943. Kern had made lenses for ciné equipment before, triplets and four-glass lenses for the company Bol of Geneva.

When the H camera proved a successful product, slow at the beginning but continuously gaining pace, Kern made a first set of C-mount lenses in 1943, triplets throughout. You had an YVAR 25 mm, f/2.5, as normal focal length, an YVAR 15 mm, f/2.8, and an YVAR 75 mm, f/2.5, all glass not bloomed. Coating began in 1944.

Cooperation ended in 1975 when Kern was broke. The managers had failed to conquer fields they left out for decades, for instance projection lenses for the 35-mm. film cinema. They were so bound by the contract that they weren’t allowed to sell the Vario-Switar 8~36, f/1.9, in a non RX-version (for Beaulieu Reflex 8 and other cameras). Just two examples

 

[simplejoy]

Paillard and Kern had a contract for the manufacture of optical parts and lenses effective January 1st, 1943. Kern had made lenses for ciné equipment before, triplets and four-glass lenses for the company Bol of Geneva.

When the H camera proved a successful product, slow at the beginning but continuously gaining pace, Kern made a first set of C-mount lenses in 1943, triplets throughout. You had an YVAR 25 mm, f/2.5, as normal focal length, an YVAR 15 mm, f/2.8, and an YVAR 75 mm, f/2.5, all glass not bloomed. Coating began in 1944.

Cooperation ended in 1975 when Kern was broke. The managers had failed to conquer fields they left out for decades, for instance projection lenses for the 35-mm. film cinema. They were so bound by the contract that they weren’t allowed to sell the Vario-Switar 8~36, f/1.9, in a non RX-version (for Beaulieu Reflex 8 and other cameras). Just two examples

Thank you very much - that‘s some excellent information!

 

[Ernst-Jan]

I dont know if you already stumbled upon this website about Dutch camera manufacturers

Nedinsco Info - De Nederlandse Camera

At the Nedinsco page it's explicit mentioned they developed an own lens.

At an camera fair a year ago I saw an impressive lens for aerial photography made by "Oude Delft" - it came from the Dutch Airforce and was sold including army style boxes and all. The lens looked pristine but was out of my budget, especially for something I don't have an use for.

 

[simplejoy]

I dont know if you already stumbled upon this website about Dutch camera manufacturers

Nedinsco Info - De Nederlandse Camera

At the Nedinsco page it's explicit mentioned they developed an own lens.

At an camera fair a year ago I saw an impressive lens for aerial photography made by "Oude Delft" - it came from the Dutch Airforce and was sold including army style boxes and all. The lens looked pristine but was out of my budget, especially for something I don't have an use for.

Thank you very much - that's very interesting! You're right - Oude Delft made some great Aerial lenses with very impressive specs. Would love to try one like that. I have one by a German and another by an Italian maker, but they're not as fast as those Oude Delft or the Swiss (Wild) lenses.


AUSTRIA
(Voigtlaender) (early)
Reichert Wien
Karl Kahles
Gerstendörfer
K. Fritsch & Prokesch
Weingartshofer
Eumig
Carl Dietzler

CZECH REPUBLIC
Druopta
Eta Praha
Kolar
Meopta

FRANCE
AFR
(Angenieux)
(Benoist Berthiot)
(Boyer)
Cindo
Clement et Gilmer
Darlot
Demaria-Lapierre
Derogy
Dupluich
D. Degen
E. Français
F. Faliez
Gallus
(Hermagis)
Huet
Itier
Kengott
Krauss
Lumiere
OIP
(Optique & Précision de Levallois = Foca)
Pathe Freres
Pulligny et Puyo
Roussel
(Som Berthiot)
Zion

GERMANY
A. Schacht
(Agfa)
(Astro Berlin)
C. Friedrich München
Contessa-Nettel
Docter Optics
(Emil Busch)
(Enna)
(Ernemann)
Feinmess
Finetta
Gerlach
(Goerz)
Guthe & Thorsch
ICA
Iloca
(ISCO Optik)
Koehler
Laack
Leidolf
Leitmeyr
(Leitz)
Liesegang
Ludwig
(Meyer Optik Goerlitz)
Meyer F.F. (Ferdinand Franz, not Hugo/Goerlitz)
Moeller J.D
Montanus
Muller & Wetzig
Noris (projection lenses only?)
Oehler J.
OMFA
Piesker
Plaubel
Rietzschel
(Rodenstock)
Roeschlein Kreuznach
Ruo Optik
(Schneider Kreuznach)
Schulze & Billerbeck
Simon
(Staeble)
(Steinheil)
Steiner Optik
TeWe Berlin
Voigtlaender
Wachter
Will Wetzlar
Wirgin
(Zeiss)
Zwierzina

HUNGARY
Gamma
MOM (Magyar Optikai Művek)

ITALY
Ballerio
Capelli
Chinaglia Domenico
Comi
Durst (possibly 3rd party lenses only?)
Ducati
FAF
Filotecnica Salmoiraghi
Ganzini
GNM
Grilli
GPM
Industria Scientifica Ottica
Ligny
Korstika
Officine Galileo
OMI
PEB
Photoalpha
SCAT
SEDE
SIRIO
Torrani

LATVIA
Minox

THE NETHERLANDS
Nedinsco
Old Delft
Philips

NORWAY
(?)

PORTUGAL
Leica Portugal (any lens development?)

ROMANIA
IOR

SPAIN
Curz Optical (projection lenses only?)

SWEDEN
(?)

SWITZERLAND
Kern Aarau
(Kern) Paillard
Suter
Spyr (projection lenses only?)
Wild Heerbrugg

UK
Aldis
Beck
Chadwick
(Cooke)
Corfield
Coronet
(Dallmeyer)
Dollond
Ensign
Grubb
Hailer Adam
Halina
Hall
Houghton Butcher
Kershaw
Kodak Ltd.
Lancaster
Leech Optics
Optomax
Perken Son and Rayment
Pullin Optical
Rochester Optical
(Ross)
Sands & Hunter
Sutton
Swift and Son
(Taylor & Hobson)
Watson
(Wray)

 

[Dan Fromm]

That's nice. How will your list change my life?

 

[simplejoy]

That's nice. How will your list change my life?

Not sure it will... but here you go:

One day K. walks into an antique store in Hong Kong and spots an old lens with a name he's not familar with, but has a vague feeling of having read it before once. He looks it up and indeed, it turns out it shows up as part of someone's list on a forum and surprisingly is listed under "Germany". The lens itself however is nowhere to be found on the internet, so curious about the rare find, he's posting about it there and starting his own research on the matter in order to preserve what he's learned.

One day P. gets a call from a LF photographer friend, who found a very old projection lens in the attic and asks if he might be able to restore the dirty piece of glass and metal. P. manages to get the lens back in shape and finds a reference to the possible lens maker in an online list, however the manufacturer's name has a different spelling. Surprised by that - and assuming it might just be an inscription error - he reaches out to the creator of said list to clarify. It turns out the lens was produced under slightly different names in different countries. While nothing groundbreaking, it is an interesting thing to find out decades after the fact and it they even manage to find out that a number of different optical facilities were involved in the manufacturing of a now forgotten lens series.

Finally, L. heads out to the Biblioteca Nacional de Portugal do find out about something else he has a deep interest in. While sitting there he remembers having a conversation about the curious aspect of Portugal not having a single local lens manufacturer through history. Wondering himself if this might just be due to poor documentation, he starts to look through the archives... A couple of days later he's able to name three documented lens makers from Portugal.

Is anything like that very likely? Perhaps not. Does anything like that make the people in the street rejoice? I doubt it. It's all extremely niche stuff after all. It surely won't change your life, particularly given the vast amount of research you've already done on your own. Does it have a tiny chance of inspiring someone else to do some research or share something unique they've found on the matter, and in doing so creating a more complete picture of a long-gone era of photographic lenses? I sure hope so.

 

[MattKing]

That's nice. How will your list change my life?

Perhaps it will give you some simple joy.

 

[simplejoy]

Perhaps it will give you some simple joy.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Not sure it will... but here you go:

Thanks for the answer. There are two histories behind my question.

One of my hobbies is keeping and breeding fish. I've even gone to the tropics to collect them. Aquarists are crazy for lists of fish names. I know one, especially nuts, who dedicated much of his life to compiling a list of valid names of fish in one group. I thought his effort was, um, silly because having a list of names without a way of matching the fish in hand to a name adds nothing.

I moved up in format from 24x36 somewhat before the 'net became generally available. I was given a copy of a lens collector's vade mecum around then and studied it. The info in it helped me recognize good but little known lenses offered at very low prices in camera shows and later on eBay. My point is that if I find a weird old lens with an unknown (to me) lens maker's name, not a retailer's, engraved on it I don't need a list of names to start trying to find information about it. Simply knowing, as in your last example, that there were three lens makers A, B and C in Portugal may be nice but doesn't advance any of my causes; I still have to find lenses they made.

Please don't misunderstand. Tastes differ. What pleases me may please no one else. And what doesn't please me may please many others. Chacun a son gout, or, as we say in English, Jack's son has the gout.

Cheers,

Dan

 

[simplejoy]

Thanks for the answer. There are two histories behind my question.

One of my hobbies is keeping and breeding fish. I've even gone to the tropics to collect them. Aquarists are crazy for lists of fish names. I know one, especially nuts, who dedicated much of his life to compiling a list of valid names of fish in one group. I thought his effort was, um, silly because having a list of names without a way of matching the fish in hand to a name adds nothing.

I moved up in format from 24x36 somewhat before the 'net became generally available. I was given a copy of a lens collector's vade mecum around then and studied it. The info in it helped me recognize good but little known lenses offered at very low prices in camera shows and later on eBay. My point is that if I find a weird old lens with an unknown (to me) lens maker's name, not a retailer's, engraved on it I don't need a list of names to start trying to find information about it. Simply knowing, as in your last example, that there were three lens makers A, B and C in Portugal may be nice but doesn't advance any of my causes; I still have to find lenses they made.

Please don't misunderstand. Tastes differ. What pleases me may please no one else. And what doesn't please me may please many others. Chacun a son gout, or, as we say in English, Jack's son has the gout.

Cheers,

Dan

Of course there might not be an obvious immediate benefit in the eyes of many people to having such a list. (I personally think it can be a great thing to know which country an unknown lens manufacturer is from, in order to know how to search for more information, but that might just be me...) However I think it's always a good thing to fill in the gaps, don't you think? You've called the book A Lens Collector's Vade Mecum "Idiosyncratic, incomprehensible, inconsistent, sometimes incorrect, often infuriating, invaluable."

Don't you think it can be valuable to improve upon that and find out more about the things this book (or probably the majority of any resource you've assembled) is still missing or getting wrong? I personally might not be able to do much with that information, sure... but perhaps someone else will come along in a couple of years and combine several aspects (lens model and manufacturer overview, country of origin, time of manufacturing, lens design, patents etc.) into a searchable archive. If it weren't for a couple of people with ambitions like that (+ a number of lesser educated souls like myself, adding tiny bits here and there) plus of course the Internet Archive a really big chunk of information on all of these old lenses would probably be already lost or at least incredibly hard to find.

So if I can perhaps lay some of the groundwork for something another person with a real plan might be able to use in terms of accessible information on a topic very close to my heart, I'll happily do my part.

BTW. thanks for your link to the https://cnum.cnam.fr/ - what an awesome resource.... it's a pity I don't understand the French language.

 

[Dan Fromm]

BTW. thanks for your link to the https://cnum.cnam.fr/ - what an awesome resource.... it's a pity I don't understand the French language.

Google Translate was disastrous when first introduced. These days it is much better. Try using it for French. Pre-1914 French photographic literature is in a much more, um, classical and easier for GT than present-day French.

As I remarked in the list, everything on the 'net is ephemeral. This is especially true of posts on bulletin boards like this one. I see no way of putting up anything like the list in a way that will make it findable in, probably, ten years. This goes for the articles I wrote that are on galerie-photo.com. Google searches will find some of them, but not the versions on archive.org. To express the thought in other words, digital works on the 'net, no matter where, are poor substitutes for physical documents -- books, journals, even newspapers on microfilm -- in libraries. And even they are at risk of going away.

 

[16:9]

With great knowledge comes great curmudgeonliness.

From a list of optics with names that sound sus in English, you're welcome to add 'Bender Optical Works' of Newcastle, UK. See also 'Nooky' (Leitz) and 'Veginar' (Pluscanar of Yugoslavia). Perhaps others know others . . . ?

 

[koraks]

I see no way of putting up anything like the list in a way that will make it findable in, probably, ten years.

Yet, APUG posts from the zeroes seem to have survived just fine. The same goes for a plethora of other online sources. Anything not made available online will be guaranteed to not be retrievable online a decade from now - or even tomorrow. The beauty of information is that it can be reproduced at near-zero marginal cost. Thus, it's not a question of either uploading it or saving it in a physical repository - one doesn't exclude the other.

Feel free to share your information. Maybe it'll survive for a year, for ten years, or a hundred. Who's to say. We can only find out if we try.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Yet, APUG posts from the zeroes seem to have survived just fine. The same goes for a plethora of other online sources. Anything not made available online will be guaranteed to not be retrievable online a decade from now - or even tomorrow. The beauty of information is that it can be reproduced at near-zero marginal cost. Thus, it's not a question of either uploading it or saving it in a physical repository - one doesn't exclude the other.

Feel free to share your information. Maybe it'll survive for a year, for ten years, or a hundred. Who's to say. We can only find out if we try.

Recherche de fichiers Schneider