PDA

View Full Version : 610mm De Golden Busch VS Schneider 550 XXL



8x10 user
9-Aug-2008, 09:57
Which is better for ULF? The Golden Busch seems like a more complicated plasmat design. Would it be sharper at larger apertures then the XXL? How about the differences in light fall off? ...Shouldn't the plasmat have more even illumination?

aduncanson
9-Aug-2008, 11:55
I can find little information on the 610 De Golden Busch, but the 550 Schneider XXL looks like a modification of the Dagor design. Schneider gives an angle of view of 78 deg at f/22 which is better than your typical plasmat will do. The 480mm WF De Golden Busch looks like a double Gauss design, like the Kodak Wide Field Ektar, which will cover as well or better than a Dagor. The 610 De Golden Busch is also described as a WF lens and so is probably a similar design. If so, it could have coverage for a 32x40 inch negative. For all of their adherents (and I am one) neither the double Gauss nor the Dagor will be as sharp as a modern plasmat derived design.

On the other hand, is ultimate sharpness really critical for your purpose? Are you going to make an 8x enlargement of your ULF negative and then evaluate its sharpness from a viewing distance of 10 inches?

IanG
9-Aug-2008, 13:15
You'd have to try both lenses to find out. But I think I'd rather trust Schneiders design criteria.

Ian

8x10 user
9-Aug-2008, 13:54
Are you sure it is a double Gauss design? It looks similar to a Sironar to me.

http://www.superlarge.com/deGoldenBusch/index.html

sanking
9-Aug-2008, 14:03
I am surprised to see that web site still active. Are these products still available?


Sandy King



Are you sure it is a double Gauss design? It looks similar to a Sironar to me.

http://www.superlarge.com/deGoldenBusch/index.html

8x10 user
9-Aug-2008, 14:31
I don't think they are available new. I did see a 19" Golden Busch sell on eBay for ~5k around a year ago.

aduncanson
9-Aug-2008, 15:35
Are you sure it is a double Gauss design? It looks similar to a Sironar to me.

http://www.superlarge.com/deGoldenBusch/index.html

That is the same image that I looked at, that made me think it was double Gauss. I am reading it that there are 4 elements with shading marks on their cross sections. The only way I can square that with Busch's claim of "7 elements" is if he counts the three air spaces. Which is not completely unprecedented.

Eric Leppanen
9-Aug-2008, 15:48
http://cgi.ebay.com/de-Golden-Busch-610mm-f12-W-F-wide-lens_W0QQitemZ270261164198QQihZ017QQcategoryZ3323QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

For what it's worth, the seller claims coverage of 20x24.

8x10 user
9-Aug-2008, 16:13
It looks like there are three strong reflections in the front and two in the back. Does that mean that it has 7 elements in 5 groups like the Apo-Sironar-W?

Dave Wooten
9-Aug-2008, 18:21
Melles Girot made the Golden Busch lenses, I think.

sanking
9-Aug-2008, 18:47
I have the 550 Schneider XXL and it is a fantastic lens. It is a Dagor type lens but designed to give better coverage on the edges than traditional Dagors. It will cover 20X24 with quite a bit of movement. It is multi-coated and has exceptional contrast.

Although I have never used the 610 Golden Busch my guess is that the Schneider is a better lens, but in ULF the difference is not likely to be relevant.

Sandy King



Which is better for ULF? The Golden Busch seems like a more complicated plasmat design. Would it be sharper at larger apertures then the XXL? How about the differences in light fall off? ...Shouldn't the plasmat have more even illumination?

IanG
10-Aug-2008, 05:48
Melles Girot made the Golden Busch lenses, I think.

The company is actually "Melles Griot" (http://www.mellesgriot.com/) the misspelling seems to be in all the references to the Golden Busch lenses.

It would be interesting to know where the design came from, perhaps someone in Rochester has various lens designs tucked away. It's noticeable the lenses are always in Rochester made shutters.

Ian

Dan Fromm
10-Aug-2008, 08:45
Ian, Melles Griot is a successor to Ilex. I haven't checked for a while, but I believe that MG still offers Ilex electronic shutters with, of course, its own name on them.

About the de Golden-Busch lens' element count, I think there are three pieces of flat (or nearly) flat glass in it.

IanG
10-Aug-2008, 09:13
Thanks Dan, I assumed it was something like that. Yes they do still make & sell electronic shutters.

Your also right the diagram of the de Golden Busch does appear to have flat glass in it, very strange.

Ian

Tracy Storer
10-Aug-2008, 10:36
I don't know about sample to sample consistency, but the 610 de-Golden Busch I used did not cover 20x24 generously...if I remember correctly, at least illumination (if not sharpness as well) suffered around the edges when we used it near infinity.
The Schneider 550 XXL sounds great, I would love to try one some day. (I use a Fuji 600-C which is very good.)


http://cgi.ebay.com/de-Golden-Busch-610mm-f12-W-F-wide-lens_W0QQitemZ270261164198QQihZ017QQcategoryZ3323QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

For what it's worth, the seller claims coverage of 20x24.

aduncanson
10-Aug-2008, 11:01
To further over-interpret a vague technical drawing, notice that there are also ray tracings depicted. (http://www.superlarge.com/deGoldenBusch/index.html)

Those three "flat or nearly flat" elements also do not refract the rays detectably. Even if flat, there should be refraction of oblique rays at the interfaces. Therefore these elements are not only flat, but they have a refractive index very close to air - even more strange.

GPS
10-Aug-2008, 11:43
To further over-interpret a vague technical drawing, notice that there are also ray tracings depicted. (http://www.superlarge.com/deGoldenBusch/index.html)

Those three "flat or nearly flat" elements also do not refract the rays detectably. Even if flat, there should be refraction of oblique rays at the interfaces. Therefore these elements are not only flat, but they have a refractive index very close to air - even more strange.

There are no three "flat or nearly flat" glass elements in the drawing, just 4 glass elements.

8x10 user
10-Aug-2008, 12:28
Perhaps there are 7 elements in 4 groups? The design looks like a Sironar to me, but the curvature of the elements seems more extreme. Maybe the extra element was required to produce such deep curves. http://www.prograf.ru/rodenstock/images/apo-sironar-s_scheme.jpg Diagram of a Apo-Sironar-S

8x10 user
10-Aug-2008, 12:30
How does the 550 XL perform wide open?

GPS
10-Aug-2008, 12:37
Perhaps there are 7 elements in 4 groups? The design looks like a Sironar to me, but the curvature of the elements seems more extreme. Maybe the extra element was required to produce such deep curves. http://www.prograf.ru/rodenstock/images/apo-sironar-s_scheme.jpg

8x10, your pink drawing is not the same as the one in the link. Anyway, there is no perhaps about the number of elements in the drawing - technical drawings are clear enough (they have to be) to see it.

8x10 user
10-Aug-2008, 12:56
I am no expert on the matter. I read that there were 7 elements, yet I can only see 4 groups... The technical diagram and the information supplied on the website do not seem to be very clear to me.

I do appreciate all of the responses to this thread and I value everyone's opinion.

8x10 user
10-Aug-2008, 13:03
Apparently, Rodenstock had a part in the design and may have supplied the glass.

http://photo.net/large-format-photography-forum/004Mxh

http://www.apug.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-14163.html

I do know that Melles Griot is known for making High-End custom lenses. MGI used them to make the lenses for the premium camera modules on their top of the line Gemini film recorders (the low-end modules use the Nikkor AMED). I would not be surprised if they also made the lenses for the Creo/Scitex Eversmart Supreme flatbed scanner.

http://optics.mellesgriot.com/optics_guide.asp


The company is actually "Melles Griot" (http://www.mellesgriot.com/) the misspelling seems to be in all the references to the Golden Busch lenses.

It would be interesting to know where the design came from, perhaps someone in Rochester has various lens designs tucked away. It's noticeable the lenses are always in Rochester made shutters.

Ian

Mark Sampson
11-Aug-2008, 04:50
Douglas Busch told the story in an old "View Camera" magazine, maybe 15 years back. My copy is buried in the attic and I'm not going up there to find it, but as I remember it, his lenses were designed by Rodenstock, and built by Melles Griot. Few were made because Busch's financier backed out of the project early on. Perhaps Mr. Simmons can provide us with a link or the article date.

aduncanson
11-Aug-2008, 07:22
In an email to me this morning Doug Busch provided the following information.

Bob Schwalberg (head writer for pop photo for years until his death)
said "the 610mm de Golden Busch is the Rolls Royce in a day of
chevy's" New design innovative in the field of lens design and multi
coated. It is incredibly sharp at infinity and optimum sharpness is
f22 NOT f8. It does not fall apart as you stop it down. He compared
it to the Nikor and Fuji field lenses being made at the time. Hope
that helps. Best, D

Posts on other forums suggest that the Pop Photo article would date to approximately 1990.

GPS
11-Aug-2008, 07:36
In an email to me this morning Doug Busch provided the following information.

-snip-
New design innovative in the field of lens design and multi
coated. It is incredibly sharp at infinity and optimum sharpness is
f22 NOT f8. It does not fall apart as you stop it down. He compared
it to the Nikor and Fuji field lenses being made at the time. Hope
that helps. Best, D

snip.

Something is wrong here. The "optimum sharpness is f22 NOT f8" - that's entirely normal for a LF lens. "It doesn't fall apart as you stop it down" - hopefully you're not speaking about the lens...:)

aduncanson
11-Aug-2008, 08:01
Something is wrong here. The "optimum sharpness is f22 NOT f8" - that's entirely normal for a LF lens. "It doesn't fall apart as you stop it down" - hopefully you're not speaking about the lens...:)


Well, I believe he was quoting Popular Photography. I do not remember that magazine ever being particularly attentive to LF equipment or technique.

Dave Wooten
11-Aug-2008, 08:18
f/9 apo nikkor 610 mm. A bit easier to locate? and a less expensive option, not at all rare. I believe it will cover 20 x 24. It does cover 14 x 17, I don t have a 20 x 24 camera, but projected image on wall indicates it might be ample for 20 x 24 (?). It is a very sharp lens.

Don7x17
11-Aug-2008, 08:42
I actually have both the XXL 550 and de Golden Busch 610 (and a Fuji 600)....time for a test!

The 610 was widely advertised as covering 20x24 and while I don't do 20x24 (only 12x20 and 7x17), both have plenty of shift/rise&fall.

Anyone know where I can get a couple appropriate resolution charts to put onto a wall (make two images per lens...one at the edge and one at the center.)?

The use of filters on the two lenses is quite different.
Years ago I had a filter adapter cut and anodized by Keith Canham to fit the 610 (slips on and has a tightening mechanism) to take 105mm filters. This works well (fortunately the 610 does not have the protuding elements that the de Golden Busch 482mm has). The 550 XXL is threaded front and rear for 122mm filters. S.G. can cut you a stepup ring if you have a collection of larger filters (I use 135 for several other lenses)

With the 610, you could also take an oversize filter onto the front of the lens using a sticky but low tack tape like the 3M Blue masking tape (sold for paint masking), but this is at some risk to the filter.

There is quite a difference between the rebuilt (I am told) Acme #5 that the 610 is fitted with v.s. the Copal 3. The Copal has 1/3 detents across the range, whereas the acme is continous in f-stop. The detent vs continuous does not matter.


If you go to the Busch website, the lens cross section in the lower right is for the 482mm lens...the 610 is constructed differently and does NOT have protuding glass elements as this diagram shows. http://www.superlarge.com/deGoldenBusch/index.html
Note that there are NO non-curved elements - this is a cross section of the entire lens and the vertical lines are actually the curved body(back into the page from the view shown) of the back half of the lens metal body. Similar artifacts occur on the XXL cross section on the left side of the schneider brochure, but the draftsman has shaded the body so a difference is apparent to the viewer http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/pdf/foto/fine_art_lens.pdf

Jim Galli
11-Aug-2008, 09:16
Interesting thread comparing Maserati and Lamborghini. I can't have either one but can speculate from the couch as well as anyone. The 19" lens cross section is nearly identical to the Schneider Wide Angle G-Claron 270mm f11. It is a gigantic hunk of glass good only for impressing your friends and family. Not quite true, it covered 11X14 and made a sharp enough image stopped down but the smaller plasmat G-Claron covered better. The WA G-Claron was an enormous WF double gauss design with protruding glass. That's what I think the "7 element" lens in the d-g-b picture is showing.

GPS
11-Aug-2008, 10:21
-snip-
If you go to the Busch website, the lens cross section in the lower right is for the 482mm lens...the 610 is constructed differently and does NOT have protuding glass elements as this diagram shows. http://www.superlarge.com/deGoldenBusch/index.html
Note that there are NO non-curved elements - this is a cross section of the entire lens and the vertical lines are actually the curved body(back into the page from the view shown) of the back half of the lens metal body. Similar artifacts occur on the XXL cross section on the left side of the schneider brochure, but the draftsman has shaded the body so a difference is apparent to the viewer http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/pdf/foto/fine_art_lens.pdf

The vertical lines are simple inner light baffles (2 steps) that make the lens more "light tight" behind the front lens group. Notice that on the exit part of the lens (the back element) they are not, as there they would have no function.

Don7x17
11-Aug-2008, 10:32
The vertical lines are simple inner light baffles (2 steps) that make the lens more "light tight" behind the front lens group. Notice that on the exit part of the lens (the back element) they are not, as there they would have no function.

yes - the casual viewer can see that there are no retaining rings (which are clearly cross sectioned on the the view just "outside" each of the four elements.)

More interesting is that I unscrewed the rear element from the shutter and verified on both the de Golden Busch 482 and 610 -- there are no "flat" elements, just the inner curved surfaces.

So the 482 is clearly a 4/4 design (4 elements in 4 groups). I don't have the 610 cross section (anyone have the old literature? My copy got lost in a move years ago).

Don

Don7x17
12-Aug-2008, 07:55
Anyone out there have the old literature?

I've talked with Doug Busch -- he lost everything (brochures,etc ) in a basement flooding years ago which is why there is so little on the website.

I was a little surprised that he had 6, not 4, different lenses in his series (the older literature I had from his Cripple Creek Workshop in the late 1980's had only 4 as I remembered). Doug said 'They are "14", 19", 24", 30", 35", & 40". all different, all focus at infinity with 36" image circle and all optimum sharpness f22'.

Don7x17
12-Aug-2008, 08:47
Douglas Busch told the story in an old "View Camera" magazine, maybe 15 years back. My copy is buried in the attic and I'm not going up there to find it, but as I remember it, his lenses were designed by Rodenstock, and built by Melles Griot. Few were made because Busch's financier backed out of the project early on. Perhaps Mr. Simmons can provide us with a link or the article date.

In response to my question "did the glass come from Rodenstock", Doug Busch says "yes, Les Everson and I designed them (he was head of Rodenstock USA, old friend). "

Dave Wooten
12-Aug-2008, 08:54
Anyone out there have the old literature?

I've talked with Doug Busch -- he lost everything (brochures,etc ) in a basement flooding years ago which is why there is so little on the website.

I was a little surprised that he had 6, not 4, different lenses in his series (the older literature I had from his Cripple Creek Workshop in the late 1980's had only 4 as I remembered). Doug said 'They are "14", 19", 24", 30", 35", & 40". all different, all focus at infinity with 36" image circle and all optimum sharpness f22'.

Don that is an interesting bit of info! So the 14" - 40" all have 36" circle at infinity? Do you know if all of these were actually produced and the quantity of each?
:)

Thanks Dave

GPS
12-Aug-2008, 09:08
Don that is an interesting bit of info! So the 14" - 40" all have 36" circle at infinity? Do you know if all of these were actually produced and the quantity of each?
:)

Thanks Dave

Strange, isn't it? The 14" would then have more than 100 view angle and would need a CF...:)

Don7x17
12-Aug-2008, 12:03
Don that is an interesting bit of info! So the 14" - 40" all have 36" circle at infinity? Do you know if all of these were actually produced and the quantity of each?
:)

Thanks Dave


Doug has five of the six (missing 482 as someone took them (2?).)
14 and 19 come up for sale occasionally, so they were done in small quantity. I've only seen one of the other four for sale in the used market, so I am guessing the upper four are quite rare (recall Doug was having financial issues at the time). Doug hasn't given me any quantity figures.

Maybe someone out there still has the lens literature and could scan a copy for me???
thanks

I don't know the coverage -- will be testing the 14 and 19 soon for coverage, falloff and sharpness (on film, not aerial image based)...or maybe someone wants to do it more quickly (and save me the effort!) ?
Don

Don7x17
12-Aug-2008, 12:05
Strange, isn't it? The 14" would then have more than 100 view angle and would need a CF...:)

We'll see what the reality is when we test them for coverage...

CP Goerz
13-Aug-2008, 20:20
Melles Griot did make the lenses for Doug Busch however he had a financial backer that pulled out at the last second and Griot were left holding the bag and had a nasty aftertaste in their mouths and won't answer any questions in either letter/E or telephone call about the lenses.


I have a 610 Busch but not the Schneider however I do have a 600mm Dagor, the 'look' of the lenses is almost identical when stopped down to 32....open shadows smooth highlights but the Busch is a bit softer at the wider open settings. I actually have a hard time seeing a difference at F45 and smaller between the two.



The Fine art Schneider is a Dagor design in the 550mm focal length so expect similar results to a Goerz...this cannot be carried down in focal length to the 14" Schneider which was the worst Dagor ever made, gold dot or not they culled the coverage for lame ass shutter use. Not even Carl Zeiss was that incompetent. I have some lens drawings I was given by a fine old friend I'll look up....Well there are a couple of 610mm Busch lenses, one is an F12 while the other is F9, different designs indeed! One is an Asymmetrical double Gauss which is the version I described above while the other is one of those amazing 'fisheye' looking things that I have only used in the 482mm f11 version...sigh :-)


As a small matter of interest Mr Busch had Griot make up a 14" version of the truly justifiably incredible WA Dagor, he thinks they only made one and that his is unique...but they actually made two...one can only guess where the other is :-)

CP Goerz
13-Aug-2008, 20:31
PS:I have drawings for....1016mm F16, 889mm F16, 889 F12.6, 762mm F12, 610mm F12, 610mm F9, 482mm F11 WF, and of course the 14" WA Dagor type lens, none have the refractive index of the glass mentioned which important is VERY important in the WA dagor copy...apparently its the most important part of the lens design.

Don7x17
14-Aug-2008, 08:34
PS:I have drawings for....1016mm F16, 889mm F16, 889 F12.6, 762mm F12, 610mm F12, 610mm F9, 482mm F11 WF, and of course the 14" WA Dagor type lens, none have the refractive index of the glass mentioned which important is VERY important in the WA dagor copy...apparently its the most important part of the lens design.

Can you please share these? Private or public post(preferred)
Thanks!

8x10 user
14-Aug-2008, 16:50
I would also like this information.


PS:I have drawings for....1016mm F16, 889mm F16, 889 F12.6, 762mm F12, 610mm F12, 610mm F9, 482mm F11 WF, and of course the 14" WA Dagor type lens, none have the refractive index of the glass mentioned which important is VERY important in the WA dagor copy...apparently its the most important part of the lens design.