Commercial Ektar vs Dagor

[ScottPhotoCo]

I'm sure that this will stir up a lot of *#^&^R&%$ but I am curious.

I have seen a lot of images with a Dagor that really push my buttons but I can't exactly figure out why. I have a 10", 12" and 14" Commercial Ektar that I like quite a bit but I've not had the opportunity to shoot with a Dagor. Where I have seen the Dagor "magic" has been in portrait use.

By chance, do any of you have portraits made with a Dagor and a Commercial Ektar of the same subject? Or even just portraits made on a Dagor?

I may end up buying one to try at some point soon if anyone has one available. I'm thinking I'd like the 14" but 12" might suffice.

I'd love to know your thoughts.

Thanks!


Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

[Ari]

Tim, have a look here: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?108171-Looking-for-People-Images-made-with-Gold-Dot-Dagor-(80-s-version)&highlight=dagor

[ScottPhotoCo]

Tim, have a look here: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?108171-Looking-for-People-Images-made-with-Gold-Dot-Dagor-(80-s-version)&highlight=dagor

Thanks. I did a search and it didn't come up. Weird.

[Jim Noel]

I have several Dagors as well as 1 or 2 Commercial Ektars. I use the Dagors the most because they give volume to subjects like people and trees. Where other lenses give hard edges and make things look like they have been cut and pasted, the Dagor's show a roundness. Of the 20 or so lenses I own for various formats, the last ones I would get rid of are the Dagor's.
Others may argue with my point of view, but they will never convince me to change.

[ScottPhotoCo]

I have several Dagors as well as 1 or 2 Commercial Ektars. I use the Dagors the most because they give volume to subjects like people and trees. Where other lenses give hard edges and make things look like they have been cut and pasted, the Dagor's show a roundness. Of the 20 or so lenses I own for various formats, the last ones I would get rid of are the Dagor's.
Others may argue with my point of view, but they will never convince me to change.

Great feedback. Thank you Jim!

[Luis-F-S]

I've got 7 Dagors from 3 5/8 to 14" as well as 19" & 24" Artars and a host of modern lenses (Grandagons, SA-XL & Nikkor W). Other than when I was doing Architectural work and needed the modern lenses, all I use are the Goerz lenses.

Luis

[John Kasaian]

FWIW, I think the OP needs a Dagor to play with so he can decide for himself. I have a Dagor and a Commercial Ektar pretty close in focal lengths (12" & 14") and they're both excellent. It's good to have a spare!

[Bernice Loui]

Ektar, Dagor produced different yet similar images. My opinion is to try both and see which one prefers.

While the Kodak Ektars are pretty consistent with their performance lens to lens, the same cannot be said of the Dagor and it's variants made by others. The Dagor was made for so many years, one needs to have a good number of them to sort out good from bad beyond typical individual lens variations. Don't be put off by un-coated dagors as they can be excellent performers as well as total duds. Later versions tend to be a bit more consistent. Do know the later Gold rim, Gold dot has more to do with marketing than actually being "special."

The 355mm Kern Dagor is a different kettle of fish from the Goerz production Dagors.

The image rendition of these vintage lenses is what drove me completely away from the modern plasmat many years ago.



Bernice



FWIW, I think the OP needs a Dagor to play with so he can decide for himself. I have a Dagor and a Commercial Ektar pretty close in focal lengths (12" & 14") and they're both excellent. It's good to have a spare!

[goamules]

...While the Kodak Ektars are pretty consistent with their performance lens to lens, the same cannot be said of the Dagor and it's variants made by others. The Dagor was made for so many years, one needs to have a good number of them to sort out good from bad beyond typical individual lens variations. ...



I'd never heard about the proverbial Dagor "inconsistencies" until about 3 years ago, and from someone on this forum. I don't believe it.

Goerz had as good a reputation as Zeiss. Which means....the best. For decades and generations of photographers, from 1892 to the 1960s, the Goerz Dagor was revered. I haven't seen anything in the historical record about inconsistencies. Nor in the 8 or 10 that I've had. For manufacturing, we're not talking about Soviet Union Jupiter quality control. Or "economy" manufacturers like Wollensak. We're talking about Goerz. Unless someone can prove to me "...you have to try a lot to filter out the duds..." I says it's a recent urban legend.

[Dan Fromm]

Garrett, I have a small heap of Dagor clones, both f/6.8 narrow angle and f/9 and f/14 wide angles. A couple of them failed acceptance testing badly. On recheck, the failures were quite ok. Operator error is always a risk. And since dagor types are quite sensitive to cell spacing, botched remounts are always a risk.

Lens abuse, or perhaps mistaken expectations, are also a risk. In proof of which I suggest that you search for "lousy Dagor" here. That's the title of a long, tedious and sometimes very funny discussion about Dagors good and bad sparked by a character who asked a 7" Dagor to cover more than it could.

Re Zeiss' quality, ask Andrew Glover, who sells on eBay as Dagor77, about it. His eBay listings often say terrible things about Zeiss' ability to design and make lenses. I think he's a head case, not surprisingly he disagrees.

[goamules]

Ha! I remember that post, which was a case study in early Internet trolling, if I recall.

[Jan Pedersen]

Yeah, that was very entertaining to say the least.
I have 4 Dagors, all later and coated, some with gold and some not and I really like them all. Contrast is just exactly what I want from a lens. They may not compare to modern Plasmat lenses when it comes to critical sharpness but used with large negatives they are so smooth.

[CP Goerz]

Dan Fromm wrote….'His eBay listings often say terrible things about Zeiss' ability to design and make lenses. I think he's a head case, not surprisingly he disagrees.'



AHh Dan, half right as always.



You've clearly read my countless descriptions over the years but lack comprehension, my main complaint with Carlos is the build quality NOT the design. I don't know how many times I have to say that for it to sink in. I'll check back in six months or so to see if your head is any better.