Another Kickstarter German lens campaign!

[Mistral75]

Checked out the kickstarter page.

First, I have to say the MTF chart is impressive. I'm guessing that's a "theoretical" chart and not empirical.

(...)

The MTF chart is not that impressive when one takes into consideration the f/2.5 aperture. Draw the same kind of chart with a 50mm lens from the '60s or the '70's at the same aperture and you will obtain comparable results.

(...)

The $99 level donations are "sold out". Only levels from about $600 and up are still available. Not sure what that means, but I'm guessing they expect to sell this lens for at least $600 per unit [retail]. (...)

There was only one lens available at $99, to the very first contributor.

The MSRP is easy to deduct from the text of the $699 pledge: "Still at 50 % of the later expected MSRP secure yourself this lens to take your photography to a new level." It's therefore $1,399.

 

[Mistral75]

Yeah, I've never heard of the name before. Maybe it was the only German camera related name that wasn't registered so they could use it for free?

(...)

A. Schacht, first based in Munich, then in Ulm from 1954 onwards, was a respected German optic company founded in 1948 by Albert Schacht, former top executive at Carl Zeiss (1913-1939) then Steinheil München (1939-1946).

The Schacht lenses were calculated by Ludwig Bertele, the man behind such highly-praised lenses as the original Ernostar, Sonnar, Biogon and Aviogon (aerial 90° viewing-angle lens).

 

[Huss]

Be this Schacht Travegon a rebadged HandeVision Iberit or not, it's definitely emanating from the net SE galaxy (the German listed group that has resurrected the C.P. Goerz, Emil Busch A.-G. Rathenau, Ihagee, Meyer Optik Görlitz and Oprema Jena Biotar trademarks):

1. The same lady named Katja Lauterbach created the Schacht Travegon and the C.P. Goerz Citograph Kickstarter campaigns.

2.The Meyer-Optik-Görlitz newsletter sent out on Friday promotes the Schacht Kickstarter project and explains that 35% of the capacity of the production site run in Bad Kreuznach by Messrs Ivo Pavlik and Michael Schroeder (two of the three people presented as leading the Schacht venture) will be devoted to build Meyer-Optik lenses from H2 2018 onwards.

Asinus asinum fricat 🙂.

Nice investigative work!

I just knew they were behind the Ihagee debacle. This has the same modus operandi - find something that is dirt cheap/not selling (which is why B&H is heavily discounting the Iberit lenses), slap a German name onto it, see who you can gouge.

 

[Mistral75]

Other people have looked at all those Kickstarter projects and have made similar or additional discoveries.

First a comment by Bit Bucket found on Leica Rumors:

https://leicarumors.com/2018/01/18/...t-now-on-kickstarter.aspx/#comment-3720381735

"Meet Katja Lauterbach of Duett Design in Dunwoody - Voyage ATL

Duett Design happens to be based at the same address as A. Schacht, Meyer-Optik-Görlitz, Oprema-Optik-Jena, Ihagee, Oberwerth etc. [N.B.: he means the entity that represents these trademarks in the US]

Besides that:

Ivo Pavlik seems to have absolutely nothing to do with the company OPC Optics mentioned in the Kickstarter campaign.

The company Patalux Industrieservice, in which Ivo Pavlik allegedly worked for 10 years, was founded on 26.09.2013, according to the commercial register.

Quote from the Kickstarter campaign: "Michael Schroeder runs Patalux Industrial Service Inc., a company of 40 employees specialized in the production of quality optical components and lenses." According to the commercial register, Patalux Industrieservice's main business is the manufacture of chemical products.

Rainer Schnabel, the former production manager of CW-Sonderoptic, was already part of the Meyer-Optik-Görlitz campaign.

None of the people named in the Kickstarter campaign ever worked at Schneider Kreuznach's cine department.

Conclusion: Once again an overpriced windbag from net SE and consorts."

 

[Mistral75]

Second, a very interesting article in Camera Creativ:

Retro ohne Ende: Schacht Travegon auf Kickstarter | CameraCreativ.de (in German)

I hope they will not mind my providing here an English translation:

The project is still interesting, because behind this and a half dozen similar campaigns are always the same people, all sitting in beautiful Koblenz.

We'll start with a look at the trademark register:

• Meyer Optik Görlitz - registered by Semi Verwaltung GmbH
• Biotar - Semi Verwaltung GmbH
• Ihagee - Semi Verwaltung GmbH
• Lydith - Semi Verwaltung GmbH
• CP Goerz - Semi Verwaltung GmbH
• Primagon - Semi Verwaltung GmbH
• Emil Busch Rathenow - net SE
• Flektogon - net SE

Tjhis is just a small excerpt, the complete list can be obtained by filling in the field for the name of the owner or applicant in the DPMA search (screenshot of the Semi Verwaltung GmbH here).

While the brand collection of Semi Verwaltung GmbH comes along quite sorted (all antique lenses), net SE is not quite as pernickety: Even brands for paper products and bags can be found here. If you look closely, you will also notice that both companies have the same legal representative, a law office in Aachen.

The Commercial Register gives some light on both companies: their common location is currently Moselstraße 50 in Koblenz. Managing Director of Semi Verwaltung GmbH is Ms. Regina Immes, at net SE is Stefan Immes the Managing Director. Related? By marriage? Or something completely different? In any case, the name is not that common.

Another conspicuous feature can be found in the actual campaigns: Although the creator of the campaign varies (Emil Busch Rathenow Inc., Meyer Optics USA, Oprema) there is a common denominator; each time a certain Katja Lauterbach is designated as responsible:

Noteworthy is also the common location: Atlanta, Georgia. Must be a great city. A search indicates that an Emil Busch Rathenow, Inc. is actually registered in Atlanta. Representative: Katja Lauterbach, Managing Director: Regina Immes, known to us. One wonders how these people can do it all.

Back to the beginning, the Schacht lens. The location is different; Instead of the new world, we find the worthy and traditional Bad Kreuznach. But many things remain the same:

Incidentally, the Bad Kreuznach commercial register does not know of a company Schacht, and the corresponding trademark has not been registered yet.

Conclusion: All this is not forbidden, but leaves, as one says in the southwest, a 'Geschmäckle'.

N.B.: 'Geschmäckle' is Swabian dialect for 'Geschmack' (taste), but with a pejorative connotation: an unpleasant (after)taste.

 

[Huss]

Well this thread just got interesting! Funny how a hunch that started this played out.

 

[happy]

I own the Handevision 35mm (traded for it on a whim) and it's actually pretty good! It's the smallest of the Iberits and the size feels 'right' on an M camera. A bit big for a 2.4 lens but not huge. It's quite sharp in the center wide open with some softness in the corners. Stopped down the corners improve and it's tack sharp out to the edges. Slightly lower contrast than most modern lenses and I like that.

I think it contends well with the voigtlander 35 color skopar. Especially if you find the handling on the voigtlander lacking due to its small size. I think the silver version looks much nicer than the Voigtlander on my camera, though I do have some very minor niggles about the lettering. I don't think it's worth $600+ but it's pretty well made and optics hold up. At ~$450 it would be a good value.

 

[happy]

I don't think it's a re-packaged handevision. Different f#, front element looks bigger.

Handevision is a lens made by Kipon using a design by IB/E Optics, not same as the Atlanta group.

 

[Mistral75]

There are individual actions to counter this mercantile trend of reviving old trademarks to make money on Kickstarter, Indiegogo et alii. In particular an artist (photographer and graphic designer) named Olaf Rauh, born in 1968 in Leipzig (you can google his name), has protected a bunch of old lens names and trademarks, mostly German ones, over the last three years.

Here below is the list of the trademarks he owns (in italics in brackets the name of the company that first used the corresponding lens name / trademark).

(Agfa)

• Solagon

(Astro-Berlin / Astro-Gesellschaft Bielicke)

• Astro-Berlin Bielicke
• Astro Ges.m.b.H. Pan-Gauss
• Tachar
• Tachon
• Tachonar

(C. P. Goerz)

• Dagor
• Hypar

(Carl Zeiss / Carl Zeiss Jena)

• Biometar
• Pancolar
• Protar
• Protarlens
• Tevidon
• Topogon

(Emil Busch Rathenow)

• Busch Perscheid

(Enna München)

• Color Ennalyt
• Ennaston

(Ernemann)

• Ernostar

(Fritz Kuhnert, Optische Anstalt / Futura Kamerawerk)

• Frilon

(Heinz Kilfitt München)

• Kilar
• Kilfitt

(Hugo Meyer / Meyer Optik Görlitz)

• Diaplan
• Domiron
• Kinoplasmat
• Megon
• Plasmat
• Primoplan

(Julius Laack / Laack Söhne, Rathenow)

• Schnellarbeiter

(Kinoptik) - this is the only non-German brand/company of the bunch (Kinoptik is a French company, still in business)

• Fulgior

(Rodenstock)

• Eurygon
• Heligon

(Steinheil München)

• Quinar
• Quinon

(Voigtländer)

• Septon
• Skopagon

Not bad, eh? 🙂

 

[Bit Bucket]

Back to the beginning, the Schacht lens. The location is different; Instead of the new world, we find the worthy and traditional Bad Kreuznach.

...but on their website aschacht.com it says:

A. Schacht Inc.
11 Dunwoody Park, Suite 145
Atlanta, GA 30338, USA

The city of Bad Kreuznach is nowhere mentioned. Even in the logo the city is missing.

The domain aschacht.com has been registered anonymously. There is also a domain of aschacht.de but there no content has been uploaded yet. The domain aschacht.de has been registered by Martina Hartmann who I suppose is somehow related to Benedikt Hartmann of net SE. At least both share the same last name and live in Overath, Germany.

 

[Mistral75]

It gets odder and odder: there was a Bad Kreuznach in the logo of A. Schacht, it isn't there any more.

On the left the pictures copied from the Kickstarter campaign on January 18 and used for my posts on the Chassimages forum, on the right the pictures as they appear in the Kickstarter campaign as of today January 27.

Even the drawing of the optical formula has been altered a bit and somewhat refined!

 

[BillBingham2]

Like nearly every "kickstarter" campaign, read con!...

Not true. They are out there, just like EvilBay. Switching campaign hosts is a good example of a concern, but I've had go results from the kickstarter campaigns I've funded to get a product (I've done a couple for $5 as I loved the idea/product but had no need for it).

The 4x5 tank I learned about here looks fine. Took a lot longer than expected but I still haven't used it.

iKamper for a LOT more cash rocks and is everything they said it would be. They also have manufacturing issues, but our configuration was simple enough it was in an early run. Quality-wise they don't make them any better.

B2 (;->

 

[Mistral75]

Second setback for the net SE galaxy (C. P. Goerz, Emil Busch A.-G. Rathenau, Ihagee, Meyer Optik Görlitz, Oprema Jena Biotar and more) after that of the Ihagee Elbaflex: the Schacht Travegon project just failed on Kickstarter.

They gathered pledges amounting to $32,782 (versus a goal set at $60,000) from 58 backers who ordered 51 lenses.

Since it was an ‘all or nothing’ project, the funding is unsuccessful and it is over.

 

[Huss]

Second setback for the net SE galaxy (C. P. Goerz, Emil Busch A.-G. Rathenau, Ihagee, Meyer Optik Görlitz, Oprema Jena Biotar and more) after that of the Ihagee Elbaflex: the Schacht Travegon project just failed on Kickstarter.

They gathered pledges amounting to $32,782 (versus a goal set at $60,000) from 58 backers who ordered 51 lenses.

Since it was an ‘all or nothing’ project, the funding is unsuccessful and it is over.

It costs 'some' money to get these projects started - with the marketing, the imagery, the 'story', the mock ups of the product. With the # of projects that have failed that they have pushed, well, after a while that all adds up.

I'm curious about the backers. They don't do any due diligence to see if what they are signing up for is legit and not just a rebranded failed existing product with an inflated price tag?

 

[zuiko85]

What amazes me is that "Citograph" 35mm fixed focus lens got enough backers to go forward. What a scam! Haven't any of these backers heard of Loreo Co. and it's 'lens in a cap'? Less than $30 shipped. For what they wanted for this thing I could buy any number of 35mm lenses and tape the focus ring at a hyperfocal distance and snap away.

 

[Lucadomi]

The power of advertising. They are persuasive and they might get there. Superior quality for not much... why not.

 

[Kent]

It is honestly kind of interesting how some of you draw conclusions without ever having had such a lens in your hand. I apologize for my frankness, but implying that the Citograph lens is just another "lens in a cap" only shows that you have not used a Citography which is not plasticky at all!
It is definitely not a high-performance all-purpose lens, but shooting with it is a lot of fun! >> https://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/2018/02/05/citograph-erste-beispiele/
(Only in German, sorry.)

Yes, a lot of old, traditional brand or model names have been registered by Semi or netSE. But then, this is their perfect right, totally legit.
Why did nobody here do that if it is so easy to make money with that?

Come on gentlemen, how much we like a lens is one thing, but I bow to those guys' courage to start these campaigns. We can critizise the high prices but I am not able to calculate the costs of a lens that is manufactured in Germany, as the newer models are. Can you?

The company behind the rebirth of Meyer made some marketing mistakes when they started some years ago. Rebranding Asian and Russian lenses is surely nothing they are proud of today, but those late models which are built in Germany are really good.

I do have the Primoplan 1.9/75 (Nikon) and that is an amazing piece of glass!

Of course, everybody is free to reject their system and refrain from buying from them but we should be fair when it comes to judging their products. Try them first, then grade them.

 

[Mr_Flibble]

Not true. They are out there, just like EvilBay. Switching campaign hosts is a good example of a concern, but I've had go results from the kickstarter campaigns I've funded to get a product (I've done a couple for $5 as I loved the idea/product but had no need for it).

The 4x5 tank I learned about here looks fine. Took a lot longer than expected but I still haven't used it.

iKamper for a LOT more cash rocks and is everything they said it would be. They also have manufacturing issues, but our configuration was simple enough it was in an early run. Quality-wise they don't make them any better.

The price they're asking for this lens would definitely not have baited me as a customer.
But calling all or most Kickstarter projects a con? That's a bit much indeed.

I've backed a number of projects over the last couple of years. Mostly board games and some custom camera straps. All except one were delivered what was promised...well, two, but I still have faith in Ferrania delivering that slide film (this year).
The other one has been kicking the can down the road for the last 5 years and are refusing to give refunds (Palladium Books)...their day in court is coming.

 

[zuiko85]

It is honestly kind of interesting how some of you draw conclusions without ever having had such a lens in your hand. I apologize for my frankness, but implying that the Citograph lens is just another "lens in a cap" only shows that you have not used a Citography which is not plasticky at all!
It is definitely not a high-performance all-purpose lens, but shooting with it is a lot of fun! >> https://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/2018/02/05/citograph-erste-beispiele/
(Only in German, sorry.)

Yes, a lot of old, traditional brand or model names have been registered by Semi or netSE. But then, this is their perfect right, totally legit.
Why did nobody here do that if it is so easy to make money with that?

Come on gentlemen, how much we like a lens is one thing, but I bow to those guys' courage to start these campaigns. We can critizise the high prices but I am not able to calculate the costs of a lens that is manufactured in Germany, as the newer models are. Can you?

The company behind the rebirth of Meyer made some marketing mistakes when they started some years ago. Rebranding Asian and Russian lenses is surely nothing they are proud of today, but those late models which are built in Germany are really good.

I do have the Primoplan 1.9/75 (Nikon) and that is an amazing piece of glass!

Of course, everybody is free to reject their system and refrain from buying from them but we should be fair when it comes to judging their products. Try them first, then grade them.

In regard to the Citograph trying it first carries too high a price, and as a used item I thinking depreciation would be too catastrophic to recover very much of the money it cost to 'experiment'.
From the samples I've seen of both the lenses the fancy and expensive one does not seem 10X better than the plastic one. So, if a person has the money to burn and wants to be the beta tester for these lenses, understands their extreme limitations, and also understand the other options that are available....and still want to use their money for the Citograph, well, it's their money.

And, it's not like I don't use my regular wide angle lenses as fixed focus at hyper-focal settings (although with 35mm I usually use a 28mm lens this way) But my lenses can also do so much more for so much less and are still compact and weight only 8 oz. or so. (I'm content with the f2.8 versions of these lenses)

 

[Kent]

The Citograph surely is not a replacement for a Summicron 2/35 or the like.
It is as fun lens. And yes, it is expensive, or at least it seems to be. I agree.

That is perhaps the problem of such a lens. It's too expensive to be distributed much and thus not many users really know it. Perhaps the kickstarter prices could help.

And still I doubt that the high price is only because they want to make a lot of money. I rather think that such a price is the only realistic one if you produce a lens in such low numbers. But since I do not know the internal financial figure, I can't tell.