8x10 close up lensgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
I am looking for inexpensive lens to do 8x10 close up. I am considering Apo-ronar 300mm or 360mm, or G-claron 240mm or 270mm. I have a sinar auto shutter so that I can use barrel lens. And the barrel Apo-ronar seems to be quite cheap. But 360mm, even 300mm seems really long, I can't go up more than 1:1 with them. If i do some color, would the ronar be better corrected? I have Fuji 180mm A for 4x5, like it a lot. But right this moment I don't have the money for a 240mm A. I'd like to hear your opinions. Thanks in advance.
-- tao wu (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 27, 2000
The Ronar is probably your best bet for the best corrections. But the G-Clarons might just be cheaper and more available, AND, more readily found in standard sized barrels for a direct fit into your shutter.
That said, you should realise that NOT all G-Clarons fit into standard sized 0, 1, and 3 shutters/mounts - I should know. I have 305mm that doesn't fit into a 1 for instance, though all the other two that I have do.
Late Ronars are multicoated as well, but I have not heard of (or seen) any G-Clarons that are.
-- K H Tan (email@example.com), November 27, 2000.
Thanks for the reply. How would a ronar compare to a nikkor process lens? What's the difference between G-claron and repro claron?
-- tao wu (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 27, 2000.
I'm curious why you don't use the 180 for close ups on 8x10?
1, its a lens you have. 2, it'd cover 8x10 in a close up application on the order of 1:1 (check to make sure it covers at the scale you want).
-- Fred Leif (email@example.com), November 27, 2000.
Actually I will use the 180mm in the right situation. But I also want a lens to have enough coverage when it's not that close. And the old sinar I got has an auto shutter, I'd like to have a barrel lens so that I can use that. The DB mounted lenses are too expensive. I don't have any long lens either, this maybe a chance to get one if I can find in the right price range.
-- tao wu (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 28, 2000.
The Repro Claron series are similar to the Ronars in design (that said, there are at least two different designs with the "Ronar" designation; but only the ultralong ones - I have to consult other sources - are any different from the 4 element 4 group Dialytes). The G-Clarons are Plasmats - 6 element in 4 groups (again, I think there are at least two different variants with the designation "G- Claron") with more coverage than the ReproClarons or any other dialyte type of a similar focal length.
I do not know enough about process Nikkors to comment. But I doubt that any can be directly fitted into current sized shutters without some work done on them.
Mind you, if you are after a G-Claron, be sure to ask the seller if it can fit a standard 0, 1, or 3 shutter. I have a 305mm that doesn't fit a 1.
-- K H Tan (email@example.com), November 28, 2000.
Just a note on the process Nikkors. They cannot be directly fit into any standard shutters (at least the f/10 Nikkors). I bought one on eBay and it is currently being mounted into shutter by SK Grimes. From what I understand, the procedure to mount them into shutter is rather difficult, and this is reflected in the price of mounting. One other thing to consider with these lenses is that the front and rear elements both extend beyond the filter threads, making use of filters quite the adventures. Though I have yet to shoot any real images through mine, my initial tests when it was still in barrell indicated that they are *very* sharp. I hope this helps.
-- Dave Munson (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 28, 2000.
One way to get a lot of magnification out of a restricted bellows is to reverse-mount an enlarging lens in front of a normal taking lens (making a very low power projection microscope).
-- Wayne DeWitt (email@example.com), November 30, 2000.
K H, I have a catalogue of Rodenstock process lenses and I thought you might be interested in further data: It says that the 16/1000 and 16/1200 are 6 elements (aberrations increase with focal length). All others, f:9 and f:14 including 14/1070 mm are four elements Dialyt type (front and rear component are similar, two elements in two groups).
The absolute symmetric design is the reason why the Apo-Ronar is sharp at all distances. The distortion is corrected for 1:1 though. The Apo-Ronar and Apo-Ronar CL have the same optics but differ by the mechanic of the barrel's diaphragm. The Apo-Ronar M is a slightly asymmetric version designed for 0 distortion at scales other than 1:1. It was made for the production of printed circuits. So, it's true, not all Ronars are created equal. Also, from a previous post, only "MC" Apo-Ronars in shutter are multi-coated. There are certainly a few single-coated repro lenses mounted in shutter on the second hand market. Not at all bad lenses but a bit more sensible to glare/flare.
-- Paul Schilliger (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 30, 2000.