Schneider 550mm XXL Fine Art lens

[Steve Hamley]

Folks, some bits of info.

I had a quote from Focal Point a couple of months ago to recement the front glass of a 16-1/2" dagor which has a bit of fog. The price John quoted was $180 per cemented interface. So that's $360 for a Dagor cell or $720 for the whole lens. That doesn't include coating. So you have to have a potentially very valuable Dagor (read: long) to justify the cost of fixing cement and/or coatings. So to have an uncoated barrel Dagor coated and shuttered would indeed cost about $2,000 plus the cost of the lens. There are people who charge less than Focal Point, but John does have a good reputation.

Robert, I wasn't casting any aspersions, just floating the idea that the 550mm Fine Art is probably about the same price (or cheaper) as a similar length late vintage coated Dagor both in the current value of the dollars the vintage Dagor originally sold for and what both would bring today. The reason you don't see 24" Gold Dot Dagors or 550mm Fine Art lenses very much is because both are extremely pricey lenses, and why buy a 24" Dagor when a 24" Artar would cover even ULF formats at a fraction of the price. That's still a valid question, and one asked and answered in this thread.

I certainly agree that if you don't need the IC, there's no real reason to buy one unless it performs wide open and you need that capability, or you want (rather badly) multicoating. Most ULF shooters (even 8x10) stop down considerably for DOF. Also, in my experience most process lenses perform reasonably well near maximum aperture (also according to Chris Perez' site) and reach maximum resoultion at f/16, so a 24" Artar would seem to be good competition for the 550mm Fine Art if you can shoot at f/16 DOF issues not withstanding. Michael is correct that there are other issues to be considered, like multicoating and modern shutters, but I'll go out on a limb and offer the statement that for most of us (obviously) the difference isn't worth the $5,000 difference between a 24" Artar or 600mm Fuji C and the 550mm Fine Art. that said, I'd love to have one. I too, would like to turn an 8x20 vertical and have some rise available.

Steve

[jtf]

Oren, thanks for the pointer to Sandy King's comments regarding perceiving greater resolution than the often cited 8lpmm. Someday I hope to be fortunate enough to see King's work in person to experience the difference of ULF. Mr. Mutmansky's comments are well taken and again I hope to see an XXL made print in person. Clearly I have to see the outcomes to understand. My modest 5x4 is in a minor universe compared to ULF.

[robert_4927]

Steve, I have a vertical back that I use on my 8x20. Solves all the rise problem and I don't have to worry about the stress on the rails by turning it on its side. It is a nice option to have 2 backs with this format just for the fact that all your movements remain the same. Since my 8x20 is built on a 8x10 bed it has an 8x10 front standard. With this set up it is almost impossible to get the lens into the sweet spot of the ground glass with the vertical back on it and the 8x10 front standard even with a radical bed tilt. So I had an extra front Standard (bed and hardware) made with the vertical supports from a 16x20. It only takes an extra 30 sec to roll off the 8x10 front standard and roll on the taller front standard for the vertical back. I don't mean to get off topic but this does come in handy when shooting with a lens that barely covers the format. As far as coatings goes. I work in Pt/pd so contact printing is about all I do anymore so multicoatings are not a big issue to me. I have shots from a 24" apo artar and shots from a 24" red dot and you would be hard pressed to tell the difference. I think the Apo Artars (non red dots) are probably some of the best deals out there in the used market. But that's just my opinion and I'm sure not all will agree.

[robert_4927]

I just looked up the 550xxl. I must say it sure is one gorgeous lens. And it will probably be the mother of all lenses for ULF. Now I wish I hadn't looked. I'm sitting here trying to justify how I can order one. Sharp in the corners at wide apertures. Now a Dagor sure can't make that claim. Can't wait to see the test results.

[Michael Mutmansky]

Oren,

Let me look at the negatives I made and see. I think it can for a good portion of the image, if not for the full 900mm IC they have set in the specifications.

One thing to remember about the 1100mm XXL is that it is not operating at full aperture when in a shutter, so even if you use it wide open, it is stopped down about a stop inherent to the limits of the #3 shutter. I suspect that the lens is probably considerably less sharp into the corners at full aperture, as most lenses are.

-----

Robert,

I don't know if the 550XXl will be sharp in the corners at full aperture, but I do expect it to perform much better than the 600mm alternatives that are available to us, simply because it is a wide angle design.

Are there any lenses out there that have a 900mm image circle in this focal length? Most don't come anywhere near that, so when you are hitting the edge on an Artar (520mm IC) or Fujinon C (620mm IC), you still have several hundred millimeters of IC left with the XXL. That tells me that it should be able to deliver sharpness on a negative at fairly wide apertures without difficulty. We'll see if field curvature is controlled enough to make good images at large apertures. It will be an interesting lens to put through it's paces.

---Michael

[Steve Hamley]

Michael,

Keep us posted. I'm doing the same thing Robert is, trying to figure out how to justify one ...

Steve

[Bernard Languillier]

One stupid question.

I have been considering vaguely getting into ULF in the coming months in order to get the ultimate quality for some cases.

Since enlarging is not an option, and since contact print is too limitative size wize (I am already getting drop down gorgious 4*5 scan print outs at that size), the only reasonnable option to fully tap into the potential of 11*14 is to get a high end flat bed scanner (iQSmart2 or Fuji5000).

Now, I read here that the lenses might not be up to the challenge...

Here comes the question: does 11*14 really deliver additional image quality at image sizes aroud A2?

Thanks,
Regards, Bernard

[paulr]

if you're talking about contact printing (the assumption here, right?) there's no need to even mention 80 or even 30 lp/mm ... these resolutions are completely irrelevent, unless you plan to hang a loupe next to your prints. what matters is how much contrast (MTF) the lens can preserve in the 1 to 5 lp/mm range. schneider knows this, so i'd be willing to bet these lenses are true low frequency/high modulation monsters.

[Eric Leppanen]

Has anyone asked Schneider for MTF charts for the 550 XXL?

[martin_4668]

I have actually sold 1pcs 550XXL lens....but for a collector, I am not sure if will ever take a picture....sorry guys, no further info.
Nevertheless...USD 5500 later, I´m sure its a fab.lens
http://www.photografica.com/shop/templates/Group.asp?GroupGuid=3673

regards