Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,846   Posts: 1,582,718   Online: 871
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    34

    Angulon 165mm in barrel coverage for 8x10

    dagor77 auctioned a 165/6.8 angulon in barrel last month. No, I'm not the buyer. It surprised me that according to his description/experiment, the coverage of this lens seems to be larger than what I thought it should be. Everywhere else I read it barely covers 8x10. Is the barrel version of angulon 165/6.8 a different design than the one in compur shutter?

  2. #2
    jimgalli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tonopah Nevada
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    3,422
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    156
    I know Ole will jump in on this one. Apparently pre-WWII Angulons, the ones that would say 16.5cm and not be coated, had quite a lot more coverage than the more common coated post WWII version did. I've never had both to do a side by side comparison. But I did get rid of my post war 165 because it was lousy as an 8X10 lens. IMHO of course. YMMV and all those other disclaimers.
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep..to gain that which he cannot lose. Jim Elliot, 1949

    http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tijeras, NM
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,246
    This is generally true about dagors as well, which the agulon was derived from.
    art is about managing compromise

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    34

  5. #5
    acroell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Freiburg, Germany & Huntsville, AL
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    88
    Images
    2
    That actually is a postwar one, about 1959-1960.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by jimgalli
    Apparently pre-WWII Angulons, the ones that would say 16.5cm and not be coated, had quite a lot more coverage than the more common coated post WWII version did.
    Is this actually true? I know the published specs prior to WWII were much more "generous", but do the pre-WWII lenses actually cover any more. Schneider got much more conservative in later years when listing coverage for their lenses, the Aungulons in particular. Like the Dagors, Angulons throw huge circles of illumination and usable coverage increases when stopping down. So, do older Angulons actually have more usable coverage, or did Schneider just get more conservative in quoting specs for their products? Or, do the newer Angulons incorporate field stops to limit the coverage to what the manufacturer considers an acceptable level of performance? It would be an interesting exercise to shoot old and new Angulons side-by-side at a variety of aperures and see just how the coverage compares. Unfortunately, I don't have any pre-WWII Angulons to test.

    Kerry

  7. #7
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/...6,8-165mm.html

    A 300 mm image circle @ f/16... hardly covering 8x10 with ease, as Dagor77 brags.

    Gosh, he's peddling snakeoil.
    "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

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by df cardwell
    http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/...6,8-165mm.html

    A 300 mm image circle @ f/16... hardly covering 8x10 with ease
    Those are the more conservative specs I was referring to - specifically 84 degrees of coverage. However, I have some Schneider brochures from the 1930s that list much greater coverage. I'd have to check to be sure, but I think I've seen the coverage listed as high as 107 degrees for Angulons in some old Schneider literature. The 1939 Schneider catalog at www.cameraeccentric.com lists the maximum coverage for the Angulon series as 105 degrees which would equate to an image circle of 430mm, but then they only list the circle of sharp definition at small stops as 13 3/16" (~335mm) - which only equates to an angle of coverage of a fraction over 90 degrees. So, even as early as 1939 Schneider was hedging their bets on exactly how much the Angulon series was capable of covering. From their own documentation, they state the "maximum field angle" is 105 degrees, but the "sharp definition at small stops" only extends out to a hair over 90 degrees. Seems to be the old circle of illumination vs. circle of usable coverage conundrum - and is probably the reason many manufacturers, including Schneider, started using field stops in their more modern lenses to limit the coverage of their lenses to the "cirlce of sharp definition".

    BTW, this is consistant with my experience with post-WWII Angulons. The circle of illumination is bigger than the usable image circle. The size of the usable image circle increases to about 90 degrees at f32. Of course, the definition of "sharp definition" and "usable image circle" will vary from person to person and application to application.

    Kerry

  9. #9
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    Sure: big circles, and an experienced hand will know ( or can tell quickly enough ) where the limits are. The tough part comes when meaningless numbers are thrown around and there is no experience or judgement to interpret ( or ignore ) them
    "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

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by df cardwell
    Sure: big circles, and an experienced hand will know ( or can tell quickly enough ) where the limits are. The tough part comes when meaningless numbers are thrown around and there is no experience or judgement to interpret ( or ignore ) them
    I wasn't referring so much to the eBay ad as I was Schneider's own specs and the claims I've read many times that older Angulons cover more than newer ones. I believe such claims are more likely a result of Schneider's changing specs than actual differences in usable coverage. I don't believe the optical design of the Angulon changed over time. If anyone is guilty of throwing around meaningless numbers, it is Schneider - at least it was back in the 1930s when they claimed a "maximum field angle" of 105 degrees, but then in the very same catalog listed a "circle of sharp definition at small stops" that equates to slightly more than 90 degrees.

    Oh, and as always on eBay, caveat emptor.

    Kerry

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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