is a 210mm gold dot really worth this?

[jetcode]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=170174455369&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=007

is it better then a modern lens such as the Fuji 240mm A or a Rodenstock Sironar N?

[Gene McCluney]

The Dagor design has a wider image circle, which means more movements are possible on your view camera, or you may often use it on a larger format camera than the lenses you mention. I have an old 300mm Dagor which easily covers 11x14, and possibly would cover even larger film, while my 300mm Nikkor f5.6 will not cover 11x14. This wide coverage, coupled with a lens modern enough to have nice anti-reflection coatings makes the lens desirable. The 210mm focal length in a Dagor design should easily cover 8x10 with some movements.

[Dan Fromm]

Joe, Gene, it isn't a 210, it is a 165. And it isn't an f/6.8, it is an f/8.

For an interesting discussion of f/6.8 Dagors, see http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=13109&highlight=lousy+dagor

Gene, one of my friends has done calculations on real Goerz Dagor designs and on similar designs from other makers. He believes that the claimed 85 degrees coverage for, e.g., the f/6.8 Boyer Beryl, is considerably exaggerated. He's told me not to count on more than 70 for general use, 55 for exacting applications.

But f/8 Dagors aren't f/6.8s and may actually make the claimed 100 degrees coverage.

[Gene McCluney]

I apologize, I replied to the OP without looking at the auction, just giving my opinion based on the couple of Dagor's I have, which do perform quite well on very large film.

[jetcode]

Joe, Gene, it isn't a 210, it is a 165. And it isn't an f/6.8, it is an f/8.

For an interesting discussion of f/6.8 Dagors, see http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=13109&highlight=lousy+dagor

Gene, one of my friends has done calculations on real Goerz Dagor designs and on similar designs from other makers. He believes that the claimed 85 degrees coverage for, e.g., the f/6.8 Boyer Beryl, is considerably exaggerated. He's told me not to count on more than 70 for general use, 55 for exacting applications.

But f/8 Dagors aren't f/6.8s and may actually make the claimed 100 degrees coverage.


I got the auctions switched up, the owner had 2 gold dots for sale and the other one is a f/6.8 hence the mistake, in fact it is a 210mm f/6.8 not the one I listed. The question then becomes does this lens outperform the 120mm Nikon SW I own (it doesn't really matter much to me but for comparison sakes)?

[Dan Fromm]

I apologize, I replied to the OP without looking at the auction, just giving my opinion based on the couple of Dagor's I have, which do perform quite well on very large film.Gene, I'm just delighted with my 210/7.7 Beryl S on 2x3, but since it only has to cover 27 degrees I'm not asking much of it.

[sanking]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=170174455369&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=007

is it better then a modern lens such as the Fuji 240mm A or a Rodenstock Sironar N?


There is some madness in ebay bidding at times. In my opinion a 165mm WA Dagor is not worth $2000 as a user lens unless you are prepared to pay a huge premium for size and weight. In terms of both coverage and performance there are several better options out there that would cost 1/3 or less.Dagors appear to have acquired the status of cult artifcats, and who knows what a collector will pay? But as as user I could find much better ways to spend my money for a quality optic in the focal length.

Sandy King

[Ole Tjugen]

Personally I prefer reverse Dagors - both Zeiss Amatar and Schneider Angulon. I'm happy with my 165mm f:6.8 Angulon, which cost a very small fraction of what that WA Dagor did.

[Hugo Zhang]

Sandy,

All we need was two guys who wanted that item so badly at that very moment. The same guy paid over $4,100 for a Protar V 18" lens in shutter yesterday.

[jetcode]

Sandy,

All we need was two guys who wanted that item so badly at that very moment. The same guy paid over $4,100 for a Protar V 18" lens in shutter yesterday.

yikes, it must be nice to have deep pockets

[Ted Harris]

Joe, the other important thing is that we are talking about issues of coverage that mean absolutely nothing for 4x5. They become important for larger sizes. For example I was willing to pay a large premium several years ago for a 150 Apo Sironar W to get the greater coverage it offered over the "S."

For a general purpose lens in the 135 - 210 range none of the so called legendary lenses will outperform the modern multicoated offerings from the Big Four.

[Nick_3536]

I got the auctions switched up, the owner had 2 gold dots for sale and the other one is a f/6.8 hence the mistake, in fact it is a 210mm f/6.8 not the one I listed. The question then becomes does this lens outperform the 120mm Nikon SW I own (it doesn't really matter much to me but for comparison sakes)?

By 90mm :rolleyes: No point worrying about different focal lengths. Plenty of 210mm lenses range from just covering to some wide angle 210mm for the larger formats.

Fuji W or the Clarons would work for most formats.

[Ole Tjugen]

yikes, it must be nice to have deep pockets

Must be even nicer to have buyers with nice deep pockets! :D

[Tri Tran]

Sandy,

All we need was two guys who wanted that item so badly at that very moment. The same guy paid over $4,100 for a Protar V 18" lens in shutter yesterday.

I hope our dollars getting better otherwise all the rare birds will fly oversea regardless. TT

[Joseph O'Neil]

IMO, a classic "good news, bad news" situation. Locally I see excellent 35mm and MF film cameras and whole systems selling for sometimes 10 as low as cents on the original dollar. So to see such high prices on LF gear of any kind means we have a healthy future - at least I think so.

On the other hand, if I was personally going to spend that kind of money on a lens, I would likely buy a new one.

But on the other hand (again :) ), I see old Model-T automobiles in excellent shape sell for more money than a new Lincoln, so who knows....?

But on the other hand (again, again :) ), if I had that kind of money to spend on a car, I'd be buying a new Lincoln over an old Model T...

Better get outta here while I'm behind, eh?

:D

[gregstidham]

Maybe the bidders live in Europe. The exchange is very favorable.

IMO, $2000 is not that much to pay if you really like a lens. Most photographers spend much more on digi stuff that will be dead in 2 years.

[dpetersen]

I actually have one of these 6.5" jobs..in a new style copal 1...that I aquired a couple of years ago as part of a 4x10 outfit. I was really thinking that I overpaid at the time, but if this lens brings that kind of money-I'm a smart feller. The lens does do very well, covers 4x10 or 8x10 with room to spare, and produces very nice prints when used at a rational f stop.

DP