View Full Version : 355mm Gold Dot Dagor - covers 8x20?

Kimberly Anderson
01-12-2009, 09:45 AM
Just wondering out loud. I did a search and came up with it would cover 7x17, but couldn't find anything about using it with 8x20.


01-12-2009, 09:51 AM
Not sure if its helpful or even relevant Michael, but in the same focal length the 355 G Claron will easily cover 8x20.
It covers 12x20 quite well (even with 2" of rise).

Kimberly Anderson
01-12-2009, 09:55 AM
Hey Scooter,

Yeah, that's what I was comparing it to. I had heard about the G Claron being a great 12x20 wide angle lens, and was wondering about this Dagor.

01-12-2009, 10:20 AM
Are you referring to the later Schneider version of the gold dot Dagor? I bought one of those when they were put on the market new in the late 1980s. I was very excited about it and it was my first non school bank loan for 750 dollars or so. I was very disappointed in that lens. I expected something special in sharpness but could never get it, the glow at wide open was hard to focus with. I gave up and sold it. On the other hand I have a vintage 210 Schneider gold dot dagor that is special and covers way more than the 5x7 it is rated for. I use it as an 8x10 lens most often. I guess none of my experience is helpful though.

Kimberly Anderson
01-12-2009, 10:37 AM
It's the newer Schneider version.

01-12-2009, 10:43 AM
ahhh... sorry for the redundant info Michael. :)

You may want to send an email to Sandy King or even Michael A. Smith.
I had a phone convo with MAS a month or so ago and I think I remember him mentioning that one of the lenses that were stolen in his quiver was a 355 Dot Dagor.
I mentioned to him that he should look for a 355 G Claron if he couldn't find a Gold Dot to replace his stolen one. So he may be a good resource for info on it.

01-12-2009, 10:58 AM
I use a 16 1/2 " Dagor on 8x20 and 12x20. Dagors are not razor sharp lenses. I don't know where that myth came from. On my 8x20 you need to stop down to at least f32 if you want it sharp out to the corners. Now in regards to the 355 there is a lot conflicting info out there. It appears the American made Dagors covered better than the European ones. My 16 1/2 " is a very early one around 1903 or so and before the name "Dagor" was used on the lens. I also owned a American made 355 Blue Dot Trigor that was way sharper than my Dagor ( still kicking myself for selling that one) and it also covered my 8x20 but then again I heard the Swiss-made Blue Dot didn't cover. It would be nice if you could take it for a test drive before buying it. But I think it would be safe to say that any 355 Dagor will cover 7x17 but sure enough someone will probably prove me wrong.

Phil Kember
01-12-2009, 11:47 AM
Hi Michael. I thought I would give you my two-cents-worth. I have a 355 GD Dagor, a 7x17 and an 8x20. This lens will not cover 8x20, in theory it does make an image circle that covers 7x17, but it is very soft on the corners and who wants that. If 7x17 is your only format, I'd consider the 355 G Claron. I use it on both panoramic cameras, but I never use it on my 8x10, I always use the Dagor. The other 14" you might consider is the F7.7 I don't own one of these, but I understand it is a fine lens and will cover your garage.....Phil.

01-12-2009, 12:39 PM
I'm sorry, the 14" dagor I was referring to is a 7.7 like my 16 1/2". I forgot they made a 6.8 in 14" I was thinking the 6.8 was a 12" I never owned a 6.8 in 14" but if you're looking for a dagor I would consider the 7.7. Like I said stopped down you can get them pretty sharp out to the corners. Of course then again I shoot 8x20 vertical full length and 3/4 portraits and in no way do I want it sharp out to the corners.

01-12-2009, 01:05 PM
Weren't some of the Gold Dots f8?

Kimberly Anderson
01-12-2009, 02:11 PM
Thanks for all the input guys. I don't have a 7x17, but do have an 8x20. I have the 355 for use on the 8x10 and the 4x10, and was just wondering if it'd cover the 8x20. Thanks for the confirmation. I have a sweet honey of a lens coming from Jim that'll be my wide-angle on the 8x20.

01-12-2009, 03:27 PM
Weren't some of the Gold Dots f8?

Robert, you may be thinking of the WA Dagors, they are f8


01-12-2009, 07:52 PM
Weren't some of the Gold Dots f8?
My 355mm Schneider Gold Dot Dagor MC is f8.0, and it dates from around 1985.

Jim Fitzgerald
01-14-2009, 10:27 PM
Michael, a sleeper of a lens for this format is the Rodenstock Gerogon 14" and the Ilex Process Paragon 15". I use both of these lenses on my 8x20 and they cover to the corners and are very sharp. If you can find them they are not to much $$. I shoot them at F-45 and they are very small and light weight. One of these is going to go into my 11x14 kit. I just have to decide which one.


01-15-2009, 11:41 AM
One of the sharpest I have ever used is a 21 1/4" ektanon. Huge coverage.. covers my 8x20 with plenty of movements and you can usually find them for peanuts.

01-15-2009, 06:06 PM
If you want a Dagor to cover 7X17 or 8X20 get one of the older ones. It is widely known that the modern 355 Schneider Dagor does not have as much coverage as most older 14ĘDagors. 355 G-Claron gives much better coverage, up to 12X20.

Sandy King

Jim Fitzgerald
01-15-2009, 09:43 PM
One of the sharpest I have ever used is a 21 1/4" ektanon. Huge coverage.. covers my 8x20 with plenty of movements and you can usually find them for peanuts.

Robert, thanks for the reminder. I have two 21 1/4" lenses. One is the Kodak Ektanon and the other is the Ilex Process Paragon. You can find these lenses from time to time. I can only afford the "sleeper lenses" in barrels for my 11x14 and 8x20's. I have one for each kit. Both of them are indeed, very sharp with great coverage.