experience with G-Claron 210 mm as a landscape lensgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
I would like to heare somones experience and opinion on Schneiders G-Claron 210mm as a landscape lens ! I have a NIKKOR-M 300 that I like very much but the 200 Nikkor-M has somwhat a small circle !
-- Gudmundur Ingolfsson (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 24, 2001
Hi Gudmundur I have been using a 200 NikkorM for landscape photography and found it to be a very respectable lens: small, light (50% lighter than the G claron), multicoated, 0 size shutter and very sharp. As far as coverage is concerned I never felt restricted with my flatbed camera (Toyo 45A).
-- Jean-Marie Solichon (email@example.com), July 24, 2001.
I would go for the G-claron. It works on 8x10 and is good for macro, if you ever need it. I have not seen the Nikkor 200mm, but I have been happy with my G-clarons.
-- William Marderness (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 25, 2001.
I use the 210 G Claron as a moderate wide angle lens for 8x10. I've been very pleased with it, though I only make contact prints from 8x10 so I can't speak to enlargements. The G Claron lenses are designed so that the image circle continues to increase as you continue to stop down, so the published image circle numbers, which I believe are based on the size of the circle at F22, are really way off when you go down to F32 or 45 or 64. I usually use mine at F 45 or F 64 and have plenty of room for movements even though the published image circle number would tell you that the lens wouldn't cover 8x10 at all, much less provide room for any movements. The G Claron lenses are single rather than multi coated, which I've never found to be a problem but I don't do any color work. I'd suggest buying from Robert White. Their price was about $250 below the B&H price at the time I bought mine.
-- Brian Ellis (email@example.com), July 26, 2001.
I've read praise for the G-claron from people like Fred Picker, George DeWolfe, and a few other known photographers of which names I don't remember, however all of them work in B&W. Maybe some color photographers here can tell us how they compare to the MC lenses of various designs.
-- Q.-Tuan Luong (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 2001.
I cant' comment specifically on the G-Claron's v. multicoated lenses but can make a related observation. On a recent shoot in in the Mendocino area in Northern CA. I was packing two lenses and my 8x10. The lenses were a 210 Apo Symmar and a 360 Apo Germinar (Docter). The Apo Germinar is single coated and the Apo Symmar multicoated. I've got a number of the chromes spead out on the light table now and there are no discernable differences in color saturation, fringing, focus, sharpness, etc. between those taken with one lens and those taken with the other. The same film in all instances, Astia.
I hae owned the Apo Germinar 360 for about a year and have used it for color work on a number ofo ocassions and never had a problem. I will add that I can;t say the same for some of the older single coated lenses that I own or have owned in the past.
-- Ted Harris (email@example.com), July 27, 2001.
hi gudmundur, still interested in this lens? hope you are doing well. nice travels to the highlands. hope to hear from you soon. regards marcus
-- marcus schwier (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 31, 2001.