What about the 305 G-Claron?greenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
Can I have some opinions on the 305mm G-Claron? and 240mm also? Thanks, David
-- david clark (email@example.com), November 24, 2000
The 305 G-Claron is a fine lens with extraordinary coverage when stopped down to f/45 and beyond: I use it as my standard lens for 7x17 inch format, and it will also cover 11x14 easily. However, it's pretty much an old-fashioned design and does not quite deliver the image quality of something like an Apo-Sironar S, and lacks multicoating. Of course it is optimized for close-up work, but in practice makes a fine lens for general view camera field work, especially if compact size combined with extreme coverage are important to you.---Carl
-- Carl Weese (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 24, 2000.
I have used the 305 G-Claron since 1984 mostly with an 8x10 and occasionally with an 11x14 which it covers with no problem. It is relatively inexpensive, very compact, and, in my experience, has very high resolution. I purchased it new in 1984 and it is multicoated. Carl Weese indicates that his is not, so maybe some are and some are not. The combination of extreme coverage and compact size makes this an excellent large format lens for work in the studio or in the field, in my opinion. I have no experience with the 240mm size. (Bill Johnson)
-- William A. Johnson (email@example.com), November 24, 2000.
William, you say your lens is multicoated. How can you rekognize a multicoated G-Claron? Is the mention MC engraved on the lens? Or was mentioned on the package or else? Thanks!
-- Paul Schilliger (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 24, 2000.
The G-claron is a fine lens. Its performance is better however at higher magnification tht at infinity, i.e. at close distances. The Rodenstock Apo ronar 300mm, on the other hand has truly superb performance at all distances from 1:1 to infinity. This assertion is based on comparison of MTFs for both lenses. The G-Claron has larger image circle however, but the quality within that circle rapidly deteriorates beyond about 50% of the IC. The AR holds to a very high quality MTF throughout the IC. The ApoRonar in shutter is multicoated. The G-Claron is and has always been single coated. If I already had the G-Claron I would hold on to it, but if I were buying new, I'd buy the Apo Ronar without doubt.
-- Julio Fernandez (email@example.com), November 25, 2000.
Paul Schilliger--I believe the multicoating is mentioned on the package, but I'll have to check it (when I get back home next week). I'll also have to check for an "MC" or other indication on the lens. Thanks for the double-check question; this will force me to look closely at the lens instead of just taking it for granted!
-- William A. Johnson (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 25, 2000.
The G-Claron lenses were always single coated, never multi coated.
-- Michael Klayman (email@example.com), November 28, 2000.
I stand corrected. My 305 G-Claron is not multi-coated. My apologies to all. Hope my comments did not steer David Clark down any wrong paths. Good to see that there are enough concerned experts watching this forum to keep some of us (such as myself) on the "straight and narrow" when necessary!
-- William A. Johnson (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 02, 2000.
It's easy to understand the assumption that a modern lens (at least in terms of production, if not in design) would be multi-coated. I've always wondered why Schneider doesn't bother to multi-coat these popular lenses, even today. Multi-coating certainly has been the standard for decades. It surprises me that Schneider would want to make an exception and only single coat a few lenses when the rest of the lens line goes through the multi-coating process. Wouldn't it just be easier to multi-coat these too? Does anyone know why single coating persists on the G-Clarons?
-- Greg Lawhon (email@example.com), December 03, 2000.
Just today (12/04/00) Schneider Germany announced the the G-Claron is being discontinued. The G-Clarons are some of my personal favorite lenses. Sorry to see them go.
-- Jeff (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 04, 2000.