Subject matter to highlight the difference between Dagor and Plasmat G-Claron?

[Steve Goldstein]

Folks speak about the differences between these two lens formulae, but I imagine this might be easier to see with some subjects than others. In particular I'm interested in comparing the earlier Dagor-based G-Claron with the later Plasmat-derived one. I have both and would like to see for myself, but hope not to expend vast amounts of film in this effort.

Thanks for any insights.

[Kevin Crisp]

This is a question for Jim Galli.

[Chauncey Walden]

Possibly more a matter of coverage.

[goamules]

For comparisons, shoot something that is challenging for any and all of the optical aberrations. Busy backgrounds out of focus, with the focus on a closer foreground, for example. Shoot wide open. You might see a difference, but you might not.

[Drew Wiley]

Depends on the specific vintage and focal lengths you're trying to compare. Dagors were made over a very long period of time. I can realistically compare some of them to a plasmat G-Claron, but have no experience with a dagor-design under the G label. So I'll stick to the 14"/355mm range just to keep things simple, and admit that my own history with dagors are more with the Schneider evolution, including Kern. The G plasmat is single coated with exceptional close-range performance, yet also excellent to infinity, and much better edge performance at strong tilts. The image circle in either case is dependent upon the degree of mechanical vignetting of the specific shutter, and whether or not you are talking about contact printing or actually need high quality detail further out toward the edges of the nominal image circle. Dagors are inherently high-contrast due to only four air/glass interfaces, so would hypothetically be at least equal to a more modern single-coated plasmat. My own opinion is that plasmats are much more versatile, while dagors tend to render a somewhat distinct look of their own. Neither design is particularly good at out-of-focus rendering or "bokeh". I'd rather use something tessar in that category.

[mdm]

I am no lens expert but at some point I found that in a forest with a distracting background of trees and things, where it is impossible to keep everything in focus, a * 1/4 dagor draws much nicer and more realisticly than a 210 Sironar S. Thinking of a famous Strand portrait, my memory of the background is sharp, but the fact of it is it was dagor out of focus.