PDA

View Full Version : BIG ART(ar)'s coverage?



Pages : 1 [2]

Jim Fitzgerald
10-30-2007, 09:56 AM
Kerry,
I guess it's one more to keep my eye out for then for this camera:

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r181/epatsellis/DSCF7108.jpg
Right now, the 306 Componon covers 16x20, but my choices are pretty slim for 20x24 (which is why I haven't made a 20x24 back yet.)

erie

Erie, very nice simple design. Gives me some ideas for the 11x14 I'm building. KISS is a good way to go. My next venture is to build my own bellows. Need to find the proper material and make a new one for my 5x7 and 8x10 cameras first and then I'll be ready for the 11x14. Do you use anything special. Thanks.

Jim

RobertP
10-30-2007, 10:35 AM
Robert, I have one also. Great lens for the 8x20. What shutter is yours in? Thanks.

Jim....Jim mine is in an Ilex 5

Jim Fitzgerald
10-30-2007, 02:06 PM
....Jim mine is in an Ilex 5

Robert, thanks. I thought that might be the one. Do you know if it is a direct fit. I think it is but I'm not sure.

Jim

RobertP
10-30-2007, 02:23 PM
Jim, I had Grimes mount it. It looks as though there are machined aluminum adapters on both elements. If you like I can photograph them and send it to you.

Jim Fitzgerald
10-30-2007, 03:25 PM
Jim, I had Grimes mount it. It looks as though there are machined aluminum adapters on both elements. If you like I can photograph them and send it to you.

Robert, thanks for the offer but I don't have a shutter yet. More curious than anything. Thanks.

Jim

sanking
10-30-2007, 11:27 PM
Problem is there is very little in the way of "prime" lenses in these focal lengths. In fact, there's nothing in "primes" longer than 550mm - assuming you consider the 550mm Fine Art XXL a prime. For modern plasmats, there's nothing longer than 480mm.

The only modern lenses this long are the Nikkor 600/800/1200 T-ED and Schneider 600/800 APO Tele-Xenar telephoto sets - which have a lot less coverage than non-telephoto designs of the same focal length - and the 600mm Fujinon C and 1100mm Schneider Fine Art XXL , which both happen to be Artar-type designs.

Even though they were optimized for 1:1, the Artars perform very, very well at infinity. Late shutter mounted Artars were even factory adjusted for smaller reproduction ratios (up to 20:1, depending on the focal length - the same as most modern "prime" lenses).

I was lucky enough to recently acquire a late model 42" Red Dot Artar in exceptional condition for about 15% of what a new 1100mm Fine Art XL would cost. I doubt if I'll be able to tell any difference in 14x17 contact prints - at least not $4000 worth.

nd in the 42" focal length the coverage is "more than I'll ever need". Even if I use the very conservative 46 degrees of coverage, the image circle comes out to over 900mm in the 42" focal length. That's enough to cover 20x24 with over 100mm to spare - and that's a conservative figure or this lens.

Kerry

I never understood the logic of the Schneider 1100mm Fine Art XL lens since there are so many nice process lenses around in this focal length, including nice coated models. One could buy a 42" Red Dot Artar and have it put in Ilex 5 shutter for around $2k.

The 550mm Schneider Dagor, on the other hand, is a very special and unique lens. The only thing comparable, except for some truly exotic glass, is a 24" Dagor. And most likely that would be uncoated and not in a shutter. I once owned a 19" Dagor in Betax shutter, but the 550 Schneider Dagor is in a class of its own compared to the old Dagors.

Sandy King

Greg Davis
10-31-2007, 08:55 AM
I had a 42 inch artar and still have a 48 inch. They both cover my 20x24 with ease and plenty of movements. My 24 inch artar covers, but I have not used it to see if it is sharp in the corners.

ReallyBigCameras
10-31-2007, 12:40 PM
I never understood the logic of the Schneider 1100mm Fine Art XL lens since there are so many nice process lenses around in this focal length, including nice coated models. One could buy a 42" Red Dot Artar and have it put in Ilex 5 shutter for around $2k.

The 550mm Schneider Dagor, on the other hand, is a very special and unique lens. The only thing comparable, except for some truly exotic glass, is a 24" Dagor. And most likely that would be uncoated and not in a shutter. I once owned a 19" Dagor in Betax shutter, but the 550 Schneider Dagor is in a class of its own compared to the old Dagors.

Sandy King

Sandy,

I agree. In addition to the 42" f14 Red Dot Artar, there is also the 1070mm f14 APO Ronar and the 1070mm f12.5 APO Nikkor. These are all the same design type as the 1100mm Fine Art XXL and within a couple millimeters in focal length. The 1100mm Fine Art XXL has an actual focal length of 1068mm. I'd have to check my brochures for the exact focal lengths, but the 42" Red Dot Artar, 1070mm APO Ronar and 1070mm APO Nikkor are all between 1065mm and 1070mm.

So, the 1100mm Fine Art XXL is basically a modern, multicoated version of the classic 42" Red Dot Artar. The others are all single coated. The 1100mm Fine Art XXL is also available in a modern Copal No. 3 shutter, but the maximum aperture goes down to f22 due to the mechanical limitations of the shutter.

And while these longer process lenses aren't nearly as common as their 19" and 24" counterparts, they can be found on the used market - usually for less than $1000 (less than $1/mm). I'm currently using my 42" Red Dot Artar (along with a 760mm f14 APO Ronar) in front of a Sinar shutter - a very practical and economic alternative to having multiple barrel mounted lenses custom mounted into individual shutters. Even if I do decide to have it mounted in a big Ilex No. 5 shutter the total cost will be about 1/3 the cost of a new shutter mounted 1100mm Fine Art XXL. That's a difference of about $3000.

In addition, there are also otherl options in 1000mm - 1200mm process lenses. The 1000mm f12 APO Germinar is one (one went for 500 euro ~ $720 on the German eBay yesterday). All these 1000mm and longer process lenses cover 20x24 with room to spare and preform very well as general purpose taking lenses (once you get around the issues of weight and limited depth of field).

I'm thrilled Schneider is making lenses specifically for the ULF market, but I agree the 550mm Fine Art XXL is much more compelling. While there are attainable, more affordable alternatives to the 1100mm Fine Art XXL, the 550mm is really without peer. Fortunately, for my modest coverage needs (14x17 max.), I can get by with the relatively inexpensive, compact, lightweight 600mm Fujinon C, but for 16x20 and 20x24 there is simply nothing else, new or old, that can compete with the 550mm Fine Art XXL.

Kerry

ReallyBigCameras
10-31-2007, 01:32 PM
P.S. I'm not suggesting the 1100mm Fine Art XXL is over priced for what it is - a modern, multicoated 1100mm lens with a 900mm image circle - just that there are more affordable options in used 20 - 40 year old 42" lenses that most photographers would find more than adequate for making ULF negatives for contact printing.

In 1967 (about the time my 42" Red Dot Artar was made) the 42" Red Dot Artar in barrel sold for $1328. That equivalent to over $8000 today. The 1100mm Fine Art XXL has list price of $6002 in barrel, or $6104 in a Copal No. 3 shutter. Of course, nobody pays full list price. Actual dealer selling prices for the 1100mm Fine Art XXL in shutter are in the $4300 - $4600 range. So, compared to that $1328 1967 42" Red Dot Artar, the current 1100mm Fine Art XXL is a relative bargain.

The problem is there are sub-$1000 alternatives on the used market that will serve the needs of the majority of the very small market this lens is targeted at (ULF fine art photographers who mostly contact print their huge negatives).

I have no doubt that the 1100mm Fine Art XXL is an absolutely superb optic. With modern multicoatings and computer assisted design, it may very well be the best 42" taking lens ever made. But, for my needs, I'm more than happy with my 42" Red Dot Artar and $3500 in my pocket.

Kerry

sanking
11-02-2007, 08:17 PM
P.S. I'm not suggesting the 1100mm Fine Art XXL is over priced for what it is - a modern, multicoated 1100mm lens with a 900mm image circle - just that there are more affordable options in used 20 - 40 year old 42" lenses that most photographers would find more than adequate for making ULF negatives for contact printing.

Kerry

That would be exactly my point as well. There are other options in this focal length that give results more than adequate for contact printing. In fact, more than adequate for enlargement up to 6X-8X as well if that is needed.

Anyone plan on making prints larger than about 96" X 160" from 12X20 negatives?

Sandy