PDA

View Full Version : Red dot Artar 890



hiend61
7-Oct-2016, 08:41
Have any of you gentlemen experience shooting chromes with this lens?. I use an Apo Ronar CL 600/9 in itīs Sinar MC version and Iīm very pleased with it, but I would like to have something longer. Iīm considering an Apo Ronar 890/14, but I canīt find any in the condition I would like, so Iīd like to know your experience with this lens. I think late versions, made by Schneider corporation of America have aluminium barrels instead of brass ones and are ligther.
Can any of you tell me the measures of flange screw and if possible the filter size?
Thans in advance for your advice.

Luis-F-S
7-Oct-2016, 09:58
I assume you mean a 35" Artar? Color rendition should be no different from one of the shorter ones. Most Artars don't have a standard filter thread sizes but SKG or someone similar can make one. My 30" is mounted with 77 mm threads.

hiend61
7-Oct-2016, 13:22
Yes, I mean RD Artar 35". I never used a RD Artar made by Goerz Optical in USA or Apo Artar made by Schneider in Germany or Switzerland, so I donīt know anything about itīs color rendition. Have you shot chromes with your 30"?.

Luis-F-S
8-Oct-2016, 05:57
No, but apo chromatic should say something about the color correction. It's mind boggling to me that some one would buy a 35" lens without ever having shot one even if a shorter one.

hiend61
8-Oct-2016, 08:15
Color correction is a thing, and color rendition is another story. The word apo does not tell me a lens has a good color rendition, it just tells me that a lens has probably less chromatic errors. I have tried long apo lenses that provided dull colors and weak contrast, but performed very well in B/W. I just would like to read the comments of people who have used long RD Artars with Chrome film, and if possible see some samples, even with the limitations of a computer screen.
I have shot chromes with almost every Apo Ronar from 240 to 600 in a variety of versions and shapes, MC, non MC, in barrel, in shutter..., and I have an idea of what I can expect from Apo Ronars. The problem is that I canīt find a good sample of AR CL 890/14. I have seen several nice samples of RD Artar 35" in the auction site. I heard very good comments from RD Artar users, but all of them shot B/W. I read somewhere that newer aluminium barrel versions made by Schneider Corp. of America and Goerz versions from serial number 800XXX have better contrast.

Mark Sampson
8-Oct-2016, 09:16
In a past life, I occasionally used a 19"/480mm Goerz Red Dot Artar on an 8x10 camera. It was long enough ago that the film was Kodak Vericolor II, Type L, from which I made 30"x40" color prints. The images were quite sharp, but the contrast was lower than when using (say) a 12"/300mm Schneider Symmar-S. The lower contrast was a subtle effect, not problematical at all. Of course with any long-distance shooting, the amount of air between you and your subject will have an effect. If I needed a lens that long, I'd happily use a Red Dot Artar again.

Drew Wiley
10-Oct-2016, 11:38
At one time Red Dot Artars were prized by color photographers, especially for large format chromes. The image circles were somewhat limited with respect to the focal length compared to plasmats. The Schneider Artar inherited the same characteristics. In other words, they weren't just "apo" with respect to consistent dot reproduction in a graphics sense. Other 4-element apo lenses shared similar prized characteristics for color film use, including Apo Nikkors and Rodenstock Apo Ronars. But given the span of time over which these were made, I suppose there is always the possibility of an odd duck or two out there, or some spacing issues of the elements due to field versus copy camera applications. And coatings obviously improved over time, which improved contrast.

hiend61
10-Oct-2016, 13:41
Thanks Mark and Drew for your comments. I also shot Vericolor II in both S and L versions. Spacing issues can potentially be a problem, but if it is possible to disamble lens cells, with patience and the help of a good CNC workshop can be solved, but in my experience, those spacing issues affect more to the peripheria of the image circle, and a small improvement can be seen in the central part of it.

Mark Sampson
11-Oct-2016, 18:06
I wouldn't worry about lens element spacing problems. Find a lens, shoot some with it. Critical sharpness will depend on many more things than that. Camera stability, air movement, shutter speed, subject movement, f/stop, all will play important parts in total image sharpness. So will the degree of enlargement (if any), as will scanning techniques if you plan a hybrid approach. I'm sure that you're aware of the things, having experience with long lenses, but I'm trying to think this through myself. The Artar is a symmetrical design, so should perform equally at close-up or distant focus; at least that's the conventional wisdom as imparted to me, and I've had no reason to doubt it.
As far as filter sizes go, I don't think that either Goerz or Schneider envisioned these as camera lenses, and it's likely that any lens you find will not have a screw-on filter ring on the front. Those can be custom-made of course, but a gel behind the lens might be the easiest solution there.
Best of luck- I would also look up the work of Reinhart Wolf- he did spectacular long-lens work of castles in Spain, as well as the skyscrapers of New York City.

hiend61
12-Oct-2016, 17:49
I had the fortune of knowing Reinhart Wolf in 1982 when he was shooting for his book Castles in Spain. I found him taking the picture of the castle of Coca, not far from my home, and I was present when he made the picture that is in the book.

Mark Sampson
12-Oct-2016, 17:55
Well, that was a bit of luck! I admire the late Mr. Wolf's work and would probably imitate if if I could. My copy of 'Castles in Spain' is, sadly for me, in German (which I don't read) and it was printed much smaller than the original chromes. It's still stunning work even too small.

Daniel Unkefer
12-Oct-2016, 19:34
I had the fortune of knowing Reinhart Wolf in 1982 when he was shooting for his book Castles in Spain. I found him taking the picture of the castle of Coca, not far from my home, and I was present when he made the picture that is in the book.


Wonderful!

I will have to get out my copy of "Castles in Spain" and find that picture.
I have a 790mm F11 Apo Ronar and I have always wanted something even longer :)

hiend61
13-Oct-2016, 03:15
Reinhart Wolf was one of the photographers who has most influenced me. The others are Adam Woolfitt, Carlos Navajas and Duncan MacNicol. Adam Woolfitt and Carlos Navajas never used large format cameras in their daily work, they were 35 mm users, but all four have in common a sense of light and composition that I love, and three of them use frequently long and very long lenses, not because they need to reach a distant object, but because they need the perspective that only a long lens can provide. There are many examples of this in Mr Wolf book Castles in Spain. The famous photo of Mr Wolf with his 8x10 Sinar Norma wit an Apo Ronar 16/1000 and Two tripods is taken while he was waiting for the correct light in La Calahorra castle. I have been several times in that location, and a very long lens is a must to include the mountains in the background and portray the castle with the right proportions. BTW, the photo of the castle of Coca was taken with an Apo Ronar 360/9 in 8x10 and the ground part was cropped.

http://jjpascuallargeformatphoto.com/es/

Joerg Krusche
13-Oct-2016, 11:29
I had the fortune of knowing Reinhart Wolf in 1982 when he was shooting for his book Castles in Spain. I found him taking the picture of the castle of Coca, not far from my home, and I was present when he made the picture that is in the book.


Why not shoot like Reinhart Wolf .. and go for a Apo Ronar 16/1000 in shutter as used by him ? .. If you want one I might be able to help you,

best,

Joerg

Drew Wiley
13-Oct-2016, 12:01
Apo Nikkors were made clear up to 1780mm. The longest I own is a 760/11. I don't know if any version longer than that could be fitted in a conventional shutter.
But they are optically incredible, even at infinity.

Joerg Krusche
13-Oct-2016, 12:21
Apo Nikkors were made clear up to 1780mm. The longest I own is a 760/11. I don't know if any version longer than that could be fitted in a conventional shutter.
But they are optically incredible, even at infinity.
Drew,

as of 890mm and longer they all have the same thread .. about 160mm .. mounting on a conventional shutter is quite a challenge ..

Drew Wiley
13-Oct-2016, 12:38
Yep, that's what I implies. Anything longer than 760 is going to be an issue, and even it probably needs a no.5. I won't bother shuttering mine, since my Fuji 600C
is way more compact and convenient anyway, and more realistic for my 8x10 needs. When I want to go especially long in perspective, I prefer a Sinar 4x5 monorail - very convenient to operate, and I have a couple of bellows that will do at least 28 inches without need of an intermediate support. No need for a second
tripod support either.

Mark Sampson
13-Oct-2016, 16:47
Hiend61, I took a look at the photographs on your site. It is, simply, spectacular work.
I don't know why you're asking any of us for advice- your photographs are an education in themselves. Keep up the good work!

hiend61
14-Oct-2016, 01:22
Why not shoot like Reinhart Wolf .. and go for a Apo Ronar 16/1000 in shutter as used by him ? .. If you want one I might be able to help you,

best,

Joerg

An Apo Ronar 1000/16 is a monster that wights 5 kilogram and needs to be mounted in two Sinar front standards. Of course the quality is superb, but a pain to use. There is a lighter 1000/14 CL, which is more compact. The 890/14 shares almost same measures as CL 600/9, is very good, not as expensive as a 1000 and very easy to use. The RD Artar 35” is even more compact.

hiend61
14-Oct-2016, 01:24
Apo Nikkors were made clear up to 1780mm. The longest I own is a 760/11. I don't know if any version longer than that could be fitted in a conventional shutter.
But they are optically incredible, even at infinity.

I had an Apo Nikkor 760/11 and itīs a superb lens, even at infinity.

hiend61
14-Oct-2016, 01:28
Hiend61, I took a look at the photographs on your site. It is, simply, spectacular work.
I don't know why you're asking any of us for advice- your photographs are an education in themselves. Keep up the good work!


Thanks Mark for your kind works. I need advice about a lot of things, and this is an excellent place to ask and share experiences.

Joerg Krusche
14-Oct-2016, 14:44
An Apo Ronar 1000/16 is a monster that wights 5 kilogram and needs to be mounted in two Sinar front standards. Of course the quality is superb, but a pain to use. There is a lighter 1000/14 CL, which is more compact. The 890/14 shares almost same measures as CL 600/9, is very good, not as expensive as a 1000 and very easy to use. The RD Artar 35” is even more compact.

Hello,

the shutter mounted 16/1000 is symetrical around the shutter .. thus no torque on front standard..therefore balanced and does not need two standards ..at least to my experience.. the 1000/14 as well as the 890/14 need to be front-mounted before the Sinar/Copal shutter when using the Sinar System..and there is more torque as compared to the 16/1000 .. the 16/1000 is heavier .. but the reason to consider the 16/1000 is its performance as documented by Rodenstock .. the 16/1000 plays in a different league .. as documented by MTF curves .. and perhaps the reason why Wolf picked that specific lens ..all other 4-element dialytes .. Apo Nikkor, Artar etc. are very good lenses of course ..

my 2cents !

Your photos are superb and beyond what I have seen for a long time

Joerg

hiend61
14-Oct-2016, 19:36
Thanks Joerg for your kind advise and words about my photos. Of course the Apo Ronar 1000 in any F16 version is "better" than the 890/14, just have a look to the MTF figures published by Robenstock, but I want a 890, because I consider itīs better for me. I donīt mind my admired Mr Wolf used a 1000 mm. I want a 890 or 35", and nothing else, because in my relative short experience of 39 years in photography I have learnt that itīs much better the simple "good" and "useful" than the "best". For 600mm and longer lenses, my Sinar Copal Shutters are the best solution, so I donīt consider any other option. The Apo Ronar CL 890/14 is very compact, weights less than a half of any Apo Ronar 16/1000, and does not stress my Sinar front standard, so Iīll have much less stability issues with it. My prints are of 50x34 cm or 50x25 cm size, from 5x7", 4x5", or 6x12cm. Exceptinally 40x26" or 50x100 cm, so I would never notice in practice the possible benefits of a better MTF lens, and I would save the 2000 EUR difference in price from any AR 16/1000 to an AR 890/14.

Daniel Unkefer
15-Oct-2016, 07:58
https://c8.staticflickr.com/6/5786/29708134583_88130ae659_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/MgcXoX)Reinhart Wolf (https://flic.kr/p/MgcXoX) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

Reinhart Wolf from "Castles in Spain"
The 1000mm F16 lens (I think!)

hiend61
16-Oct-2016, 04:28
Yes, This is a Rodenstock Apo Ronar 16/1000 mm. Some years ago, this lens was offered in the auction site at a fix price of 7.000EUR, but the seller listened offers. I donīt know if this lens was sold. If I had the money, I would buy it. Apart from the quality of the lens, itīs a piece of History.
Note this lens uses a 135mm flange screw, so it uses almost all the 139mm useful diameter in a Sinar board. Mounting screw is massively reinforced, and a second Sinar board is needed to bear the 5 kilogram weight of this beast. Behind the lens is a Sinar shutter. The shutter diameter is considerable smaller than the rear lens, so the largest useful F stop is f32, the best performing one.

Daniel Unkefer
16-Oct-2016, 07:12
Yes, This is a Rodenstock Apo Ronar 16/1000 mm. Some years ago, this lens was offered in the auction site at a fix price of 7.000EUR, but the seller listened offers. I donīt know if this lens was sold. If I had the money, I would buy it. Apart from the quality of the lens, itīs a piece of History.
Note this lens uses a 135mm flange screw, so it uses almost all the 139mm useful diameter in a Sinar board. Mounting screw is massively reinforced, and a second Sinar board is needed to bear the 5 kilogram weight of this beast. Behind the lens is a Sinar shutter. The shutter diameter is considerable smaller than the rear lens, so the largest useful F stop is f32, the best performing one.

hiend61,

Thank you for your comments. For 30+ years I have wondered about this lens, ever since in saw it in the book "New York", which I also own. Yes, what a piece of photographic history. Absolutely amazing!

How did Wolf support the front end of this huge lens? Was it simply a hole cut in a board, or did he have additional supporting with the Norma Front Standard? I would not imagine that a lens board alone would support the heaviness of "the beast". I have always wondered about this....

Also your work is very beautiful to see and is an education for me.

Best Regards,
-Dan

Joerg Krusche
16-Oct-2016, 07:34
hiend61,

Thank you for your comments. For 30+ years I have wondered about this lens, ever since in saw it in the book "New York", which I also own. Yes, what a piece of photographic history. Absolutely amazing!

How did Wolf support the front end of this huge lens? Was it simply a hole cut in a board, or did he have additional supporting with the Norma Front Standard? I would not imagine that a lens board alone would support the heaviness of "the beast". I have always wondered about this....

Also your work is very beautiful to see and is an education for me.

Best Regards,
-Dan

Hi,

I will try to put next week some photos of set-ups of 1000mm lenses onto the forum .. and with full respect and admiration for Wolf's work .. I believe that his set-up as shown is less than ideal .. part of which is due to the use of that long barrel lens .. which though plays in a class of its own performance-wise

hiend61
16-Oct-2016, 08:21
Its a Sinar board fitted in the slimest part of the lens, just where the front cell, (Both rear and front cells are identical), screws in the central body of the lens, where diaphragm is located. This link to the auction site will show you a similar solution in a CL 1000/16, but using a custom Sinar board to fit in a 5x7 frame. This lens replaced the one used Mr Wolf, and is the latest version made.

http://www.ebay.es/itm/Rodenstock-Apo-Ronar-CL-16-1000-mm-mit-Zubehor-/162235294395?hash=item25c5fa22bb:g:1BMAAOSw-CpX~Mma

A Sinar Norma and I suppose a P/P2 could hold a 5 kg lens if the board is in the middle of the lens, but the arrangement used by Mr Wolf was the only possible because he used a Sinar copal shutter behind the lens. I never tried, but I canīt imagine a 5kg lens attached to a Sinar front standard with just a board in the rear of the lens. I use a 9/600, and used an Apo Nikkor 760/11 attached with a board at the rear of the lens in a Sinar P2 and there is no problem at all.
BTW, this lens also appears in the New York book, but note that he back of the camera is 5x7, not 8x10. I suposse Mr Wolf needed to reach a far detail and decided to use 5x7 instead of crop a 8x10. 156244. This is a photo of my camera with an Apo Ronar CL 600/9 in a Sinar selected version, factory mounted in board by Sinar.

Drew Wiley
17-Oct-2016, 08:43
I'd do it differently. I once made a long 5/4 X 3" maple bar, with appropriate threaded inserts, to which I then attatched two Sinar rail clamps suitably apart. This
was extremely stiff and then was used directly atop a big wood tripod top, length-centered for balance. Way better than the two-tripod method for these long extensions with heavy lenses. Sinar themselves had a somewhat overpriced diecast aluminum equivalent of this idea; but I prefer the greater stability and vibration resistance of hardwood.

hiend61
17-Oct-2016, 12:52
I'd do it differently. I once made a long 5/4 X 3" maple bar, with appropriate threaded inserts, to which I then attatched two Sinar rail clamps suitably apart. This
was extremely stiff and then was used directly atop a big wood tripod top, length-centered for balance. Way better than the two-tripod method for these long extensions with heavy lenses. Sinar themselves had a somewhat overpriced diecast aluminum equivalent of this idea; but I prefer the greater stability and vibration resistance of hardwood.

It sounds great. Could you share a photo of it?. Wood is more vibration resistant than aluminum, and from time to time Iīm tempted to buy a tripod wood. I have never seen one in any serious pro photography shop in Spain to try one. I saw Berlebach ones in internet.

Drew Wiley
17-Oct-2016, 13:40
The point to is have a platform head - a suitably large flat surface atop the tripod, without any nonsense of a center column or other reduced surface area, or any intermediate tripod head. Sorry but I don't own any digi camera device for posting shots.

Dan Fromm
17-Oct-2016, 14:41
Drew's comment re "any nonsense of a center column" stuck a chord.

I have a Berlebach 8023G. Its a discontinued model in their lightweight Report system. The leg set is very solid but the tripod isn't as suitable for use with long lenses as I'd like because the center post can't be locked perfectly into the platform. There's a tiny irreducible wobble. I've never played with a tripod in Berlebach's heavyweight UNI system, don't know whether any of the UNIs with center post have the same weakness.

I solved the wobble problem with my Baby Bertha by using a Manfrotto Magic Arm to clamp the camera's monorail to one of the legs. I stole the idea from Robert Polidori, see http://www.cnngo.com/hong-kong/play/robert-polidori-257129

I really will have to post a picture of my 2x3/6x12 camera with 900/10 Apo-Saphir and all the trimmins'.

Drew Wiley
17-Oct-2016, 15:42
You can even get adjustable removable strut arms like that for reinforcing portable workbench legs. Yet another trick to avoid a second tripod.

hiend61
17-Oct-2016, 16:13
The point to is have a platform head - a suitably large flat surface atop the tripod, without any nonsense of a center column or other reduced surface area, or any intermediate tripod head. Sorry but I don't own any digi camera device for posting shots.

Youīre right Drew. I noticed long time ago that when I used a Sinar long base plate with two Sinar rail clamps on a Sinar pan and tilt head I had bad results, and when used the same on a long plate, low profile Gitzo 1500 head all my problems desapeared. With 600 an 760 lenses I use two tripods and in this case does not matter on which head rests the long Sinar base plate.

hiend61
17-Oct-2016, 16:20
Dan, I saw this same picture in Robert Polidoriīs web site, but I didnīt knew which kind of arms was he using. I checked In a Manfrotto brochure, and in fact it seems they are Manfrottoīs magic arms with clamps at the end. Thank you for the inspiration. Iīll ask my dealer to try one.

Joerg Krusche
20-Oct-2016, 10:04
Hello again,

there are many ways .. here my set-up for the long ones

1. I use two tripods. coarse set-up without lens/matte screen .. peeping from behind , centering the subject .. see Plaubel 1

2. Fine adjustment with lens and matte screen .. tripod head loose .. you can move sideways with two fingers on the horizontal bar of front tripod .. and vertical adjustment with rear tripod .. very easy ..then fasten tripod head... see Plaubel 2

3. Example of RD Artar 35 mounted on 5FS.. see PL Artar 35

4. now with Apo Ronar CL 35 ..

5. now with shuttered 16/1000 "balanced"

6. variations of Sinar set ups with lenses up to 47 inches and more

7. the same with long 8x10 bellows which may also be used alone for 1200mm lenses

The set up described is fast , allows easy fine adjustments, and no vibrations .. ecept the "sweet" ones156446156447156448156449





Hi,

I will try to put next week some photos of set-ups of 1000mm lenses onto the forum .. and with full respect and admiration for Wolf's work .. I believe that his set-up as shown is less than ideal .. part of which is due to the use of that long barrel lens .. which though plays in a class of its own performance-wise

Joerg Krusche
20-Oct-2016, 10:07
.. and here the 3 pics mentioned in my previous mail156450156451156453





Hi,

I will try to put next week some photos of set-ups of 1000mm lenses onto the forum .. and with full respect and admiration for Wolf's work .. I believe that his set-up as shown is less than ideal .. part of which is due to the use of that long barrel lens .. which though plays in a class of its own performance-wise

hiend61
20-Oct-2016, 11:45
Joerg, that seems a smart solution, an also sounds easier. Iīll try next weekend and Iīll tell you.
Impressive set of lenses. The 1000/16 is a lighter version than the latest CL 8 elements version. Itīs even more compact than the one used R. Wolf. It has 6 elements and itīs a superb performer. I think itīs about 2,7 Kilograms in barrel. The latest 8 elements CL version itīs 5 kolograms.
Did you order the shutter adapters in your local CNC Shop?. Where did you get that 8x10 to 8x10 bellows?. I have never seen one.

Joerg Krusche
20-Oct-2016, 12:07
Juan,

adapters ordered .. will pick them up next monday .. the 8x10 to 8x10 bellows is pretty rare .. ebay was my friend a long time ago.. it stretches enormously .. allows room for playing ..





Joerg, that seems a smart solution, an also sounds easier. Iīll try next weekend and Iīll tell you.
Impressive set of lenses. The 1000/16 is a lighter version than the latest CL 8 elements version. Itīs even more compact than the one used R. Wolf. It has 6 elements and itīs a superb performer. I think itīs about 2,7 Kilograms in barrel. The latest 8 elements CL version itīs 5 kolograms.
Did you order the shutter adapters in your local CNC Shop?. Where did you get that 8x10 to 8x10 bellows?. I have never seen one.

Joerg Krusche
20-Oct-2016, 12:22
Sorry again

I forgot to mention that it is very important that weight is mostly on the front standard .. here a benefit from heavier lenses ..





Hello again,

there are many ways .. here my set-up for the long ones

1. I use two tripods. coarse set-up without lens/matte screen .. peeping from behind , centering the subject .. see Plaubel 1

2. Fine adjustment with lens and matte screen .. tripod head loose .. you can move sideways with two fingers on the horizontal bar of front tripod .. and vertical adjustment with rear tripod .. very easy ..then fasten tripod head... see Plaubel 2

3. Example of RD Artar 35 mounted on 5FS.. see PL Artar 35

4. now with Apo Ronar CL 35 ..

5. now with shuttered 16/1000 "balanced"

6. variations of Sinar set ups with lenses up to 47 inches and more

7. the same with long 8x10 bellows which may also be used alone for 1200mm lenses

The set up described is fast , allows easy fine adjustments, and no vibrations .. ecept the "sweet" ones156446156447156448156449