The addiction begins. My first brass lenses

[marbrog]

I wanted to see what all the fuss about these old lenses was about so I bought a lot with 4 of them from swedish ebay. included was a old brass ground glass loupe and a light meter which from my understanding of the manual has you counting seconds while you watch a bit of POP turn grey. I have bought the Vademecum but I was hoping some of you experts could tell me more about these lenses.

Anyway the lenses are:

1. Ross London Anastigmat 1:8 WA F. 150mm "Zeiss Patent". Its a tiny little thing. , the closest Zeiss equivlent I have found seems to be the Protar Series III, but that is f/9 not /8 like this one. It seems to illuminate 8x10 at infinity but Ill have to test if it covers with film someday.

2. "ALFA Dubbel Anastigmat f:6.8 210mm Import" I have no clue what this lens could be, it could be rebranded by some company called Alfa for the swedish market or anywhere else where we spell double like dubbel.

3. Schulze & Billerbeck, Berlin "Euryplan Serie V F:5 No5 F=270mm" I read in the Vademecum that the Euryplan is the forrunner to the modern plasmat, this is a large lens. Something has happened to it however, there are a lot of scratches and cracks inside it. There are some big cracks and a lot of small ones that didnt show in the image that are uniform and form a pattern like you would see on dried up mud. See the attached image or link.

4. Emil Busch "Rapid Aplanat Ser.D F:8 No4 F=340mm" This is the best one cosmetically.

I set up a page with some test shots. A want to apologise in advance however for the poor scanning. This is the best I could get out of this machine with the included software. Dead Link Removed

I would appreciate any information you have about these lenses and if you have a copy of any of them please post an image from it.

Marcus

 

[Ole]

The Ross/Zeiss f/8 WA - might that be a Protar ser. IIa? Two elements in frint, three in the rear? It's not likely to be a III (f:7.2, 2+2) or a IIIa (f:9, also 2+2)...

A "Dubbel" Anastigmat f:6.8 is likely to be a Dagor-type or similar, most 3+3 fully cementes double anastigmats tyrn out to be Dagors or reverse Dagors.

The Euryplan is, as the VM says, a precursor of the Plasmat. Yours seems to have badly decomposed cement.

Emil Busch Rapid Aplanats are great. That may well be the sharpest lens of the whole lot!

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

The euryplan looks like at this point it is unuseable. If it is just the cement, you could get it recemented. If there are indeed surface scratches to the glass as well, it may not be worth doing.

 

[marbrog]

Thanks Ole and TFC.

I really dont know if the Euryplan is totally unusable, I made this image wide open. Its a terrible scan but you can see it looks a bit like a normal lens with a soft filter or a stocking. The highlights bleed in to the shadows. I think it could be useful in some situations.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

it's soft-focus and low-contrast. Looks interesting enough that you might want to place a few inquiries as to the cost of repair- I have no idea how much you have invested in it, but if it isn't much, it could be worth having that bad cement redone. You'd definitely get a boost in overall contrast from it, which would be a good thing.

 

[ongarine]

The Ross/Zeiss f/8 WA - it could be a Protar series IIIa (f:9, also 2+2) because Ross, one of the lens maker patented to built Zeiss Anastigmat outside Germany, often change the f number of the corresponding Zeiss series. The Ross/Zeiss are excellent in use.
See in Vademecum for the confrontation.

A "Dubbel" Anastigmat f:6.8 is likely to be a Dagor-type or similar, many are made in Germany under others name and amnufacturers. Some are really good at the same level of the Goerz Dagor, some are not so well made and tend to be not too much good in use.

The Euryplan is, as the VM says, a precursor of the Plasmat and a very good lens when in good glass conditions. I have some in different focals and also a very rare casket set that in use are excellent. Yours seems to have badly decomposed cement as one of mine that is very similar.

Emil Busch Rapid Aplanats are great as many Aplanat or Rapid rectlinear and agree with Ole, an Aplanat lover like me, sharpest lens of the whole lot and very usefull in taking pictures having the trick to use a focal lenghts a little bit longer that the one required to cover the format you are using.
Enjoy them and if you like them try to have some others...it is always a wonderfull experiences work with these old lenses.

 

[matti]

I planned to bid on that auction as well, but missed it http://www.tradera.com/auction/auction.asp?aid=51162064

I have a big Petzval that also looks a bit like your Euryplan. Not at all that much though. Anyone know the process of recementing? Who recements old lenses? Probably the same people who put shoes on horses and pull teeth with a vise, no?

/matti

 

[marbrog]

Thanks again! This is such a great site.

I payed about $18 each for these lenses, and that is with the low dollar we have now so it sounds like more than it is.

I dont think I will look into getting the Euryplan repaired, I dont really need another sharp lens in a focal length so close to my Symmar 300mm. I think it will get more use as a special application soft lens, but I will need to learn how to develop and print to get the best of its low contrast.

I dont know much about the dagor type lenses. I remember something about them having about 85 degree coverage. So my 210 should cover 8x10 if that is the case. Are they convertable?

Next I think im going to try hunting for a Petzval, what focal lenths would be good for 13x18 and 8x10 for the sharp center fuzzy edges look?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

for a Petzval, for 13x18 you want about 10". For 8x10, about 14-16". Look for a lens that is marked as being one size down from your intended size. Petzvals will fully illuminate a much larger image circle than they will project sharp - for example, I have an 1861 Jamin Darlot that is approximately 12-13", but at portrait focusing distances, it will fully illuminate an 11x14 ground glass. At infinity, it will fully illuminate an 8x10, and misses the corners of 11x14 by about an inch/inch-and-a-half. Most likely it was originally sold to go with a full-plate camera (6 1/2 x 8 1/2).

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ongarine, don't forget that dialytes were also sold as doppel anastigmats. I'll bet that cheap dialyte type DAs greatly outnumber the dagor types. And some of them, e.g., a 130/6.8 Goerz Doppel Anastigmat that a blockhead sold a trusting fool (that's me) as a Dagor are terrible. Always suspect the worst about a Doppel Anastigmat until it has been examined.

 

[highpeak]

I feel your passion for brass lens, Marcus.

I just got something on ebay( three old brass lenses, with sepration, no shutter, etc) , haven't got them yet, so don't know what they are. Anyway, if they are not what I expected, I still can use them as a nice paper weight.

Have fun,

Alex W.

 

[Ole]

... Always suspect the worst about a Doppel Anastigmat until it has been examined.

Very good advice. Sometimes you get lucky, but remember that those cases are pure luck (like my O. Simon Anastigmat, which turned out to be a Hexanar).

Dialytes cost a lot less than Dagors to produce, and were actually (potentially) sharper! But the contrast will always be a lot lower.

 

[ongarine]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Fromm
"... Always suspect the worst about a Doppel Anastigmat until it has been examined."

This could be a very interesting theme for a discussion...
Maybe some Dagors aficionados are not so happy.
Tomorrow, with more time, I will send my opinion based on simple tests on Doppel Anastigmat made by various manufacturers.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ongarine, if you're not likely to die from laughing, read this http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=13109&highlight=lousy+dagor thread all the way to the end. It is on dagors. Remarkably diverging opinions about the lenses are presented in it.

Cheers,

Dan

 

[marbrog]

Excuse the newbie question, but what do you look for with the penlight to see if there are spaces?

 

[JBrunner]

"The addiction begins..."

I think I hear peals of evil laughter from over in Nevada....

 

[Jerevan]

I bought an Emil Busch Aplanat 8" (also marked ROJA) at the same auction site a while ago but I paid about the same for that one lens as you did for the whole lot of yours... But it is in excellent condition so I am happy. Nice to see local people doing LF stuff, too! What camera do you use, Marcus?

 

[Jerevan]

I have a big Petzval that also looks a bit like your Euryplan. Not at all that much though. Anyone know the process of recementing? Who recements old lenses? Probably the same people who put shoes on horses and pull teeth with a vise, no?

/matti

Check out this page: http://www.skgrimes.com/popsci/index.htm for some information. I have some future plans to try to recement an old brass lens, just to see if works out...

 

[Marco B]

Hi,

I don't know if it's any use to you, but a slightly similar lens (ALFA Dubbel Anastigmat f:6.8 240mm) is mentioned in this PDF document (just search for ALFA Dubbel Anastigmat):

http://www.lpfoto.se/swe/auktioner/gamla_auktioner/auktion9/auktion9xpdf/1-34.PDF

Marco

 

[marbrog]

I bought an Emil Busch Aplanat 8" (also marked ROJA) at the same auction site a while ago but I paid about the same for that one lens as you did for the whole lot of yours... But it is in excellent condition so I am happy. Nice to see local people doing LF stuff, too! What camera do you use, Marcus?

Ive seen wildly varying prices for brass lenses there, these where listed in "Objektiv" so maybe people didnt think to look for them there, there was one lens in "Samlar, äldre" (old collectables) at the same time that went for more. But it was marked "porträt" and so maybe more desirable as it could be a petzval.

I have a Sinar Norma with 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 backs and also one slidning 6x7 back and a Zoom 2. And a Norma shutter that works perfect and is very practical with these old lenses.

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Just bought my 13th brass lens. It was unmarked and the description was only 6"x4". I didn't have a brass lens with a 4" diameter so you can always justify buying another one. Maybe you will get a sleeper. I know I have in the past, hence the addiction.

Jim