Repro-Claron vs. G-Clarongreenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
Hello, Does anyone know if there is any difference in the Repro-Clarons and the more current G-Clarons, other than when they were made and the names?
-- David Vickery (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 04, 2002
Yes there are huge differences. I use BOTH. The G-Clarons are 6 element "wide field" lenses that are outstandingly sharp and a much better than average compromise with weight and size. Especially the 240 and 305mm which remain in Copal 1. G-Clarons because of the 6 element correction are VERY sharp throughout their whole field. I use my 150 on 4X5 and 5X7! My 210 on 5X7 and 8X10! and my 240, 270 on 8X10 as well as all the other formats, and my 305 on 11X14! I also have 210mm, 305mm, and 355mm Repro clarons. Repro Clarons are 4 element lenses and the same formula as the famous Artars and Ronars. They cover a similar field as the Artars. They are incredibly sharp. One caveat is that Schneider evidently not considering View Camera use didn't put a mechanical vignette in the repro clarons and you'll see image but you can easily move over into mush. I was up in our local Mining Park last weekend with a 120 Angulon to do some thunderheads when the curator mentioned that the baby owls were out of their nest. I had the 5X7 'dorff and the longest lens I had with me was the 355 repro claron. I used it to photograph the owls at a distance of about 15 feet. Later I selected a 35mm format size area of those negs and enlarged just the baby owl about 11X. You'd think it was done with a Nikon! I love the repro clarons for closer in things. I've been building a body of work on derelict work trucks. The repro clarons have amazing bokeh if you want to fade away from a central sharp point.
-- Jim Galli (email@example.com), May 04, 2002.