24" Apo Red Dot Artar

[richard_rau]

I have come upon a 24" Apo Red Dot Artar and I know from

searching this forum that Artars generally have small image

circles being process lenses. I also know that they are

incredibly sharp. I am deliberating having this lens mounted

into a Copal 3 shutter to use on my 8x10 Deardorff. At the cost

of the lens mounting, and at the risk of visiting old ground here,

can anyone tell me about this lens in particular. would you

endorse this, or would it be more prudent to invest in a similar

focal length in a Nikkor or other similar glass of equal focal

length already in a shutter which I suppose falls into the 600mm

range? So far my investment is zero...so I am only looking at the

cost of the shutter, mounting, and a lens board which would run

in the $700 dollar price range. Thanks!

[robert_davis2]

If I understand you've got the lens? Why not just mount it on a board and try it without a shutter for awhile? See if it meets your needs.

[roger hein]

Richard,

 

If the lens is in nice shape don't walk, run and buy it! It will 'cover' anything you'll

likely own in the future (up to 12x20). I use one that was mounted in a Copal 3 by

Steve (may he rest in peace).

 

Cheers,

Roger...

[henry_suryo]

Richard, the RD Artar is a wonderful lens. A 24" is fairly long for 8x10, and is usable on the Deardorff 8x10. I had one, but the original bellows on my camera were streched almost to the max as were the rails. Extra caution is required to avoid vibration and to shield the bellows if they have pinholes. I ended selling the lens, because I didn't use it that much and needed the funds for something else. After I replaced the bellows on my camera, I wish I had the lens still. When you can't get close enough, there's no replacement for it. Of course if you ever decide to go bigger, this will also come in handy. $700 seems like a good price for it. Hope this helps,

Henry

[sandy_king]

The 24" Goerz Red Dot Artar is a very fine lens and will give you a lot of coverage on 8X10. Lots of people use them on 12X20 and get very good results all the way to the corners with the lens stopped down.

 

However, do weigh the total cost of buying a 24" Artar and having it mounted in a shutter against the cost of buying a new or used 600mm Fujinon-C. I have used both of these lenses and although the Artar is very good the Fujinon is better, and multi-coated.

 

Sandy King

[c_p_goerz]

Depth of field with long lenses is limited even with all kinds of swings etc so you'll end up stopping down to F45 at a minimum, throw on a filter and with some emulsions you are looking at one second, no need for a shutter at those speeds. With a WA or standard lens I can see why you would need shutter but with a longer lens a shutter is expensive and heavy, who needs it!

 

 

CP Goerz.

[david_bradley1]

<BLOCKQUOTE><I>

Depth of field with long lenses is limited even with all kinds of swings etc so you'll end up stopping down to F45 at a minimum, throw on a filter and with some emulsions you are looking at one second, no need for a shutter at those speeds.

</I></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll second the comment about shallow depth of field, and how!

I recently had my inaugural outing with a new 750mm lens. I took a "sunrise cityscape" of downtown Seattle with the Olympic Mountains in the background. At f32 the city buildings, 9 miles away, were in sharp focus, but the Olympics, about 48 miles away, were fuzzy. Prior to this experience I would have considered 9 miles and 48 miles to both be "basically infinity" for focusing purposes. Not any more! In fact I may need to use some front tilt to get them both in focus. Image that: using front tilt to keep my "near" foreground in focus when it is "only" 9 miles away! Looks like this might be my first "f45 and slower" lens.

<P>

But, I disagree that a shutter would be superfluous. If I remember right, my f32 sunrise shots were taken at something like 1/15 or 1/8 of a second on Provia. If you're shooting in sunlight with, say, Provia then Sunny 16 says the correct shutter speed would be 1/100 at f16, or 1/25 and f32, or 1/15 at f45, or 1/8 at f64. Sure, it's easy to have multi-second exposures too (I had a 2+ minute exposure this morning.), but I would be frustrated to have a lens that I couldn't use in daylight conditions. Well, I suppose one could increase the exposure time with an ND filter, so it's <I>doable</I>.

[richard_rau]

Thanks folks! , A lot of food for thought here. Perhaps, I should

have elaberated. The 24" Red Dot in question was "rescued"

from the eminent demise of going into a landfill along with it's

big brother a 30" and a large process camera as well (sign of

the times !) Well, I won't go into my thought process for not

rescuing both, and for now the 24" has a happy home. So,

knowing that it could be useful as a long lens with only the

expense of a shutter, I figured "why not?" My only question was,

"is the expense of the shutter worth it.?", and the answer seems

to be yes. If a Dorff fully extended to 24" is that likely to suffer

from vibration, then it would seem to me any extra introduction of

vibration (by removing and replacing lens caps as a method of

exposure) would only compound the problem! The depth of field

issue is one I hadn't considered, and since I doubt that I would

use it above f/22, longer exposures would seem more likely at

smaller apertures since I tend to use FP4 in 5x7 with a reducing

back frequently, as well as in 8x10 sometimes. The extra

expense of a modern long lens was the only thing that I was

deliberating against the expense of the shutter for the Red Dot.

[william_whitaker1]

The idea of a 30" Artar going to a landfill makes me sick! If you don't want the 24", I'd be happy to buy it. But you'd do well to apply it to your own work. "Small" is relative. It has more than enough coverage for your 8x10 and is long for the format (as has been stated). But if you already own it, make photographs. You AND the lens will be happier for it.

 

Regards,

Will

[sandy_king]

One more thought on shutter mounting. You might consider mounting the lens in a #5 Ilex instead of the Copal #3. A used Ilex will run about 1/3 the cost of a new Copal. The Copal is more accurate but at the slow shutter speeds you will typically use a 24" Artar you will probably be able to tell with your ear if the shutter is running fast or slow.

 

Sandy King