Zeiss bahakim ?? (1 Viewer)

[Bencw]

What do you make of this? it went for £225, advertised as very rare zeiss. When I see triple tested on a binocular I immediately think Japanese, surely it's not Zeiss?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/zeiss-bah...BIDX:IT&nma=true&si=XOSMILmHO2RgwH8YXmy9K2DuJ

 

[LPT]

Certainly not Zeiss, but not a fake because there's no Zeiss marking on them. The case, though, might be CZJ which is maybe why the seller is claiming they are Zeiss. Why in the world 5 bidders would be willing to pay over 100 GBP for this binocular, though, is utterly beyond me.

 

[Bencw]

LPT, have to agree, 225 GBP is amazing, I would not pay more than 20 GBP for it, in fact I would not want it at all.

 

[Binastro]

An Irish photographer recently sold a mounted photograph of a potato that was on his wall to a businessman for 1 million euros as reported in Amateur Photographer.

I don't think it is April 1st, and the report seems genuine.

P.S.
The photographer is Kevin Abosch from Dublin

The photograph 'Potato #345'.

 

[Sancho]

An Irish photographer recently sold a mounted photograph of a potato that was on his wall to a businessman for 1 million euros as reported in Amateur Photographer.

I don't think it is April 1st, and the report seems genuine.

P.S.
The photographer is Kevin Abosch from Dublin

The photograph 'Potato #345'.

I read about that here. It wasn't even a particulary nice-looking potato. I would have used a Golden Wonder (I think he used a Kerr Pink). High-end spuds, them Golden Wonders. None of your Cypriot grey-market imports.

 

[Binastro]

Are those the ones Gary Lineker uses for his chips? No wonder they are expensive.

 

[jring]

Certainly not Zeiss, but not a fake because there's no Zeiss marking on them. The case, though, might be CZJ which is maybe why the seller is claiming they are Zeiss. Why in the world 5 bidders would be willing to pay over 100 GBP for this binocular, though, is utterly beyond me.

Hi,

certainly not CZJ. First and foremost because there was no 16x50 built by CZJ. There was some 16x40 models (Telextin and Telsexor and military derivates of those) but no 16x50.

Also the markings don't even try to look like a CZJ... the pictures on ebay leave out the front side where the Made in Japan or JBI numbers would be...

Lastly the given serial number of 62014 would date this pair in 1904 - I have some doubts how this fits to them being coated... single coating was invented at CZJ in the 30s by the ukrainian physicist Alexander Smakula.

Joachim

 

[Binastro]

Or possibly a lot earlier by TTH or Dennis Taylor.

 

[jring]

Or possibly a lot earlier by TTH or Dennis Taylor.

Hi Binastro,

ok, I found the article on Dennis Taylor and that he found that a tarnish building up on some element of a Cooke astro photo objective actually improved transmission, at least at first, before the objective became completely hazed. It seems he also developed a process to reach this index matching using chemicals and patented it. He was able to improve transmission per surface by about 1%. Thanks for pointing me to an interesting read.

http://home.europa.com/~telscope/hdtaylor.txt

And I found some more info on anti-reflection coatings in the introduction of H.A. McLeod, Thin-Film Optical Filters (p 1ff) as I googled for Lord Rayleigh and tarnish as I vaguely remembered a story of him getting the same result and found that we have to go back a bit farther to Fraunhofer for this knowledge.

https://books.google.de/books?id=7z...TAA#v=onepage&q=lord rayleigh tarnish&f=false

But it seems that Smakula was the first to develop the single layer interference coating as we know it today and marketed by Carl Zeiss Jena as the famous T-Belag - reaching about 3% better transmission (99% vs. 96% uncoated).

Joachim

 

[Bencw]

I see this bin is up for sale again on the auction site, whoever bought it must be trying to salvage some of the £225 paid.