Image circle?

[Emil Schildt]

I have a VERY heavy Suter Anastigmat 520mm (20.5") lens (F6.3)

I have been looking around to find out how big a negative (camera) I can use this on..

no luck, I'm afraid.

Can anybody in here inlighten me?

(I have a 16x20 camera I want to try out... will it cover?)

I know I can put it on the camera and take a look, but the problem is, that - as said, the lens is really heavy - and I need to make a strong front plate for it (no flange an'all...)

Thanks for any input.

[Louis Pacilla]

Hey Emil

You know I would bet this is a Dagor copy (I think Eddie had one for sale a while back) something like a 2x 3 glued Cells.I don't think Suter called their Dagor copy Double Anastigmat but simply Anastigmat.

You will need to determine what the cell construction is to really get a clue on coverage.

If this is a Dagor copy( maybe collinear) it should certainly cover a 16x20 stopped down to something like f22-32 & possibly f 16.

I hope this helps. Remember, I'm going on my memory which suffers these days.:(

[Ongarine]

Yes Emil you are lucky:) , the Suter Anastigmat series II 520 mm. f6,3 will cover 16x20. I had an old photocopy of a Suter catalogue I studied very well because I had to test some of the their Anastigmats and I remeber quite well your is a candidate to fulfill you need.
I have some of them and they are, for my taste, excellent in image quality and in coverage. There were many slightly different design from Dagor and Suter did one of the best. Test it and let us know.
Ciao

[Ole Tjugen]

The Suter Anastigmat is more likely to be a 4+4 than a "straight Dagor copy".

I think it should cover your 50x60cm camera. But let me check the approximate coverage on MINE, and I'll get back to you!

[Emil Schildt]

The Suter Anastigmat is more likely to be a 4+4 than a "straight Dagor copy".

I think it should cover your 50x60cm camera. But let me check the approximate coverage on MINE, and I'll get back to you!

you have one too?

Thanks all - now the "problems" start!!
Without a flange I fear it will be very difficult to mount this safely on a front plate (it is very heavy!!

and just to make troubles...:

I have another candidate for this camera:

A Hermagis Aplanat 540mm... Will that cover too? (much, much lighter!)

[eddie]

A Hermagis Aplanat 540mm... Will that cover too? (much, much lighter!)

i bet it does easily.....

[Ole Tjugen]

An Aplanat is almost all air, an Antiplanet is almost all glass. So an Aplanat is a LOT lighter! :D

On the other hand, a 540mm Aplanat on 50x60 is really stretching it. A 680mm is the shortest i would thing would give decent corner definition.

[Emil Schildt]

An Aplanat is almost all air, an Antiplanet is almost all glass. So an Aplanat is a LOT lighter! :D

On the other hand, a 540mm Aplanat on 50x60 is really stretching it. A 680mm is the shortest i would thing would give decent corner definition.

Understood - however, Is my anastigmat an Antiplanet?:eek:

[luphot]

Hello,
an easy setup to test your FL and IC:
You don't need a big camera, flange or lens board, just a window, black fabric and tracing paper (you can tape x A3)...and 3 arms.
Tape on the window some black fabic with a hole in for the lens
Hold the lens on the window, move the tracing paper to focus at infinity, use your third hand to mesure FL and IC

[Ole Tjugen]

Understood - however, Is my anastigmat an Antiplanet?:eek:

Bad case of brain fart - reading one thread and replying in another.

However, most Aplanats are lighter than a comparable Anastigmat.

[Steven Tribe]

"use your third hand to mesure FL and IC".

This is one the first recorded cases of Gallic humour!
I know this is the recommended procedure but there are many problems, not just the problems of heavy lenses, limited number of hands and the maximum fixed distance between hands. My problem is windows in two or more of the four possible walls in every comfortable room in the house.