Camera Collecting, The Incurable Passion, How to know if you’re a camera collector and what you can do about it.

Camera Collecting, The Incurable Passion, Part 1

How to know if you’re a camera collector and what you can do about it.

By Jason Schneider

I took my first tentative steps down the primrose path of camera collecting way back in 1960 when I acquired my first Leica, a display model IIIg with 50mm f/2.8 collapsible Elmar lens in a red Leica snap top display case. The poor thing had been languishing at Village Photo Shop in Rockville Center, Long Island ever since the store first acquired it in 1957 and the kindly old German guy who owned the place took pity on me and let me buy if for 10% below the list price of $273.00. Since he was an authorized Leica dealer at the time, this was strictly verboten, but much appreciated. While I didn’t buy that camera as a collectible, unbeknownst to me, I had been mortally bitten by the Leica bug, and shortly thereafter I acquired two more Leicas in short order. The first one was a gorgeous black Leica II (Model D) with a collapsible nickel-finished 50mm f/2.5 Hektor snagged for the grand sum of $39.50 at Willoughby’s camera store on W. 32nd St. in Manhattan. It had been consigned to the “junk pile” as an “old camera with an uncoated lens” and I didn’t have the heart to haggle over the price. Next came a near-mint 5-digit Leica I (Model A) with a 50mm f/3.5 Elmar I bought from Minifilm (also on 32nd St.) for 60 bucks plus tax after some spirited bargaining.

My first de facto collectible camera, the gorgeous Leica IIIg with collapsible 50mm f:2.8 Elma...png
My first de facto collectible was this gorgeous Leica IIIg with collapsible 50mm f/2.8 Elmar I bought back in 1960 at a whopping 10% discount.

Leica II (Model D) Front View  showing added strap lugs,  nickel hardware and 50mm f:2.5 Hekt...jpeg
Leica II (Model D) of 1932 with collapsible 50mm f/2.5 Hektor. I snagged mine for a paltry $39.50. Ah, the joys of camera collecting in the '60s!

Leica i (Model A) with 50mm f:3.5 Elmar, I snagged mine fir 60 bucks and it's still one of my ...jpg
The iconic Leica 1 (Model A) with 50mm f/3.5 Elmar. I acquired mine for a mere 60 bocks plus sales tax in the '60s, but it took a bit of haggling

For some unfathomable reason, acquiring 3 vintage Leicas in the course of around 6 months seems to have opened the floodgates, and shortly thereafter I began buying old cameras at a furious pace—a 3A Folding Kodak Autographic Special (you could still buy 122 roll film for it until 1970), a 9x12cm Voigtlander Avus film pack and plate camera with a 135mm f/4.5 Skopar and a Rada 120 roll film adapter, a great hulking 4x5 RB Series B Graflex with a B&L Tessar, a flawless pre-war Zeiss Super Ikonta A with an uncoated 70mm f/3.5 Tessar---I could easily go on for 5 more paragraphs, but you get the idea. By 1969, when I presented my idea for a column on camera collecting to the late great Herbert (Burt) Keppler, then Editorial Director at Modern Photography, I had amassed a motley and variegated collection of nearly 100 cameras. Keppler, who became my mentor and lifelong friend, approved the project, and dubbed the monthly column The Camera Collector, a name that stuck when we both moved over to Popular Photography in 1987 and I was named Editor in Chief. The reason Burt Keppler was sympathetic and supportive to what was then a wacky editorial idea is simple—we were kindred spirits. He had been a de facto camera collector for decades, and his collection was at least twice as big as mine! We had both experienced what was, in effect, the golden age of camera collecting, the days before camera collecting was “a thing” and individual camera collectors (with the possible exceptions of Leica, Contax, and Nikon collectors) largely pursued their passion in solitude.

Kodak 3A Autographic Special of 1916 is generally considered the first camera with a built-in...jpeg
Kodak 3A Special of 1916 was first with a built-in coupled rangefinder. I ran plenty of 122 film through mine before they discontinued it in 1970.

RB Series B 4x5 Graflex of the '20s is still a frmidable picture taker and an American classic.jpg
RB Series B 4x5 Graflex of the '20s is a great hulking large format SLR. It's not the last word in convenience but it's a great picture taker!

Prewar Zeiss Super Ikonta A provides 45 x 6cm format on 120 roll film. Mine has an uncoated 7c...jpg
My prewar Zeiss Super Ikonta A is a pocketable medium format classic and its uncoated 7cm f/3.5 Zeiss Tessar lens has gorgeous rendition.

Are you a camera collector? Here’s how you can tell.

If your office, storage room, or shelving units are cluttered with scores of different cameras, many of which you seldom if ever use for taking pictures, you are surely a camera collector by default. However, there are many less virulent cases of collector-itis that qualify.

Warning signs of the dreaded Camera Collecting syndrome:
  • Buying cameras simply because they’re beautiful objects and not intending to use them for making pictures.
  • Buying cameras for which film is not readily available (such as 620, 127, 616, 116, 828, 122 roll film sizes which are only sold at extravagant prices by custom film rolling outfits).
  • Buying film (analog) cameras at all, especially those where the line is no longer in production, like Bronicas, Rolleiflex TLRs, Mamiyas (all format) rangefinder Canons, Nikons, and Contaxes, et al.
  • Buying cameras with the thought of someday using them, but only fondling and firing them from time to time.
  • Making up ingeniously plausible excuses to your spouse regarding the excessive camera purchases that show up on your credit card.
  • Discovering that you have bought more than 10 used cameras on eBay within the last 12 months, all of which are discontinued and no longer available brand new.
  • Buying more than one roll of film per month. The mere act of buying film doesn’t prove you’re a camera collector, but there’s a high correlation between the quantity of film you purchase and whether you’re exhibiting camera collector syndrome.
What kind of camera collector are you, and what can you do about it?

I pride myself on being a user-collector rather than a showcase collector because I have fun making pictures with my vintage classics and confine my purchases to cameras that are fully functional or can be made so at minimal expense. However, cameras can be and often are technological works of art, so I harbor no ill will toward those who display most (or all) of their collectible cameras, nor do I believe user-collectors like me are somehow superior to showcase collectors. I’ve viewed scores of camera collections over the years, and many are breathtaking, equal to what you’d find in any national museum of technology like the Smithsonian. And many if the folks that assembled them have done meticulous research that has enriched the histories of their chosen brands. Finally, I’ve discovered that there are limits to being a user-collector, and I’m a perfect example. I currently own 212 cameras and I currently shoot with about 20 of them, which is less than 10%. Bottom line: most camera collectors display (or hoard) most of their collections and occasionally shoot with the rest. But whichever way you do it, it’s intensely human, an act of love tinged with beady-eyed acquisitiveness.

Camera collecting strategies: It pays to have one!

I will confess to being a haphazard collector—my personal collection ruins the gamut from common box cameras and low-end, scale-focusing 35s, to elite rangefinder 35s, to a staggering variety if 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 twin lens reflexes, to a splendiferous assortment if folding 35mm and roll film cameras, to a passel of vintage 4x5 and 8 x 10 view cameras—and much, much more. In short, my collection is sprawling and undisciplined, much like its owner. Therefore, all the following great advice gleaned from my 65+ years of camera collecting falls under that ever-popular category of “Do as I say, not as I do.”

Scarce Koniflex II, one of the many semi-exotic TLRs in my collerction, is a great shooter.jpg

The Koniflex II of the '50s is one of far too many 2-1/4 TLRs in my collection. It's beautifully made and has a superb 85mm f/3.5 Hexagon lens.

Specialize. It’s generally much more rewarding to concentrate on a single type or brand of camera than to just collect cameras willy-nilly as I have done. For example, I recently viewed a stunning display of rangefinder Canons beginning with the Canon S-II of the late ‘40s and ending with the last model in series production, the coveted Canon 7sZ that finished in late 1968. The happy owner, who also shoots with some of his 100 or so Canons, confesses that he hasn’t been able to find earlier bayonet mount Canons with Nikkor lenses such as the iconic Hansa Canon (Kwanon) of 1935-1940 and the Canon S of 1938-1945 at affordable prices. However, he has supplemented his Canon collection with some captivating examples of Canon’s erstwhile competitors, the Leotax, Tanack, Honor, and Nicca.

Canon S-!! of 1946-1949 %22Made in Occupied Japan%22 with 50mm f:3.5 collapsible Serenar lens.jpg
Canon S-II of 1946-1949 was stamped "Made in Occupied Japan." A collector's prize, it's fitted with an outstanding 50mm f/3.5 Serenar lens,

Specialization is a gradient, and many experienced camera collectors specialize in 2 or 3 camera categories and brands and will occasionally snap up an interesting “out of category” camera that turns up at a great price, possibly with the intention of eventually swapping it for a hard to find “in category” camera.

Set standards. There are a few collectors out there who claim that that won’t buy a camera unless it’s in mint condition. Good luck to them, because I have found that 99% of used cameras described as “mint” have minor cosmetic defects of one kind or another—typically minor scratches, paint loss, issues with the leatherette covering, or cleaning marks on the lens. If you really want a “mint” camera, try to find one listed as “new in box,” and even then, perfectionists are likely to be disappointed—unless the camera in question has literally never been unpacked, in which case the seller can only post a photo of the “sealed” box.

New Old Stock Canon A-1 and case. Really %22%22mint%22? Maybe..png
If you really want a "mint" camera, and are willing to pay extra, find a new old stock or unused example like this Canon A-1 in original packing.

My personal criteria are as follows: I will not pay a substantial premium for a camera listed as “mint” or “new in box,” but I do confine my purchases to cameras that are very clean and fully functional with as few blemishes as possible. I will accept a few minor surface scratches, especially in inconspicuous places, and a neatly and discreetly engraved owner’s name or I.D. number is OK. I will not, except in the rarest of cases, purchase a camera that is dented or shows brass through the chrome or black finish (I know there are many collectors that adore “brassed” cameras). An exception: My beautiful Nikon S, which is fully functional and fitted with a near mint 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S.C lens, but has a teensy bit of brass showing near the front viewfinder window and a couple of shallow dents, and circular tripod-mounting scratches on the bottom plate. Note: There are no official standards for purchasing vintage cameras—you must set your own—and bear in mind that all those descriptive adjectives used by sellers reflect their personal opinions (maybe with a bit if hype added) and may not reflect your own.

Nikon S  with 50mm f:21,4 Nikkor-S.C lens.Nte slight brassing near front viewfinder window,.jpg
My beautiful Nikon S is one if the few cameras I've ever bought with slight "brassing" and minor dents in] the bottom plate. I still love it!

Beware the repair trap. You may well find that the collectible camera if your dreams that checks all the boxes in your “must have” list requires some repairs, especially if you intend to shoot with it. But not all repairs are created equal. Rangefinders that work but are out of adjustment, shutters that fire at all speeds but are too slow, dusty viewfinders, mirrors and viewing screens, and meters that read too high or too low can usually be repaired at reasonable cost. Shutters and rangefinders that don’t work at all may not be repairable, replacing perforated shutter curtains is time consuming, very expensive, and not every repair shop will do it, and meters that are dead may be irreparable without replacing the meter cell or mechanism, which are often unobtainable. Even old cameras that appear to work perfectly should really be checked out and C.L.A.-ed by a competent repair person before you rely on them for taking pictures on film, which is, after all, a labor intensive and expensive undertaking in 2024.

Vpoigtlander Avus 9x12cm with excellene 13.5cm f:4.5 Skopar lens in old dial-set Compur shutter.jpg
Voigtlander Avus 9 x12 cm film pack and plate camera of the '20s. I can still use it because it came with a Rada 6x9 cm 120 roll film adapter

Never buy cameras sold “As Is, No Returns Accepted.” The only time you should even think about buying a collectible camera sold “as Is” is if you’re willing to risk losing the entire purchase price on the outside chance that it may be repairable at reasonable cost, or you’re buying it for parts, and the price is irresistible. I’ve done this riverboat gambler thing about a dozen times in the last 10-15 years and have been burned nearly 70% of the time, so, in the immortal words if the ancient Romans, caveat emptor.

Best advice: Buy cameras only from reputable sellers (eBay sellers with over 100 sales and a 99+% seller rating are usually a good bet) and make sure that the return time frame (typically 2-4 weeks) is sufficient for you to get it back to the seller for a full refund, which, incidentally, includes the original taxes paid and your original shipping cost. Normally the return shipping cost is on you, but some dealers offer “free returns,” which means they will add your return shipping cost when they post your refund, a plus.

Make friends with an experienced repair person familiar with repairing vintage cameras: Sadly, most people who fall into this category are getting on a bit, and many have retired, so vintage camera repair specialists are getting harder to find. One we can recommend is Ryan Jones of Pro Camera of Charlottesville, VA, Happily, this 40+ years old company has hired two new young technicians who are learning the age-old craft, so there’s hope for all of us.

Have fun shooting with your vintage classics! Even if you’re primarily a showcase collector there’s nothing quite so satisfying as walking around with an ancient camera and taking pictures with it. Aside from sheet film, the only film sizes generally available are 120 roll film and 35mm, but both are widely sold in a variety of black and white and color emulsions, including ISO 100 to ISO 800 color print and color transparency films, and black-and-white films with speeds ranging from IS0 40 to ISO 3200. Many of the vintage lenses on your goldy-oldie classics also capture that breathless quality known as “the vintage look.” So, if anyone taps you on the shoulder and questions your sanity when they notice the antique you’re shooting with, you can just say you’re doing it for art’s sake—just like the Ars Gratia Artis banner below the roaring MGM lion, which is now, in this shamelessly illiterate era, preceded by the English translation, “Art for Art’s Sake.”
 
DownUnder's post raises the difficult question, for those of us getting along in years, of where our beloved analog cameras will go when we're gone. I'm thinking of making mine a donation to any higher education institution that has a good photography program as part of their Fine Arts Department; for me, the University of New Mexico is in my back yard and would be a great choice.
Now, the thought of some 18 year old photo student manhandling my precious Hasselblads and Rolleis makes my stomach churn, particularly as I manned the Photo Dept. tool crib in college; many a student-mangled Leica passed through my hands. But if someone could develop a passion for analog photography by using (and even abusing!) those cameras, I suppose it would be for the best. Better than the dumpster, for sure, but the time to make those arrangements is now.

My personal encounters with camera club members and fine arts (photo major) university students have led me to the conclusion that I will be doing one of two things with my own collection. This decision I have arrived at after much thought and a fair few discussions with my partner, whose relatives in Asia would (here I do not say "will" which is relevant) likely not use them and sell them off.

All this taken under due consideration, bearing in mind that when I am no longer here I will have no control over how my things are disposed of anyway, so all that follows in this post is entirely theoretical, I will do one of the following -

As well, after having contacted and (very briefly) discussed this matter with the relevant administrators (most were little interested or even politely dismissive of my queries and my offer anyway, which does say a lot) here in Australia my collection after being donated to a university or college photo faculty, will likely be sold off. Which I can easily do myself and pocket the proceeds for my own use. So!

2. Directly moving on from the previous point, selling the lot and indulging in a pleasant holiday (with my partner), probably our last visit to the southern countries of Europe where life is enjoyable and costs lower than those other more "cultural" countries further up north. My cameras even if sold as an entire lot at the best possible prices on today's market, would not come close to funding such a voyage as we would be away for at least two months. But it would pay for a fair few luxuries like days spent on Mediterranean beaches, good seafood lunches and afternoons in shaded cafes sipping the local wines. Life is short and I feel a duty to my partner to make it as mightily sweet as I can afford. Selling my collections would help me achieve this.

My various other collections will be sold by my estate. At this stage I am unsure as to what these are worth but my executor has kindly offered to take this in hand when I am no longer here to annoy and bother and harrass her over the minutiae of what she will have to do on my (by then departed) behalf.

Now let us return to cameras...

In summing up all this, I collected the lot and more importantly I paid for them. Hence the final decision as to how to dispose of them and more importantly to us, how to spend the money made by such a sale, will stay with me. Fair is fair.
 
A small correction to my previous post (#41).

Re the paragraph
"1. Donating my collection to someone who is likely to cherish it. No likely candidates on m list as well. Unlikely to be family as they are all dici-heads and money-minded, so my collection would be quickly disposed of at whatever prices the local secondhand shops (in Kuala Lumpur) offered. Which doesn't please me at all."

I meant to write "digi-heads" and not "dici-heads". The latter is too cose to a certain common insult term which would likely get me eliminated in a family coup.

Apologies to all for the mis-spelling. I've noticed that small word errors tend to creep into many of my postings, which I attribute to a combination of old age and a little too much good red wine in the evenings.

As usual my MacBook Air(head) did me in (this is my standard excuse in our household) but I really must learn to read what I write more carefully before posting...
 
I'm the anti-collector, a camera ascetic. If it isn't being used I don't want it around.

Here's a Psychology Today article on collecting by a neuroscientist and collector: Collecting: An Urge That’s Hard to Resist

Although we're basically all the same, how different we can be. I guess what lights up the pleasure centers of my brain is minimalism and utilitarianism.

But Happy Collecting to you! :)

John
 
Quote “Collectors also gather what they consider treasures to enhance their network of friends; in other words, they have a social motivation for collecting. Perhaps their love of objects came first; then, somewhere along the line, they realize there are people like themselves. They may find them independently or join organizations for like-minded people. Friendships forged through these vehicles no doubt expand social lives.”
 
Collecting is just another social lubricant. When I rode a motorcycle strangers would come up to me and start conversations and I would get invited to rides, BBQs, biker bar hangouts. I met so many friends and I didn’t even try. When I have a Leica around my neck somewhere on this planet another other person with a Leica would inevitably start a conversation. With Leica groups there would be Tupperware parties of sorts where these guys would show off their M2 black paint or some exotic optics. People are lonely for friends I guess. It can be watches or hi end audio.
 
Some people collect wine, which is designed to be consumed. A different philosophy.
Been there, but unless you are wealthy enough to have a huge cellar, the "Collection" can disappear quite quickly. Some of my friends and relatives think of me as a wine collector, having a refrigerated cellar which holds about 100 bottles, but in truth, these are meant for the future enjoyment, as I have found most today go to the grocery or their local wine shop to buy a bottle or two and drink them that night. At the price of a fine red wine today, I feel they are wasting their $ as most are still being made to last 15-20 years, whether you decide to keep them that long or not. My oldest bottles are from the 2005 vintage, but the vast majority are from 2016, 2018, and just getting into some 2019's, again mostly Californian cabs and blends, as my days of affording any Classified Growths from Bordeaux have ended. When I started drinking decent wine (beyond Boone's farm), I was able to afford a 2nd through 5th growth Bordeaux and the occasional splurge of a 1st growth now and then. At the current prices of at least $700-1200 a bottle of 1st growths today, I am not in that tax bracket..... and haven't been, forever! Any of my most valuable cameras would have a hard time achieving a sale price of a Chateau Lafitte bottle. With that being said, there's still a great enjoyment of opening a 15 yr old bottle and finding how great it has evolved. On the other hand, maybe also finding a bottle upon opening, that was probably bad from the start....
 
I've taken most of the items that I've collected apart, to find out how they work and what makes them different.
On some- discovered undocumented changes introduced during the production run. Existing written information regarding some - simply incorrect.

When I was a kid, I took apart most of my toys. Got pretty good at putting them together again. With cameras and lenses- put them back together in a condition better than before taking apart, at least 98% of the time.
 
I've taken most of the items that I've collected apart, to find out how they work and what makes them different.
On some- discovered undocumented changes introduced during the production run. Existing written information regarding some - simply incorrect.

When I was a kid, I took apart most of my toys. Got pretty good at putting them together again. With cameras and lenses- put them back together in a condition better than before taking apart, at least 98% of the time.
I took my toys apart, too, but never got to the part about putting them back together. Sometimes others' toys as well; my father's stopwatch suffered the same fate at my hands. Fortunately, with age, I've gotten a bit better at part two.
 
... there's still a great enjoyment of opening a 15 yr old bottle and finding how great it has evolved. On the other hand, maybe also finding a bottle upon opening, that was probably bad from the start.

Think of it as expensive balsamic vinegar. Wonderful stuff on fresh green salads or marinating vegetables...
 
Age has a lot to do with it, your age that is, not the equipment's. As Retro Grouch says, it becomes important to get rid of stuff because the next generation will not attach the same value to it as you did. Sell, donate or whatever, just don't imagine your children will cherish boxes full of equipment that is no longer relevant unless it has a very close family provenance.
Nice! After reading your post, the sendup of an old song keeps repeating in my head, “Sell all your stuff, it’s later than you think!” There are no pockets, or neck straps, in a shroud, eh?
 
Nice! After reading your post, the sendup of an old song keeps repeating in my head, “Sell all your stuff, it’s later than you think!” There are no pockets, or neck straps, in a shroud, eh?
You should start another thread entitled: 'What cameras will you find in Hell when you get there?' or was that a track from a long forgotten Paul Butterfield Blues Band album?!
 
I
My personal encounters with camera club members and fine arts (photo major) university students have led me to the conclusion that I will be doing one of two things with my own collection. This decision I have arrived at after much thought and a fair few discussions with my partner, whose relatives in Asia would (here I do not say "will" which is relevant) likely not use them and sell them off.

All this taken under due consideration, bearing in mind that when I am no longer here I will have no control over how my things are disposed of anyway, so all that follows in this post is entirely theoretical, I will do one of the following -

As well, after having contacted and (very briefly) discussed this matter with the relevant administrators (most were little interested or even politely dismissive of my queries and my offer anyway, which does say a lot) here in Australia my collection after being donated to a university or college photo faculty, will likely be sold off. Which I can easily do myself and pocket the proceeds for my own use. So!

2. Directly moving on from the previous point, selling the lot and indulging in a pleasant holiday (with my partner), probably our last visit to the southern countries of Europe where life is enjoyable and costs lower than those other more "cultural" countries further up north. My cameras even if sold as an entire lot at the best possible prices on today's market, would not come close to funding such a voyage as we would be away for at least two months. But it would pay for a fair few luxuries like days spent on Mediterranean beaches, good seafood lunches and afternoons in shaded cafes sipping the local wines. Life is short and I feel a duty to my partner to make it as mightily sweet as I can afford. Selling my collections would help me achieve this.

My various other collections will be sold by my estate. At this stage I am unsure as to what these are worth but my executor has kindly offered to take this in hand when I am no longer here to annoy and bother and harrass her over the minutiae of what she will have to do on my (by then departed) behalf.

Now let us return to cameras...

In summing up all this, I collected the lot and more importantly I paid for them. Hence the final decision as to how to dispose of them and more importantly to us, how to spend the money made by such a sale, will stay with me. Fair is fair.
I never realized until now that collecting cameras (or anything) had such close connections with our mortality. However it runs much deeper than merely how we assign and dispose of our worldly goods. On the surface, the act of collecting is focused on accumulating material possessions, but its ultimate aim is transcendent, namely elevating the material to some semblance of the eternal. The fact that we must inevitably leave our collections behind when we shuffle off this mortal coil does not diminish the passion, love, appreciation, and humanity they represent.
 
I am not a camera collector. However I do fall into a 'specialised' category in that I have a collection of Grubb lenses which originate from Dublin, Ireland and date from the 1860s onwards. Condition is not a consideration and at least one has its glass missing. Much of the attraction is the associated history and research required to understand how and why they were made and the politics behind how they were received at the time. Its a complex story and having worked on it for years and having so far written about 30k words I feel that there is plenty more to appreciate. Grubb is most likely the originator of the Rapid Rectilinear lens although he did not patent it. Snap taken on a 1950s Summarit .....
Grubb Lenses.jpg
 
Last edited:
I am not a camera collector. However I do fall into a 'specialised' category in that I have a collection of Grubb lenses which originate from Dublin, Ireland and date from the 1860s onwards. Condition is not a consideration and at least one has its glass missing. Much of the attraction is the associated history and research required to understand how and why they were made and the politics behind how they were received at the time. Its a complex story and having worked on it for years and having so far written about 30k words I feel that there is plenty more to appreciate. Grubb is most likely the originator of the Rapid Rectilinear lens although he did not patent it. Snap taken on a 1950s Summarit .....
View attachment 4832526
Very Nice Grubb lens collection indeed! According to Wikipedia the Rapid Rectilinear was "introduced by John Henry Dallmeyer in 1866" and "its symmetrical design reduces radial distortion, improving on the Petzval lens." However, The RR was generally limited to a slow maximum aperture of f/8. At f/16 it's quite sharp, capturing images with excellent detail, moderate contrast, and gorgeous rendition. The Wikipedia entry doesn't conclusively state that Dallmeyer invented the RR , so perhaps Grubb was an early proponent.
 
Very Nice Grubb lens collection indeed! According to Wikipedia the Rapid Rectilinear was "introduced by John Henry Dallmeyer in 1866" and "its symmetrical design reduces radial distortion, improving on the Petzval lens." However, The RR was generally limited to a slow maximum aperture of f/8. At f/16 it's quite sharp, capturing images with excellent detail, moderate contrast, and gorgeous rendition. The Wikipedia entry doesn't conclusively state that Dallmeyer invented the RR , so perhaps Grubb was an early proponent.
The original patent by Dallmeyer was not for a symmetrical design. I have two Grubb Doublets from 1865 which are similar though and which I am trying to figure out (Grubb Patent and portrait lens combination apparently). Kingland comments on the similarity of the RR and two Grubb Patent lenses symmetrically arranged about the aperture stop. But Dallmeyer was the person who patented his design in 1866. Its a complicated, messy story and one which unleashed controversy in the photographic press of the time. It seems that we have been arguing over the merits of lenses since photography began!
 
Back
Top Bottom