I agree completely. But the corners in a negative that's going to be contacted don't have to be as good as those in a neg that's going to be enlarged to get the same image quality in the final print's corners.Originally Posted by Jim Noel
I agree completely. But the corners in a negative that's going to be contacted don't have to be as good as those in a neg that's going to be enlarged to get the same image quality in the final print's corners.
solid argument!
David attributed this in another post:
"The best Dagors were made after 1963 [the "gold" period] when Goerz perfected a device to centralize the elements within two seconds of arc. This is equivalent to five feet in 100 miles. How do I know this? I built the device and also filled in as a lens fitter from time to time."
March 1986 issue of "Shutterbug" had a letter from Edward Bolsetzian who worked at C.P. Goerz[/QUOTE]
through a glass darkly...
The Dagor is a 65~70 degree lens, according to my experience ( 6", 8 1/4", 9 1/2", 240mm, 30cm, and 14") and some old references I have. You might do 85 degrees for contact prints.
Dan's mention of 55 degrees for critical work is interesting, this is just about what Schneider gave as the coverage (53?) for the 14" MC gold dot version.
One man's Mede is another man's Persian.
The 14" Schneider gold dot that I owned had a very limited image circle. It covered about the same as the 14 red dot artar I use to own. The Schneider was totally different than the 14" f7.7 that I used to own. The f7.7 covered 11x14 with movements.
I want to say that I do not in any way mean to disparage Dagors. They are great lenses. The incident referred to above actually happened earlier this summer as I had a couple of fans going in the living room to try to stay cool and some papers wanted to take flight. The nearest thing in reach to use to hold them down happened to be my 12" Dagor. It was funny at the time to use a fine old lens for such a mundane task.
I have a set of three Dagors marked C.P. Goerz Am. Opt. Co. (7", 8 1/4" and 9 1/2") that I really like and which form the basis of my lens kit for 5x7 and include the long side of the format, the diagonal and twice the short side of the format, which is a pleasing trinity of focal lengths to my eye for most conventional (non-panoramic) formats. The last two cover 8x10 as well, making them even more useful. I especially like the 9 1/2".
Last edited by William Whitaker; 26-Jul-2013 at 11:51.
Folks,
I have a slew of them, from Series III (and IV) Double Anastigmat to Gold Rim and Gold Dot. What everyone has said is fairly correct given sample variation over the years. If you're enlarging and want the sharpest corners, 75 degrees is a reasonable number. Contact printing 85 degrees. Earlier ones had more coverage or at least more illumination. Later ones were technically better. I have some that shift focus and some that are more like modern lenses (less focus shift). My 10-3/4" seems to shift the most, and I always try to focus at at least f/11 with this lens. My 12" Gold Dot shifts little or none.
It's always good advice to focus as close to the taking aperture as possible with any lens, modern or classic.
They're fine lenses but some aren't as good as others. Trying is the only way to tell.
As far as coverage above 8x10, depends on the specific lens and model. I have a 19" Series IV Double Anastigmat that will cover 20x24 wide open according to the person (very reputable and does have a 20x24) I bought it from. f/7.7 Double Anastigmats and Series III 14" and above should cover any reasonable format.
BTW, I also had a 14" Trigor and a single-coated 14" Schneider Kern. They were both extremely flare prone, the Kern being unusable pointed into the light. Neither had the coverage of other Dagors so I "uploaded" them. The Kerns and Trigors are cult lenses, you can do much better with the other series.
Cheers, Steve
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks