Please help about some rare brass lens!

[photojournalism]

Hello!
Have anyone know anything about the brass lens - Planistigmat 313mm f6.6 Phos Varsovie?
As I know the owner of Phos factory (founded 1904) was Alexander Ginsberg who was studied and had work in Carls Zeiss company. This lens seems symmetrical and convertible. If you know what kind is this lens, how much it can cost today or any other information will be useful.
Thank you, Andrey.
largeformatphoto@yandex.ru

 

[photojournalism]

Found some interesting information:

It appears, Alexander Ginsberg was married to Carl Zeiss daughter, that's why he had access to Zeiss lens design and patents.

 

[photojournalism]

P.S.
Here is the pic of this lens

 

[Ole]

At the moment I don't know anything about it, but I might find out something when I get home next week.

 

[Whiteymorange]

Vade Mecum lists some (very little) info on aplanistigmat lenses by "Fos" and says in another place that the Warsaw factory produced lenses for export from 1899 to 1915. Not much more, I'm afraid.

 

[desertrat]

Count Reflections

You can get some information on how the lens is constructed by counting reflections. Close the diaphragm all the way so you can check the front and rear groups separately. That way you don't have to look through all the lens groups at once. Look at the reflections of a small light bulb in the front lens group. Bright reflections are where glass meets air. Very dim reflections are where two elements are cemented together. Count the bright and dim reflections. Then do the same with the rear lens group. Here are some examples:

Two bright reflections - single lens element
Two bright and one dim reflection - a cemented doublet
Two bright and two dim reflections - a cemented triplet
Two bright and three dim reflections - a cemented quadruplet
Four bright reflections - two single elements, air spaced
Four bright and one dim reflection - a single element, an airspace, and a cemented doublet.

There are more combinations, but this is a start. Let us know what you find.

 

[photojournalism]

Thank you! That'll be great!

 

[photojournalism]

Thank you for information.

 

[photojournalism]

You can get some information on how the lens is constructed by counting reflections. Close the diaphragm all the way so you can check the front and rear groups separately. That way you don't have to look through all the lens groups at once. Look at the reflections of a small light bulb in the front lens group. Bright reflections are where glass meets air. Very dim reflections are where two elements are cemented together. Count the bright and dim reflections. Then do the same with the rear lens group. Here are some examples:

Two bright reflections - single lens element
Two bright and one dim reflection - a cemented doublet
Two bright and two dim reflections - a cemented triplet
Two bright and three dim reflections - a cemented quadruplet
Four bright reflections - two single elements, air spaced
Four bright and one dim reflection - a single element, an airspace, and a cemented doublet.

There are more combinations, but this is a start. Let us know what you find.

Hello! Thank you!
It's great test, I didn't know about it!
The test shows a cemented doublet in both elements.
I analysed some information, thought a lot and decided that planistigmats were made according Carl Zeiss Double-Protar design.
What do you think?

Andrey

 

[Ole]

If it's a cemented doublet in each cell it's not a Doppelprotar - that takes at least three elements in each cell.

 

[photojournalism]

If it's a cemented doublet in each cell it's not a Doppelprotar - that takes at least three elements in each cell.

Thanks! And so, what design it can be? May be Protar?
http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/zeiss/p22.html

 

[photojournalism]

Hm, It can't be Protar because the protars have other apertures....

 

[photojournalism]

Sorry, sorry. I had mistake - here are two bright and two dim reflections - here is a cemented triplet! Double protar!
thanks to all!

 

[photojournalism]

Damn! I'm an idiot I was counting the reflection in window. The problem stay - here are two bright and one dim reflection looks like goerz dagor.

 

[Ole]

Two bright and one dim is more likely to be an Aplanat than anything else - and a Dagor would have two bright and two dim.

Another clue is: If tilting the lens while looking at the reflections, do all reflections move in the same direction? On an Aplanat they will, on an unsymmetrical 2+2 Anastigmat ("Protar") they will in one cell but not the other.

 

[sun of sand]

Sven Schroder6-Aug-2007, 19:03
Hi

I have a Hermagis booklet which includes the Aplanastigmat, its in French but I can make out with the illustration its dagor/collinear type the subtitle is "Double Anastigmat Symetrique" wideopen 56 degree coverage with 90 degree's at F14, and is convertable with each elements F12.3 and 1.75 times the combined focal length. It was available in Type A 75mm to 136mm and Type B from160mm to 450mm yours is Type B F6.8 and covers 18x24 wideopen and 30x40 at f14. So think French dagor and you won't be far out.

Thanks and Regards
Sven


just happened to find this and remembered the thread

 

[sun of sand]

Aplanastigmat Hermis Paris


310mm, f:6,8 and it opens to about 4,5. Very comfortable to see on the screen-glass.
It seems to have a huge image circle that can cover over 11x14

 

[Ole]

Well - if we could be certain that Phos and Hermagis meant the same thing when they used the word "Aplanastigmat", that would help. The problem is that it's quite likely they didn't...

 

[sun of sand]

well that sucks, Ole

I've never seen planastigmat before

 

[photojournalism]

Sorry, I was too inattentive. Here is the final point: The Phos Planistigmat has the same reflections as the Goerz Dagor - two bright and two dim. It means that the Planistigmat is cemented triplet. It is the wide angle lens for large format 11x14 +.
Many thanks to all!

 

[photojournalism]

Our history gets an interesting turn. As we found the Phos Planisigmat (produced period 1899-1915) is the symmetrical double anastigmat like a Dagor. But we know that Zeiss bought the Goerz only in 1926. And we also know that Emil Von Hoegh tried to be employed to Zeiss and had show his Double Anastigmat, but Carl Zeiss didn't give Emil Von Hoegh the work and after that Von Hoegh was employed to Goerz and created his famous Dagor.

----------------"Ken Ruth at Photography at Bald Mountain is an enthusiast concerning Dagors. He told me the following: "This 27 y.o. mathematician (Emil Von Hoegh), went to Zeiss with his new design for a symmetrical double anastigmat. On his way to Jena, he stopped at a fair and won a goose in a raffle. He knocked at the Zeiss door looking for job as a lens designer and offering his lens to be manufactured. They look at this guy with a goose under his arm and obviously the answer was "Thank you very much" So, he went to Goerz in Berlin and was immetiately hired as a chief optical designer. Goerz started producing the lens in 1894 and in
1895 they reached 35.000 units. "-------------


How do you think is it possible that Zeiss and Ginsberg decided to produce the same design lens (by schemes of Von Hoegh) WITHOUT a patent. It was possible in Poland in Russian Empire but not in Germany. If this truth - we have a firs fake production in the world LOL

Special thanks to Bauloff Viktor for information.

Regards, Andrey

 

[Ole]

The Dagor is not the only cemented 2x 3-element anastigmat. There's also the Collinear (Voigtländer), the Hexanar (O. Simon), the Protar Ser. VI (only Carl Zeiss Jena from 1909 to 1912), the Amatar (Carl Zeiss), the Angulon (Schneider), and a couple of others too. They all have the elements in different orders, with the exception of the Amatar and the Angulon which are in the same order but with different design criteria.

So is it a "fake", a "spinoff", a "derivarive", or a different design?

 

[photojournalism]

Hm. I don't know about Protar ser. VI (http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/zeiss/zeiss.html). Actually the Phos can be like the Protar ser VI and the fact that Phos has the millimeter marked iris ring says about it also.

 

[Ole]

Precisely - that's the 1907 catalogue, not 1909. http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/zeiss/p1.html

I've only seen one of those convertible VIa's, and didn't buy it. Its rarity is no great loss (unlike the Amatar).

Zeiss seems to have marked the aperture on the majority of convertible lenses in mm - my Doppel-Amatar is typical. It's not unreasonable that Phos and others did the same.