» DAGOR 355mm MC GOLD DOT Schneider 14" W/ Compur #3

[Caracalla]

Good day,

Recently the DAGOR 355mm MC GOLD DOT Schneider 14" W/ Compur #3 lens was sold on eBay for $2600.00 very expensive:(

Why is this lens so expensive? If anybody would have some images or thoughts and where would be the best place to get another one but for less money if it is possible.

Also, what would be the equivalent of the DAGOR 355mm MC GOLD DOT Schneider 14" W/ Compur #3, any ideas?

Regards
Caracalla

[Gene McCluney]

Dagors were made for what? 60 years or so. The one you mentioned is just one of the latest ones. The quality exhibited by the Dagor style lens can be had much cheaper if you are willing to accept an uncoated example from before WW2. While lower in contrast, if you print your own b/w, this should not be an issue. There are many good examples of 14" Dagors out there for much less money.

[Caracalla]

Gene,

Any store/source that you may suggest or alternatives to DAGOR 355mm MC GOLD DOT Schneider 14" W/ Compur #3 .....? Anyone else that you know using one? Much appreciated, Thanks

Regards
Caracalla

[sanking]

Good day,

Recently the DAGOR 355mm MC GOLD DOT Schneider 14" W/ Compur #3 lens was sold on eBay for $2600.00 very expensive:(

Why is this lens so expensive? If anybody would have some images or thoughts and where would be the best place to get another one but for less money if it is possible.

Also, what would be the equivalent of the DAGOR 355mm MC GOLD DOT Schneider 14" W/ Compur #3, any ideas?

Regards
Caracalla

The 355 f/9 G-Claron would be the closest thing to the 14" Gold Dot Schneider Dagor. The G-Claron is a plasmat type design, which is a derivative of dagor type, and has better resolution at the wider apertures, but it is not multi-coated. Cost would be about 1/3 of the 14" Gold Dot Dagor.

The 14" Gold Dot Dagor is the last of the Dagors made, and it is multi-coated, making it a very contrasty lens. However, if the goal is image making, as opposed to collecting, it is not a very good buy IMO. It is certainly an excellent lens, but for ultra large format the 355 G-Claron is very superior since it gives much larger coverage. And for smaller formats there are lens that sell for less that will give better performance.

Sandy King

[Caracalla]

Sandy,

I will certainly look at the 355 f/9 G-Claron. Could you please elaborate more on the lenses for smaller formats that sell for less that will give better performance. Much appreciated, Thanks

Regards
Caracalla

[Jim Galli]

Check your pulse for magic bullet attackis. Yes, the GDMC is a lovely lovely lens. A lot of pluses in a very small elegant package. But $2600? I wouldn't accuse anyone else, but I know I have to constantly remind myself, "it's the image stupid". IOW some images made with a $26 lens can trump the ones made with the $2600 lens simply because they are wonderful.

OK, OK. If you twist my arm I'll cave in and sell you my lowly single coated GD14 for a mere $2150.00

[Michael Graves]

I've got a 14" Apo-Artar that set me back a whopping $225.00 plus another $45.00 to Carol Flutot for a CLA. I'd bet a thousand bucks that if me and Jim were to shoot the same subject without knowing the other was doing it, and then if you compared the image shot with his Gold Dot and the one shot with my Red Dot, his would be much, much better than mine.

Not because the lens is better. He's just a good photographer and I'm not. However, if he used both lenses to shoot the same image, I'd love to see how many people could see the difference.

[sanking]

Sandy,

I will certainly look at the 355 f/9 G-Claron. Could you please elaborate more on the lenses for smaller formats that sell for less that will give better performance. Much appreciated, Thanks

Regards
Caracalla

Almost everthing used in the 355-360 range will give better overall performance IMO than a Dagor on small formats (8X10 and smaller) and would be much less expensive. That would inlcude Symmar-S, Rodnestock-Sironar, Fujinon-W, Nikkor-W, etc. That would also include most of the Apo type lenses mounted in shuter: Red Dot Artar, Apo-Nikkor, Apo-Geronar, etc.

Of coure, some love the "Dagor" look, which is quite real. But that look results in large part from lens aberrations that give a nice "bokeh" in the out of focus parts of the image. But for the "Dagor" look older non-coated or single coated Dagors would do just as well, if not better.


Sandy King

[Scott Davis]

I'd look at a 14" Commercial Ektar as a viable alternative. Not only is it a faster optic (f6.3), but it throws a huge image circle (11x14 with movement), costs 1/5 what that Dagor did, and actually has a more pleasing bokeh (the iris in a Copal 3 is a 5-bladed iris, which yields some pretty harsh OOFAs, whereas the Ilex #5 shutter has a 20+ bladed iris, which gives a much more nearly circular aperture, thus smoother transitions from sharp to out-of-focus). The Commercial Ektars are also coated (not multi, but still) so they give excellent contrast without being too punchy.

[Chuck Pere]

I think that price was an aberration. Probably closer to $1200-1400. I got mine years ago to use for 8x10. Then it turned out that I never used the 8x10 that often and when I did it was with wider angle lenses. Now I've been using this lens with 5x7. Does have a different look compared to my other "modern" lenses. Never seems to be hard sharp or harsh. As compared to say my 150 G-Claron. I'm still not sure I like the look. Anyhow I'll trade my one owner complete with box lens for your 5x7 wood Canham with 5x7 and 4x5 back. Gotta strike while the iron is hot. Did I mention the small size 60mm filter, and that Compur shutter is nice even without a T setting.

[Don Hutton]

I think Camera West in Monterrey has a single coated Schneider GD 14inch for about $1400 - I actually prefer the single coated iteration of this lens - the MC version is pretty harsh.

[seawolf66]

Here is a list of web site's to go looking for those types of lens
[http://www.lensrepro.com/]]]]][http://www.equinoxphotographic.com/]]]]
[http://www.equinoxphotographic.com/][For sale section]][[[http://photo.net/][for sale forum]]][[http://www.apug.org/forums/home.php][for sale section]]]]
[[http://www.keh.com/onlinestore/home.aspx?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=photo%2Bequipment&utm_campaign=photography]]

good luck :

[Caracalla]

Check your pulse for magic bullet attackis. Yes, the GDMC is a lovely lovely lens. A lot of pluses in a very small elegant package. But $2600? I wouldn't accuse anyone else, but I know I have to constantly remind myself, "it's the image stupid". IOW some images made with a $26 lens can trump the ones made with the $2600 lens simply because they are wonderful.

OK, OK. If you twist my arm I'll cave in and sell you my lowly single coated GD14 for a mere $2150.00

Jim,

As far as twisting your arm, I can work on that;) but $2,150.00 is out of my league and that's the problem:(

[Caracalla]

I've got a 14" Apo-Artar that set me back a whopping $225.00 plus another $45.00 to Carol Flutot for a CLA. I'd bet a thousand bucks that if me and Jim were to shoot the same subject without knowing the other was doing it, and then if you compared the image shot with his Gold Dot and the one shot with my Red Dot, his would be much, much better than mine.

Not because the lens is better. He's just a good photographer and I'm not. However, if he used both lenses to shoot the same image, I'd love to see how many people could see the difference.

Totally Agree!

[Scott Davis]

I've actually seen that test - well, with the GD Dagor, a 14" Commercial Ektar, a 375mm Ilex, and one other that I can't recall at this time. What I do know is that you CAN tell the difference between the lenses. The Dagor is by far the most contrasty, but it also has the harshest out-of-focus areas, and an unpleasant sharpness. The Ilex and Ektar were pretty closely tied for smooth focus transitions, overall contrast and color, and high but not intrusive sharpness. These shots were done on 8x10 transparency, so you couldn't fudge the results in printing.

[Caracalla]

Almost everthing used in the 355-360 range will give better overall performance IMO than a Dagor on small formats (8X10 and smaller) and would be much less expensive. That would inlcude Symmar-S, Rodnestock-Sironar, Fujinon-W, Nikkor-W, etc. That would also include most of the Apo type lenses mounted in shuter: Red Dot Artar, Apo-Nikkor, Apo-Geronar, etc.

Of coure, some love the "Dagor" look, which is quite real. But that look results in large part from lens aberrations that give a nice "bokeh" in the out of focus parts of the image. But for the "Dagor" look older non-coated or single coated Dagors would do just as well, if not better.


Sandy King

I agree and the price difference so far is substantially different.

[Caracalla]

I'd look at a 14" Commercial Ektar as a viable alternative. Not only is it a faster optic (f6.3), but it throws a huge image circle (11x14 with movement), costs 1/5 what that Dagor did, and actually has a more pleasing bokeh (the iris in a Copal 3 is a 5-bladed iris, which yields some pretty harsh OOFAs, whereas the Ilex #5 shutter has a 20+ bladed iris, which gives a much more nearly circular aperture, thus smoother transitions from sharp to out-of-focus). The Commercial Ektars are also coated (not multi, but still) so they give excellent contrast without being too punchy.

OK 14" Commercial Ektar, Yusuf Karshs favourite lens I hear. I know his images but can somebody point me to the link/direction of some real world images.

Finally, where do I get one? any ideas?

[Caracalla]

I think that price was an aberration. Probably closer to $1200-1400. I got mine years ago to use for 8x10. Then it turned out that I never used the 8x10 that often and when I did it was with wider angle lenses. Now I've been using this lens with 5x7. Does have a different look compared to my other "modern" lenses. Never seems to be hard sharp or harsh. As compared to say my 150 G-Claron. I'm still not sure I like the look. Anyhow I'll trade my one owner complete with box lens for your 5x7 wood Canham with 5x7 and 4x5 back. Gotta strike while the iron is hot. Did I mention the small size 60mm filter, and that Compur shutter is nice even without a T setting.

Chuck,

I don't have 5x7 wood Canham with 5x7 and 4x5 back but if you could help me translate that in $$$;) i would appreciate it:)

[Caracalla]

I think Camera West in Monterrey has a single coated Schneider GD 14inch for about $1400 - I actually prefer the single coated iteration of this lens - the MC version is pretty harsh.


Thanks, I will give them a call...

[Caracalla]

Here is a list of web site's to go looking for those types of lens
[http://www.lensrepro.com/]]]]][http://www.equinoxphotographic.com/]]]]
[http://www.equinoxphotographic.com/][For sale section]][[[http://photo.net/][for sale forum]]][[http://www.apug.org/forums/home.php][for sale section]]]]
[[http://www.keh.com/onlinestore/home.aspx?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=photo%2Bequipment&utm_campaign=photography]]

good luck :

Short-Cut appreciated ;)

!!!Cheers!!!

[Caracalla]

I've actually seen that test - well, with the GD Dagor, a 14" Commercial Ektar, a 375mm Ilex, and one other that I can't recall at this time. What I do know is that you CAN tell the difference between the lenses. The Dagor is by far the most contrasty, but it also has the harshest out-of-focus areas, and an unpleasant sharpness. The Ilex and Ektar were pretty closely tied for smooth focus transitions, overall contrast and color, and high but not intrusive sharpness. These shots were done on 8x10 transparency, so you couldn't fudge the results in printing.

Did you see the test locally or published, web, etc.

[tim atherton]

I recall reading that this was the lens Lynn Cohen used for a lot of her colour work along with the 8.25" version)

After trying a number of modern lenses, this was the only one she found that gave her the combination of colour rendition, crispness and sharpness she needed for her large prints

http://www.lynne-cohen.com/

[Caracalla]

Jim Galli,

I forgot to mention, I went to see your site and loved it, very nice photos you have there ,

!!!Awesome!!!

[Caracalla]

I recall reading that this was the lens Lynn Cohen used for a lot of her colour work along with the 8.25" version)

After trying a number of modern lenses, this was the only one she found that gave her the combination of colour rendition, crispness and sharpness she needed for her large prints

http://www.lynne-cohen.com/


Tim, Thanks for the link...

[Jim Galli]

Jim Galli,

I forgot to mention, I went to see your site and loved it, very nice photos you have there ,

!!!Awesome!!!

Well thanks! Nice of you to say. Best luck in your search. The page about Burgers Sierra Retreat (http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/Lodge/Lodge60.html) was almost entirely done with the 14" Dagor. Jim

[Bill_1856]

There are many wealthy people in the photography business/hobby who can afford anything they want. That particular Dagor is, in a way, the ultimate LF lens, and obviously someone with the wherewithall wanted it. (Not everyone is as cheap and stingy as Jim Galli, Dan Smith, and me.)

[neil poulsen]

The final bid was placed by a "0" history bidder "!00!00!00!" whose obvious intent was the spoil the auction. However, a serious bidder placed a $2590 bid, so it might have legitimately sold for something approximating that amount.

It would have been nice if EBay could have interceded to save the auction.

[Nick_3536]

Caracalla are you shooting ULF? If not why even chase a Dagor that will excite all the ULF folks?

Plenty of big 360mm lenses that almost nobody wants. They all have plenty of coverage for 8x10 or smaller. The downside is the huge size and matching filters.

If you can live with 300mm then you can get some small newer lenses that don't cost a great deal.

[Caracalla]

Well thanks! Nice of you to say. Best luck in your search. The page about Burgers Sierra Retreat (http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/Lodge/Lodge60.html) was almost entirely done with the 14" Dagor. Jim

You seem to have a very good taste so you keep getting better and better :)

Way to Go Jim!!! Keep shooting.....!!!

I love the last one esspecialy!

[Caracalla]

There are many wealthy people in the photography business/hobby who can afford anything they want. That particular Dagor is, in a way, the ultimate LF lens, and obviously someone with the wherewithall wanted it. (Not everyone is as cheap and stingy as Jim Galli, Dan Smith, and me.)

So far, these lenses are holding their value exceptionally well, I am not sure if anything is going to change in the near future but I'll keep trying.

[Caracalla]

The final bid was placed by a "0" history bidder "!00!00!00!" whose obvious intent was the spoil the auction. However, a serious bidder placed a $2590 bid, so it might have legitimately sold for something approximating that amount.

It would have been nice if EBay could have interceded to save the auction.

I don't think eBay can do much about it, but it was too hi/much for me anyway so....

[Caracalla]

Caracalla are you shooting ULF? If not why even chase a Dagor that will excite all the ULF folks?

Plenty of big 360mm lenses that almost nobody wants. They all have plenty of coverage for 8x10 or smaller. The downside is the huge size and matching filters.

If you can live with 300mm then you can get some small newer lenses that don't cost a great deal.

Getting there :) I had a very good deal on the 20x24 but couldn't find the Polaroid processor for it, so I'm still thinking.

Fellow photographer/member Scot Davis suggested 14" Commercial Ektar in #5 Ilexs shutter or..., so I'll be happy to buy it if I can find one in good condition.

[Scott Davis]

Did you see the test locally or published, web, etc.

I saw it locally. A friend of mine has the original transparencies, and we're going to scan them in this weekend possibly (I've now got an Epson V750 so this is doable), with an eye to posting them here or somewhere else.

14" Commercial Ektars in good working condition should be available for under $400. $500+ is a collectible one complete with original presentation box and caps, in pristine condition. Also keep your eye out for the 375mm Ilex (which is essentially a 14" Commercial Ektar, tweaked a little), which will probably go even cheaper because of the lack of brand name. There were slight, subtle differences in the 375 and the 14", but they were very minor.

[Steve Hamley]

Folks,

I've owned a 14" single coated Kern Dagor and a 14" Blue Dot Trigor. Both sans filter threads. Both were extremely flare prone even on 4x5 pointed into the light. I sold both and now use a 360mm WA Apo Nikkor with good results on 8x10 and 8x20.

For 4x5, I use a 360 mm Kowa mounted in a Compur #2.

I'll second the motion for the 14" Ektar, Great lens and likely has as much or more coverage than the Kern Dagor, along with a more pleasing (IMO) contrast. BTW, I'm a Dagor fan, but just not this particular one.

Steve

[Scott Rosenberg]

not much to add to this thread, just wanted to say hi to steve h... it's been a while since i've seen him around these parts!

[Bill_1856]

Dr. Sobrinho has had two of these, and claims disappointment with both of them (compared with the pre-Scheider, Goerz versions). He should know.

[Caracalla]

Dr. Sobrinho has had two of these, and claims disappointment with both of them (compared with the pre-Scheider, Goerz versions). He should know.

Perhaps I am not that frequent on this forum, but unfortunately I don't know who Dr. Sobrinho is.

[Caracalla]

I saw it locally. A friend of mine has the original transparencies, and we're going to scan them in this weekend possibly (I've now got an Epson V750 so this is doable), with an eye to posting them here or somewhere else.

14" Commercial Ektars in good working condition should be available for under $400. $500+ is a collectible one complete with original presentation box and caps, in pristine condition. Also keep your eye out for the 375mm Ilex (which is essentially a 14" Commercial Ektar, tweaked a little), which will probably go even cheaper because of the lack of brand name. There were slight, subtle differences in the 375 and the 14", but they were very minor.

I would appreciate that very much, Thanks

Cheers

[Caracalla]

Folks,

I've owned a 14" single coated Kern Dagor and a 14" Blue Dot Trigor. Both sans filter threads. Both were extremely flare prone even on 4x5 pointed into the light. I sold both and now use a 360mm WA Apo Nikkor with good results on 8x10 and 8x20.

For 4x5, I use a 360 mm Kowa mounted in a Compur #2.

I'll second the motion for the 14" Ektar, Great lens and likely has as much or more coverage than the Kern Dagor, along with a more pleasing (IMO) contrast. BTW, I'm a Dagor fan, but just not this particular one.

Steve

I'm Looking for 14" Ektar, we'll see, perhaps I can find a good one faster then a DAGOR 355mm MC GOLD DOT Schneider 14" W/ Compur #3. However, DAGOR 355mm MC GOLD DOT is too much MONEY for me at this moment and there are none available.

[neil poulsen]

I had one for a while. Very contrasty lens. 4 air to glass surfaces, all multi-coated, whereas, the typical plasmat will have twice that many air to glass surfaces.

But according to Kerry Thalman, it had only a 318 image circle. Not great for 8x10, but stopping down improved that.

[Skip Roessel]

I have a Schneider gold dot 14, for my Korona 7x17, and I like that the best. But it's best in the corners after f/11 or f/16, and I also use the Fujinon 360 f/6.3 which is sharper in corners a couple of stops wider, and bigger moves with maybe 40mm wider circle... But that lens is twice or three times the weight and I hate using it. Would be good for architecture, with big rises, etc. Both Copal 3/
s/