Coverage of a Schneider 355mm gold dot dagor

[Bruce M. Herman]

Does anyone have first hand experience using a Schneider 355 mm f8 gold dot dagor on an 8x10 camera?

I am selling mine on eBay, but I've only used it on a 4x5. Kerry Thanlmann's View Camera article says its coverage at f16 is 302 mm, which is too little for an 8x10. But I seem to recall reading in an earlier View Camera issue that the lens is suitable for an 8x10.

I have a potential bidder who would like to use the lens on an 8x10, and I don't want to mislead him/her. Your help is appreciated!

Thanks, Bruce

[Chuck_1686]

Sure will. This lens is built for 8x10. I've never run out of coverage on my Wista 8x10. My Dagor info shows that Dagors will cover 56deg at f6.8, 70deg at f16 and 87deg at f45. An older Schneider brochure shows the 355 f8 as having 396mm coverage at f11 and infinity. Recommended to 10x12. Strange thing is that my lens box says angle of coverage at f45 is 58deg and 312.5mm. That has to be a misprint as I think they mean f8.

[Arne Croell]

This specific 14" Dagor covers less than previous Goertz models, but is still fine with 8x10. The copy of Schneiders official data sheet that I have lists an image circle of 443.8mm (! god knows how they arrived at the decimal number) at f/22, and 516mm at f/45. That translates to angles of 64 and 72 degrees, respectively.

[jerry brodkey]

I have one that I bought from Calumet about 1975 and it is labeled 14 inches. I actually thought it was too harsh and am much happier with a 355 mm g-Claron that I bought more recently. Use them both with plenty of movement on 8X10.

[neil poulsen]

I checked mine by looking to see at what rise I can see the extreme corners of the ground glass without having the rim of the lens vignette the f-stop.

On axis, focused at infinity at f16, there's slight vignetting, leading me to believe that Kerry's estimate is about right. What's interesting is that the older Goerz 355 Red Dot Artars at f16 were spec'd out at the same (302mm) image circle.

At f22, I can achieve a 1.75" rise with no vignetting. This translates to about a 385mm image circle at f22. It gets better at smaller apertures than this.

I'm wondering if the difference between this and Arne's estimates is whether or not there is practical falloff, versus actual vignetting.

Practically speaking, there's no problem using these lenses with movement for 8x10 at apertures of f22 and smaller.

[Bruce M. Herman]

Thanks to everyone for your rapid responses and helpful information!

Best wishes for a Merry Christmas!

Bruce

[Tom Diekwisch]

Mine says 395mm image circle at f45 with a coverage of 58 degree. Movements for 8x10 are 58/50mm at this aperture. All of these values seem to me about right. It is worth while knowing that the optimum aperture for this particular lens is f45, which is quite interesting. f22 is still very soft and f32 results in slight improvments. f64 and f90 suffer too much from diffraction. Thus - f45 is it! Anyway, it works well with 8x10 and ample movements at this aperture. You may also want to know that there have been three versions out there, and fanatics argue whether the second or the third deserve a higher value as a collectable. I know that I have the coveted third version which has been made by Kern in Switzerland, is multicoated, and has been re-calculated by Schneider. However, this third version has a smaller image circle than the other two. Others prefer the second version, which is not multicoated and has more coverage. Anyway, my version is quite something because of its high light transmission and almost complete absence of any reflection/flare. Kerry Thalman has some information on these lenses in his article on Schneider lenses.

[neil poulsen]

With respect to my data, I have the 3rd version to which Tom refers.

[CP Goerz]

Will just do 11x14 and no more, certainly no good for 8x20 etc, get a series III Dagor or a Berlin for that.

cp goerz