Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 41

Thread: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

  1. #21
    (Shrek)
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,929

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    After looking over Dan's list (thanks!) I wonder if the switch to plasmat type was due to the cost of manufacturing. A dagor requires 3 (usually) equally-sized elements that need to be ground to perfectly match for the glass/glass interfaces. I'll assume that at the time Schneider was doing the final adjustments by hand grinding. Which would be why the first focal length they switched to a plasmat was the largest, the 355, which by virtue of having the largest glass elements would be the hardest to grind to a perfect fit.

    And once the plasmat 355 was out there and accepted by the industry, they made the decision to switch the rest of the line too, because plasmats were increasingly used in process lenses starting about then perhaps due to the work Schneider themselves did in perfecting the design for the needs of graphic arts and printing.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    Jody, the G-Clarons are very roughly parallel to Symmars. The original Symmars were dagor types, replaced in the 1950s by plasmat types. The VM says that the plasmat types were better corrected than the dagor types. There's a hint.

  3. #23
    (Shrek)
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,929

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    Jody, the G-Clarons are very roughly parallel to Symmars. The original Symmars were dagor types, replaced in the 1950s by plasmat types. The VM says that the plasmat types were better corrected than the dagor types. There's a hint.
    I thought the Symmars converted to Plasmats much sooner? They're rare as hen's teeth, but fleabay almost always has dagor-type G-Clarons. And Schneider obviously knew photographers loved dagor rendering, given how long they kept making 'premium' dagors with fancy marketing (into the 1980s?).
    Last edited by Jody_S; 28-Nov-2020 at 14:55.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Forest Grove, Ore.
    Posts
    4,027

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    Would a Dagor type G-Claron 355mm have any advantage over a Plasmat 355mm G-Claron? The latter is an outstanding lens.

    Do the Dagor type G-Clarons exhibit focus shift, like some of the longer Dagors?

  5. #25
    Corran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North GA Mountains
    Posts
    8,251

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    Probably image circle for one. My 305mm GC Dagor covers 8x20, as I've mentioned in the past. The 355 covers 12x20 at the least...maybe more?

    PS: my 305 exhibits negligible focus shift. A 210mm f/6.8 Symmar I have of the Dagor persuasion has copious amounts though.
    Bryan | Blog | YouTube | Instagram | Portfolio
    All comments and thoughtful critique welcome

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Collinsville, CT USA
    Posts
    1,928

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    Quote Originally Posted by neil poulsen View Post
    Would a Dagor type G-Claron 355mm have any advantage over a Plasmat 355mm G-Claron?
    I believe that I have used both over the years. Am 90% sure that my first 355mm was a Dagor formula. About 15? years later acquired a 355mm Plasmat. Never used both at the same time to compare, but both served me well on my 11x14. Looking at negatives side by side from both lenses (unfortunately different images/images and 15? years apart), I honestly couldn't tell you which was shot with which lens. I can remember only once when the Plasmat wouldn't cover the whole negative... Architectural vertical shot with extreme rise of the front standard.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    Re Dagors' and clones' focus shift on stopping down. My dagor type G-Clarons (150, 210 and 3 240s that I've sold) have/had none. My Boyer Beryls (85, 90, 135, 180, 210, 210 S and 250) have none. My 45/9 CZJ Goerz Dagor (a wide angle lens) doesn't have it either. But I don't doubt that older Goerz Dagors do. Don't know about newer ones, there have been recomputations.

  8. #28
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,989

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    My experience is with the final Kern dagors that Schneider marketed. The double-triple G-Claron was already in the rear view mirror. They distinctly told me that dagors in general were too tricky to make due to the need for precisely matched front and rear elements, and that the newer GC plasmats were better corrected anyway. Dagors have their own special rendering, but I'm of the impression that GC dagors were marketed as process lenses. Plasmat GC's have much larger effective image circles, and even though marketed for tabletop photography, are superb at infinity too. My Kern Dagors had focus shift only within the first half-stop from wide open.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Newbury, Vermont
    Posts
    1,381

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    When I first got into 11x14 years ago...my first lens was a 19" Eastman Anastigmat (in barrel)...followed by a 14" Schneider/Kern Dagor - which was blazingly sharp but exhibited a noticeable field curvature for that film size. I ended up with a Schneider/Kern Blue-Dot Trigor, from the very last batch, which was absolutely phenomenal in every way.

    Edit: Actually, after the 19" E.K. Anastigmat (but before the Kern Dagor)...I did own a 12" Series 3 Dagor for awhile...which covered 11x14 and was quite a nice lens - but there was just a bit of focus shift as I remember.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Recognizing dagor type G-Clarons

    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Wiley View Post
    Plasmat GC's have much larger effective image circles,
    If you believe claims in the catalogs, its the other way 'round.

    G-Claron claimed coverage @f/22 (mm)

    f dagor plasmat

    150 191 189
    210 280.5 260
    240 319 298
    270 360 335
    305 411.5 381
    355 ? 444

Similar Threads

  1. Information on C-Clarons? (not G-Clarons!)
    By Jeff Dyck in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 26-Apr-2005, 10:02
  2. double anastigmat type G-Clarons
    By Dan Fromm in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 15-Sep-2004, 13:36

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •