Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,852   Posts: 1,582,880   Online: 976
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30
  1. #21
    Jim Fitzgerald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Ventura, Ca
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,795
    Images
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by epatsellis View Post
    Kerry,
    I guess it's one more to keep my eye out for then for this camera:


    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

  2. #22
    RobertP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,130
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Fitzgerald View Post
    Robert, I have one also. Great lens for the 8x20. What shutter is yours in? Thanks.

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

  3. #23
    Jim Fitzgerald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Ventura, Ca
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,795
    Images
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertP View Post
    ....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

  4. #24
    RobertP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,130
    Images
    8
    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.

  5. #25
    Jim Fitzgerald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Ventura, Ca
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,795
    Images
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertP View Post
    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

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by kthalmann View Post
    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

  7. #27
    Greg Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Crestview Hills, KY
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,950
    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.
    www.gregorytdavis.com

    Did millions of people suddenly disappear? This may have an answer.

    "No one knows that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." -Matthew 24:36

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by sanking View Post
    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

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    523
    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

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by kthalmann View Post
    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

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin