Rolleicord with Dagor taking lens??!

OK, photonetters, explain <A

HREF="http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?

ViewItem&item=3813940794&category=11721&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBWA%

3AIT&rd=1">this one</A>.

<p>

Here we have a prewar Rolleicord, I don't know which model, with what

appears to be a 75/9 Dagor as the taking lens. This should be a

Triotar, right?

<p>

My guess is that someone replaced the original Triotar on this camera

with a Dagor off an old folder or something. Alternatively, were

prewar Cords ever sold equipped with Dagors?

looks like someone squeezed in a dagor - they were not sold like this, though a few prewar cords had tessars (they were ordered by the gestapo)

i'd say , wait for a better one Dave, let this one pass . if you could find a Rolleicord Vb in good working order , that will be the best among this breed of cords , IMHO .. pc

In my experience a Dagor or Dogmar would be a better lens than the Triotar, irrespective of what was OEM. If it works, don�t knock it!. I had an ancient Dogmar 105/3.5 in an enormous dial set Compur that I had to remove from the Mini Graphic before I could close the bed, but it was head and shoulders above anything else usually encountered on the Graphic. I�ve had Triotars on both Rolleicords and Ikoflexes and while they may be a shade better than the meniscus on a box camera they left much to be desired on a MF reflex. Take some pictures with it and then judge whether the deal is right.

Thanks for info-- interesting modification. I wasn't actually thinking of using it as a TLR, but it crossed my mind that the Dagor could be cannibalized to become a semi-wide lens on my 23 Graphic. On the other hand, it's probably a very old lens, even older than the camera. Not something I'll lose any sleep over. Cheers.

The basic Goerz Dagor design goes back to about 1890. It was well corrected for astigmatism, color, distortion, and spherical aberration. Some were made as "convertables" in where the front or rear groups could be used individually as longer focal length lenses. (They were not as well corrected this way.) There were many variants of this lens, some being manufactured today.

If I were you, I'd consider the real possibility that someone screwed in a Dagor front lens group, while the rear group could still be from the original Triotar set. Also, each of the viewing and taking lenses on all Rollei's were carefully measured for their actual focal lengths, and paired as matched sets. This is necessary for the two lenses to track identically in focusing. If someone did change the entire taking lens in the camera you're considering, it's pretty unlikely that they were also able to find a perfectly matched viewing lens. By the way, Proxars (and the later Rolleinars) were also measured and matched as sets. An original set of Proxars will always bear consecutive serial numbers.

Mark Bouquet wrote: "If I were you, I'd consider the real possibility that someone screwed in a Dagor front lens group, while the rear group could still be from the original Triotar set."

 

Nope. The shutter isn't the original one, so I don't believe that. And the aperture scale matches the Dagor.

Harry Geron wrote: "I�ve had Triotars on both Rolleicords and Ikoflexes and while they may be a shade better than the meniscus on a box camera they left much to be desired on a MF reflex."

 

You must be joking? Triotar is not that far behind the Tessar. The 3,5 Triotars on my Rolleicord II's are very sharp and contrasty. My 4,5 Triotars are also good. The only Triotar I've got that's soft is the 3,8 version on my Rolleicord I.

The Triotar is of simple triplet construction based on designs of over a hundred years ago, largely superceded by the Tessars. They are adequate up to about f/5.6 (if carefully assembled). They were not too good off-axis for wide angle lenses. (Neither were some of the Tessars.) This type of construction was often used for lenses in the cheaper slide projectors.

Patrick: Well, I may have been hyping a bit but I never had a Triotar that was worth the saving in cost over the Tessar. My first �Cord was of about the �36 vintage and my Ikoflex about the same era. It finally sunk into me that if I wanted quality I would have to bite the bullet and move to the �Flex. F&H must have had a good reason to switch to the more expensive lens. <p> If it was indeed a replacement, someone seems to have had a good reason to replace the Triotar with the Dagor. Goertz was part of the Zeiss combine after about 1927 and it isn�t too far fetched to suppose that someone ordered it that way from the factory. In any event, if it is properly adjusted for focus and match to the viewing lens, then I would think it would be a fun combination assuming that all other controlling factors are copacetic.

Well, someone got a steal on this: $37 + shipping. Interesting old camera anyway.

I'm not talking about posh cameras like Rolliflexes, but a simple TLR called Altiflex 1H. I would like to know what the shutter is. There is no name on it, the speeds go from 1/25 to 1/00 th sec, and T and B.The apertures are 4.5, 6.3, 9, 12, 18, 25. The camera was made around 1936 I believe. I bought this last week for a few quid, but apart from being dirty and very worn works OK, as far as I can see. I'm waiting for my first film to be processed. Cyril Lowe.