small 300mm?

[false_Aesthetic]

Heya,

What's the smallest MC 300mm lens I can get for 4x5?

Thanks
T

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Heya,

What's the smallest MC 300mm lens I can get for 4x5?

Thanks
T

The 300mm Nikkor M and Fujinon C are both about the same size (Copal No. 1 shutter and 52mm filter size).

The 300mm Docter APO Germinar is smaller (also Copal No. 1 shutter, but 40.5mm filter size), but weighs about the same (brass cells, instead of aluminum) and is single coated.

Kerry

[Oren Grad]

I believe late-production Apo-Ronars were multicoated. Late shutter-mounted 300 Apo-Ronars came in Copal 1 and take a 49mm filter.

[Joseph O'Neil]

It's not 300mm, but the 270mm G-Claron is pretty small for a lens of that size range. I "downsized" from an older Komura 300mm (Tele) to the G-Claron (bigger coverage, and smaller lens), and i have not noticed the "missing 30mm" at all. IN fact, the larger coverage of the 270 makes it fell like it is a bigger lens, if that makes any sense to you.
Might be worth a look if one comes your way.

joe

[Ted Harris]

I believe the Fujinon 300A is in the same range but have never compared size and weight. It's also a lot more expensive than the others mentioned.

[naturephoto1]

I believe late-production Apo-Ronars were multicoated. Late shutter-mounted 300 Apo-Ronars came in Copal 1 and take a 49mm filter.

Hi Oren,

Yes they were and I have one. :D Mine weighs 13.4 oz including the lens and Copal 1 shutter, lens caps, retaining ring, Heliopan SH-PMC 49mm UV filter, and Linhof Technika 1 board.

Rich

[Oren Grad]

G-Claron

Not MC, though I don't think that's an issue myself. If that's OK, there is of course the 305 G-Claron too, though both the 270 and the 305 are larger than the other lenses mentioned here (filter sizes 58 and 67).

[Jim Jirka]

I have always found this table to be very useful.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF4x5in.html

[Gary Smith]

I believe the Fujinon 300A is in the same range but have never compared size and weight. It's also a lot more expensive than the others mentioned.


I have never even seen a Fuji 300A. What is special about them, and how much do they go for compared to say a Fuji 300mm C?


Thanx and sorry to hijack the thread.

Gary

[Ted Harris]

Fuji originally amde the 'A' line in 180 - 240 - 300 - 360 - 600 - 1200. The 600 and 1200 were discontinued long before they started multicoating lenses. The 300 and 360 were discontinued sometime in the late 1980's or 1990's (Kerry help here) and bothsingle and multicoated samples are around, mine is multicoated. What is so special about them is their coverage. The 300 A has a 420mm image circle as opposed to 380mm for the C. The A's when found sell in the range of $800 -$1000, maybe more now that the lens market is going a bit nutz. Like other lenses in the A series they are wonderful performers at all distances with superb sharpness. The longer 'A' lenses were the cult lens of the moment about a year ago.

[Ken Lee]

Thanks to Ted for introducing me to the 300A.

I have a short piece on it on my site here (http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/tech.html#300A), along with some sample images.

[Christopher Perez]

To recap, small 300mm lenses include...

- Nikon 300 M f/9
- Fuji 300 C f/8.5
- Fuji 300 A f/9
- Rodenstock 300 Ronar f/9 (recent versions, early were single coated)
- Docter Optic 300 APO Germinar f/9 (single coated, but you'd never know it wasn't MC)

My favorites include the APO Germinar and the Fuji A. The APO Germinar for it's brilliant resolution and contrast and the Fuji A for it's resolution, contrast, and coverage. I recently sold my Nikkor M only because a Fuji A became available and I've been wanting one after Ken's and Kerry's comments on the optic.

[Ted Harris]

Chris, BTW I agree on the quality of the Apo Germinar. I have one of the 360's that I got whn they were being closed out in 1999. It's big but not overly heavy and a stunning performer. However, the 300 A never stays home and the 360 often does because of size.

[Jan Pedersen]

I believe late-production Apo-Ronars were multicoated. Late shutter-mounted 300 Apo-Ronars came in Copal 1 and take a 49mm filter.


Believe Oren is right about the late Apo-Ronar's my 300mm shows colors that make me believe it is a MC version. It is by the way in a Prontor 1 Professional.

[Christopher Perez]

Ted,

Isn't it amazing how good an old 4 element airspace design can be? Even shooting into the sun, the APO Germinar is contrasty and sharp. It easily keeps up with any of the multi-coated wonder optics I have. :)

Considering weight: I have and use a 360mm Schneider Symmar Convertible in #5 Compound shutter for the 8x10. But it's good only in the studio and some things within staggering distance of the van. I swear that lens could anchor the Queen Mary!

When I head into the field, if it's with the 8x10, the Fuji A 300 goes with me. If I'm out and about with the 4x5 or 5x7, it's nearly always the APO Germinar 300.

It's nice to have, how shall we say? Options. :) :) :)


Chris, BTW I agree on the quality of the Apo Germinar. I have one of the 360's that I got whn they were being closed out in 1999. It's big but not overly heavy and a stunning performer. However, the 300 A never stays home and the 360 often does because of size.

[naturephoto1]

I believe late-production Apo-Ronars were multicoated. Late shutter-mounted 300 Apo-Ronars came in Copal 1 and take a 49mm filter.


Believe Oren is right about the late Apo-Ronar's my 300mm shows colors that make me believe it is a MC version. It is by the way in a Prontor 1 Professional.

Hi Jan,

As far as I know the Apo Ronars should be marked with an MC if they are multicoated. Both my f9.0 240mm and f9.0 300mm Apo Ronars which are in Copal 1 shutters are marked MC and are multicoated. Perhaps some of the earliest MC were not marked as such. Maybe Bob Salomon can comment if that was the case.

Rich

[Jan Pedersen]

Rich, not a bad idea to open one's eyes. There is a big and loud MC on the lens so i guess it must be a Multi Coated. :D Just made a small fortune and thanks for that..

[naturephoto1]

Rich, not a bad idea to open one's eyes. There is a big and loud MC on the lens so i guess it must be a Multi Coated. :D Just made a small fortune and thanks for that..

Jan,

Used MC Apo Ronars do demand a price premium. :eek: :D I know, I purchased the MC versions and was willing to pay the extra.

Rich

[Jan Pedersen]

:D Had to go all the way to Germany to find one in a Prontor Proff. Not really had a chance to see what it can do yet but this weekend should be :cool:

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Chris, BTW I agree on the quality of the Apo Germinar. I have one of the 360's that I got whn they were being closed out in 1999. It's big but not overly heavy and a stunning performer. However, the 300 A never stays home and the 360 often does because of size.

Ted,

The Docter Optics 300mm APO Germinar was made to screw right into a Copal No. 1 shutter. Unlike your 360mm APO Germinar, it's a very tiny 300mm lens. Much smaller than even your 300mm Fujinon A (40.5mm vs 55mm filter size). But, of course, it lacks the coverage of the 300 Fujinon A. It's a great lens for 4x5, 5x7, but not for general 8x10 use.

Here's a photo of mine in a Copal Press No. 1 shutter.

Kerry
http://thalmann.com/Ebay/300mm_APO_Germinar_2.JPG

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

For comparison purposes, here's a photo of a 300mm Fujinon A:

http://thalmann.com/Ebay/Fujinon_300_A.jpg

Unfortunately, it's not to the same scale as the 300mm APO Germinar photo, but since they are both in No. 1 shutters, you can get some idea of the relative size of these two lenses. The Fujinon A is a very compact 300mm lens, but the APO Gerninar is downright tiny (you can't see it in the photo, but the rear cell of the 300mm APO Germinar is the same size as the front).

Kerry

[Jan Pedersen]

They are both sweet looking lenses and had it not been for the recent purchase of the 300mm Apo-Ronar, would have been all over the 300mm Docter Wetzlar that was up for sale earlier today and hopefully ended up in good hmm. a good lens board.

[Ted Harris]

Kerry agreed and from the various Apo Germinar's that I have now seen they are all small in terms of the cells; it is the shutters that kill you ..... that said my 360 Apo Germinar is the smallest general purpose lense I own in a #3 shutter.

[Christopher Perez]

Yes. Late model Ronars can be multi-coated.

Jan, on a related topic, could you tell me how many aperture blades your Prontor Pro has? The reason I asked is that I recently saw on that had what I think were only 4 "blades" in a #1 shutter. The aperture shape was nothing like the round multi-bladed Prontor Press shutters I have.


[COLOR="Blue"]I believe Oren is right about the late Apo-Ronar's my 300mm shows colors that make me believe it is a MC version. It is by the way in a Prontor 1 Professional.

[Jan Pedersen]

Christopher,
That is the only thing i don't like about the Prontor Pro. it has only 5 blades. Can't imagine that the bokeh will be anything to write about. Was not aware of that when i bought it.

[Arne Croell]

Since all these 300mm lenses come in size 1 shutters, the best weight comparison is weighing just the cells, as the shutters can be exchanged. In increasing order of weight, just the cells without shutters or caps:

Apo-Ronar MC: 94 g
Fujinon-C: 100g
Nikkor-M: 106g
Apo-Germinar: 107g
Fujinon-A: 231g

Apart from the Fujinon-A, there is not really that much difference.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Apo-Ronar MC: 94 g

Arne,

Good comparison.

I assume this is a late APO-Ronar MC with the cells in aluminum barrels. I had a 240mm APO Ronar MC with the cells in brass barrels. I don't remember the exact weight, but even though it was a very compact lens, the weight was surprisingly heavy - probably in the same ballpark as the 300mm Fujinon-A. I just remember I was disappointed after buying it as I was looking for a lens in the 10mm - 240mm range for backpacking and it only weighed a couple ounces less than my much larger 210mm APO Symmar. So, I sold it and got a 240mm Fujinon-A, which was much lighter than that particular 240mm APO Ronar MC.

Kerry

[Arne Croell]

Arne,

Good comparison.

I assume this is a late APO-Ronar MC with the cells in aluminum barrels. I had a 240mm APO Ronar MC with the cells in brass barrels. I don't remember the exact weight, but even though it was a very compact lens, the weight was surprisingly heavy - probably in the same ballpark as the 300mm Fujinon-A. I just remember I was disappointed after buying it as I was looking for a lens in the 10mm - 240mm range for backpacking and it only weighed a couple ounces less than my much larger 210mm APO Symmar. So, I sold it and got a 240mm Fujinon-A, which was much lighter than that particular 240mm APO Ronar MC.

Kerry

Kerry, yes the Apo-Ronar has aluminum barrels, serial no. 10880xxx, made in 1990 or so.

[Arne Croell]

The 300mm Nikkor M and Fujinon C are both about the same size (Copal No. 1 shutter and 52mm filter size).

The 300mm Docter APO Germinar is smaller (also Copal No. 1 shutter, but 40.5mm filter size), but weighs about the same (brass cells, instead of aluminum) and is single coated.

Kerry
Kerry, btw, why do you think the Apo-Germinar cells are brass? I can't tell 100% on my 300mm, but other ones I have are aluminum for sure (scratches near the thread). That brown anodization of the threaded part may be misleading. The slightly higher weight compared to the Apo-Ronar cells is probably due to thicker lenses.

[naturephoto1]

Kerry, yes the Apo-Ronar has aluminum barrels, serial no. 10880xxx, made in 1990 or so.

Hi Arne,

Thanks for the information. I had concluded that my 240 and 300mm Apo Ronars in Copal 1 shutters were in brass barrels and that was the reason for the weight differences from the later published data. I have weighed the lens cells of each but, my scale only measures to the nearest 5g increments. Below are my findings for the cells in the brass barrels:

240mm Apo Ronar MC: 190g
300mm Apo Ronar MC: 150g

It would be nice to have had them in the aluminum barrels, but I believe that I will live with the weight difference.

Kerry, then if my numbers are about correct, your Fujinon 300A must have weighed about 41g more than the 240mm Apo Ronar MC in the brass barrel.

Rich

[Arne Croell]

Thanks, Rich! So the brass adds about 50% to the cell weight for the 300mm Apo-Ronar. On the other hand, brass is theoretically superior with respect to strength and temperature changes if that is any consolation. That is why all the process versions of the Apo-Ronar are in brass barrels, as weight did not matter there.

[naturephoto1]

Thanks, Rich! So the brass adds about 50% to the cell weight for the 300mm Apo-Ronar. On the other hand, brass is theoretically superior with respect to strength and temperature changes if that is any consolation. That is why all the process versions of the Apo-Ronar are in brass barrels, as weight did not matter there.

Hi Arne,

Well that is supposed to be the case which is why my circular filters and step-up rings (Heliopan or B + W) are in brass (which do not flex as much as the aluminum). On the other hand all of my Cokin P size filter adapters (Singh-Ray or Lee filters) which is what I am standardizing for most of my work uses the aluminum threads. But, like my Leica R lenses the brass should be self lubricating for the aluminum filter threads.

Rich

[Jan Pedersen]

My Apo-Ronar 300mm with serial number 1044xxxx is a brass barrel.


jan

[Arne Croell]

My Apo-Ronar 300mm with serial number 1044xxxx is a brass barrel.


jan

As an addition to this older thread, an Apo-Ronar I just got with serial no. 1061xxxx has also brass cells. That means that Rodenstock changed from brass to aluminum cell mounts for the shuttered Apo-Ronars between 1986 (1061xxxx) and 1990 (1088xxxx), interpolated from the available serial no. lists. The complete list for the small 300mm lens cell weights (without shutters or caps) would then be:

Apo-Ronar MC (aluminum mount): 94 g
Fujinon-C: 100g
Nikkor-M: 106g
Apo-Germinar: 107g
Apo-Ronar MC (brass mount): 154 g
Fujinon-A: 231g

[turtle]

Another very small and light 300 is the Rodenstock Geronar f9. This is an MC triplet and not very sharp at wider apertures but very sharp at landscape apertures such as f22. The limited number of elements means it has great contrast. They are very cheap when they appear on ebay but are quite rare. They also cover 10x8 and weigh only about 250g in a copal 1.