300mm Goerz red Dot Artar

[David Hall]

I have been offered this for $850. The glass looks great, it is in what appears to be a pretty new #3 shutter. I am told it covers 8x10.

I currently use the HUGE Schneider 360/5.6 as my normal 8x10 lens. This looks to be a good alternative at about one one-hundredth of the weight of the one I use.

Is it a good deal? Would it be a good "normal" for the 8x10 and a slightly longer lens for the 5x7? I do all B&W so multicoating isn't an issue for me.

Thanks.

dgh

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

It should be really sharp and would be normal for 8x10", but you won't get much movement for subjects at a distance. Artars have a relatively narrow angle of coverage, because they were designed to be used around 1:1.

It would be a good longer lens for 5x7", though. Artars are best at the long end of whatever format you're using them with, since the larger focal lengths will offer plenty of extra coverage, and because they are relatively compact. I use a 19" Apo Artar on 8x10", for instance, but for a 12" lens I use a Dagor.

 

[avandesande]

A Dagor or a g-claron are both good normal lenses for 8x10 and easy to find. I think you can get the 305 g-claron in shutter for around 600$ brand new.

 

[Thilo Schmid]

David,

another lens in a #3 shutter would not be a real alternative to your Symmar. Considder a process lens or the Nikkor-M

 

[c6h6o3]

I've vignetted my 19" Red Dot Artar on the 8 x 10 with full front rise and some tilt to both standards. I don't think a 12" Artar would cover 8 x 10 at all well as the angle of coverage is < 50 degrees. You certainly wouldn't get any movements. If you have a 5 x 7 reducing back, though, or a 4 x 5 with enough bellows draw, snap it up. My Artar is my most cherished lens. I have the Artar, a Dagor, a Nikkor, two Rodenstocks and 4 Zeiss lenses for my Hasselblad. The Artar is superior to all the others in every way.

 

[Donald Miller]

David,
I just received Midwest Photo's latest sales bulletin. They have a two 305 mm G Claron lenses in stock. The 8+ condition lens is listed at $429.00 and the 9+ condition lens is listed at $699.00.
These are supposedly really sharp lenses and have excellent coverage. I know that the 355 mm G Claron will cover 12X20 format. I am not sure, but it seems that the 305 mm was represented to cover 11X14. Perhaps someone else can verify that. The only condition is that this is a F9 lens. So it is slower and dimmer but I shoot a F9 Dagor on my Deardorf and I can certainly see to focus. Hope this helps, good luck.

 

[David Hall]

OK guys,

PLEASE be patient with me on this, because I know we covered it before. What's the difference between a red dot artar and a dagor? And which is sharper, contrastier, has more coverage, etc?

Thanks.

dgh

 

[Robert]

I've got a few process lenses. All F/9. Focussing is easy. Aren't some of the older lenses F/18 at the wide end? Even checking focus at F/22 isn't a real hardship.

The Dagor is the wider coverage. The Dagor is the "wide" design. I guess the Artar might be sharper overall.

 

[clay]

The 305 G-claron will cover 7x17, with some movements. It is a very sharp lens with a decent amount of coverage. My understanding is that it is a single coated symmetrical lens that is sort of the optical descendant of the dagor design. Badger Graphics still had some of these new last time I looked at pretty reasonable prices.

The red dot artars have considerably less coverage, are also coated, and are incredibly sharp. I doubt if a 12" artar will be suitable for using on an 8x10 if you anticipate using any movements.

Clay

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Artars are process lenses designed for reproducing flat artwork, maps, and such. Less coverage is better than more in that situation, because the lenses weren't designed for use at infinity, and at 1:1 excessive coverage can cause bellows flare. They do perform quite well at infinity, though. They're really sharp.

Dagors are wide lenses. They have lots of coverage stopped down, and good contrast, even in uncoated versions, because they have only 4 glass-air surfaces. They can also function as convertibles in a pinch by removing the front cell to produce a lens about 1.75 x the focal length of the combined cells. I have two coated Gold Dot Dagors and one uncoated Ser. III Dagor, and they are great lenses. My 168mm/6.8 Ser. III will cover 8x10".

If you wanted to put together an all Goerz lens kit, your widest lens might be a Wide-Angle Dagor, with a regular Dagor or three in the middle, and an Artar or two at the long end, since a wide angle of coverage is not as important with longer focal lengths relative to the format size.

 

[Eric Rose]

Maybe I should start a new thread but does anyone have any first hand experience with the Geronar 300mm by Rodenstock? I have the 210mm and 150mm Geronar's and find them just fine. Any of you that got my first post card will see the 150 is a fine lens.

Yours thoughts would be appreciated.

Eric

 

[jmcd]

David,

I have been using the 305 G-Claron on 8x10 for four months or so. It is similar in size to a 210 f5.6.

To my eyes the G-Claron is very sharp. It is not too big for me, and has so much coverage that it has not even been a consideration for me when making movements, a real luxury. I let the lensboard rise and fall at will. I like the modern shutter, especially when shooting fast film like HP5+. I also considered the 12" Dagor, as I use a 9-1/2" Dagor mounted in a shutter, also excellent.

With the G-Claron, I definitely notice flare in situations where the light has a low angle of reflectance, such as photographing down at a sandy beach, with the sun beyond. Or on a highly specular day with the light bouncing all over, off of the clouds and everything else. I don't know how much better a multi-coated lens would be at handling this, however.

 

[fhovie]

I have 2 Multicoated lenses and 2 single coates lenses. I notice a real difference in B&W between them. My Symmar is pre-multicoating (by 6 months) and in the folliage, I can see a reduction in sharpness caused by lens flare like halation under a lot of magnification. It is something that only I notice but it does keep my using the MC lenses more often if I can get away with it. My 300mm single coated Schneider is OK but nowhere near as sharp as my 210 Sironar or Caltar(Grandagon). Maybe in 8x10 it is less pronounced as it is yet another order of magnitude in the negative to print ration. -Frank

 

[John Kasaian]

Hello! I'm a bit late in joining in, but IMHO, a 300mm Artar Red Dot or APO dosen't have the coverage for 8x10. I am basing this on my own 14"(360mm) APO Artar which covers 8x10 with very little wiggle room. Even the 300mm Nikkor M is--once again IMHO--painfully tight though some people do just fine with them. I would opt for the 305 G-Claron is you want an affordable APO lens in that focal length. ------Cheers!