Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,678   Posts: 1,482,102   Online: 849
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    Agreed... I was speaking of Schneider as well.

    And most specs as well !
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Shooter
    Digital Negs
    Posts
    12
    Dear Mr Cardwell,


    dagor77 aka f7.7 here.


    I have(had) the lens, I have a camera and I checked the coverage of the optic in question. I am NOT in the habit of selling 'snake oil' and if you have any doubts why don't you E mail the person who won the lens to see if I was lying/exaggerating/selling snake oil? If I mention a lenses coverage its not something I've pulled up from my imagination its what the lens shows me on the groundglass.


    Lens manufacturers throw out coverage figures that are all over the place(and vary year to year with no design change) and are considered 'enthusiastic' or 'conservative' on the end users need for whatever coverage they happen to need.


    I DO know what a sharp image looks like so if I say a lens has 15" of circle its 15" of circle that can be used, the image circle may be larger but unuseable and I will mention that...though I do on occasion forget the focal legth of the very lens! ;-)


    I do get to play with many lenses and don't think its a big deal if a lens has a 10" circle or a 15" circle for the given focal length, I'm not going to make a fiction from unsuitable facts to try and sell a lens for a few more bucks and end up with a negative feedback/bad blood and a bad reputation in two seconds flat etc.


    'Just the facts, Ma'am'! as Joe would say.


    F7.7/cp goerz/dagor77/andrew.

  3. #13
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    Dear Andrew,

    Being a happy customer of yours, perhaps you will excuse my posting as over familiarity, born of a long midwestern winter.

    It is with the greatest respect and affection that I place you and the phrase 'snake oil' in the same paragraph and only then to the degree you so artfully spin from lore, romance, and experience, those threads to tempt and inform your customers. Perhaps the word Glamour would be better than the phrase 'snake oil.

    You are without question a reliable and dependable merchant.

    The Angulon is a case that illustrates the plight of photography today: so much forgotten, and so few reliable sources for the inexperienced. The Angulon is certainly a lens that can have broad and generous coverage for some, while being disappointing for others. It is a matter of judgement. In years past, the lens was conservatively described as a 5x7 lens and understood to outperform that description by an uncertain measure. It was a time when the lens was sold to a professional, whose work would be examined by a most critical client. The old commercial standards were different than for a fine artist today.

    I would add that for important work, ANY piece of photo gear needs be USED to see how the lore, and facts, suit the USER.

    The most important requirement of photo gear is the reliability of the seller. And Dagor77, in all matters but Zeiss, sets the standard.


    I hope this finds you well, sir.

    Yours,

    Donald











    Quote Originally Posted by f7.7
    Dear Mr Cardwell,


    dagor77 aka f7.7 here.


    I have(had) the lens, I have a camera and I checked the coverage of the optic in question. I am NOT in the habit of selling 'snake oil' and if you have any doubts why don't you E mail the person who won the lens to see if I was lying/exaggerating/selling snake oil? If I mention a lenses coverage its not something I've pulled up from my imagination its what the lens shows me on the groundglass.


    Lens manufacturers throw out coverage figures that are all over the place(and vary year to year with no design change) and are considered 'enthusiastic' or 'conservative' on the end users need for whatever coverage they happen to need.


    I DO know what a sharp image looks like so if I say a lens has 15" of circle its 15" of circle that can be used, the image circle may be larger but unuseable and I will mention that...though I do on occasion forget the focal legth of the very lens! ;-)


    I do get to play with many lenses and don't think its a big deal if a lens has a 10" circle or a 15" circle for the given focal length, I'm not going to make a fiction from unsuitable facts to try and sell a lens for a few more bucks and end up with a negative feedback/bad blood and a bad reputation in two seconds flat etc.


    'Just the facts, Ma'am'! as Joe would say.


    F7.7/cp goerz/dagor77/andrew.
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Norfolk, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    250
    Just a thought, but would the fact that this lens was in barrel form have any bearing on the coverage? Just how much, if at all, would a shutter reduce the coverage?


    Richard

  5. #15
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,280
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    There is definitely a difference in "coverage" between pre-war and postwar Angulons. I might do a little experiment soon, as I temporarily have two 90m's: One of each.

    The 165mm Angulon (postwar) was sold for use on 18x24cm format, hich is just enough smaller than 8x10" to make a difference. Like the 90mm on 9x12cm vs. 4x5", the coverage is tight but should be good at f:32. As I only have a 18x24cm camera and no (operational) 8x10", I haven't actually tested this. It's a wonderful lens on 5x7", though!

    Shutter or barrel should not make any difference.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    522
    Quote Originally Posted by Ole
    The 165mm Angulon (postwar) was sold for use on 18x24cm format, hich is just enough smaller than 8x10" to make a difference. Like the 90mm on 9x12cm vs. 4x5", the coverage is tight but should be good at f:32.
    But this is still based on the manufacturer's recommendation. Did their recommendation (and specs) change because they changed the design/construction of the lens in a way that reduced the coverage, or did their recommendation change because they became more conservative?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ole
    There is definitely a difference in "coverage" between pre-war and postwar Angulons. I might do a little experiment soon, as I temporarily have two 90m's: One of each.
    I would love to see the results of such an experiment.

    Kerry

  7. #17
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,280
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Kerry, a quick inspection of lenses of widely different vintage shows that the newer lenses vignette at a smaller angle than the older ones. It is quite possible that this "cutoff" is intentionally introduced to conform with a change in the definition of "sharp". I do not know, but I have the things needed to find out.

    Two 90mm's, one 5x7" camera, and four sheets of film: One shot with each lens at f:8 and f:32 should show any differences there are, and allow enough "dead corners" to measure the usable image circle.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  8. #18
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,280
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Ah - there it was!

    Film is defrosting, both shutters have been checked. One 90mm has a serial number in the 1.5 million, the other 2.6 million. That makes the old one a 1939 model and the new one 1951. Definitely pre- and postwar, then. The old one is the "really old type", with a different smaller front face. Surprisingly both are coated...

    Will shoot and develop tomorrow.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,015
    I have one of these in a Comput shutter. From your description, I think they are the same lens. The old Angulons lack baffles in the lens to limit the image circle. The image circle is huge, but the edges are out of focus and very fuzzy. Mine will not cover 8X10 with good definition at infinity when near wide open, but at f/32 it does fine (as long as I don't need any movements). Depending on your camera, you may get a little flare from the excess light spill. The lens is really quite good, within its limitations.

  10. #20
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,280
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    I've developed my films now, will scan them tonight. My initial reaction is surprise - both 90mm Angulons come very close to being sharp over the whole 5x7" negative at f:32! At f:8 anything outside of 5" is very fuzzy, so the corners would be very soft on 4x5". But I won't hesitate to use either 90mm Angulon on 5x7" in the future, at least as long as contact prints are the intended result.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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