PDA

View Full Version : 210 g-claron



David Hempenstall
5-Nov-2003, 23:49
just missed one (2nd hand).

need a small, light short lens for the 8x10, and this lens has made it to the top of the list.

anyone know where one is?

anyone got one they don't want?

cheers, d.

Ernest Purdum
6-Nov-2003, 06:02
They show up on eBay quite regularly. They are easy to search for because you can just type in "Claron" right fropm the home page. If you don't use a computer, a friend wqould probably be happy to do this for you.



If you find one in barrel, the cells will thread right in to a #1 shutter, Copal, Seiko or Compur.



I'm bothered by your statement that you will be using it on 8" X 10". Though some people report finding the image circle much larger than Sinar rates it at (260mm for the later ones), it still seems too small to me.

John Kasaian
6-Nov-2003, 06:11
david,

If I'm not mistaken, the "G" in G-Claron stands for "Galli" You might see if Jim has any available.--------Cheers!

Ted Harris
6-Nov-2003, 07:08
As a follow-on to Ernest's comments, although it is well established that Schneider rates their lenses very conservatively in terms of image circle I too question this choice for 8x10. Unless the 260 mm is an extreme understatement I can't conceive that you would more than bare coverage with no movements. Why not consider somethign that has ample coverage and is even smaller and lighter than the 210 G-Claron? Something like the 240 mm Fujinon A.

Brian Ellis
6-Nov-2003, 07:33
I used the 210 G claron for 8x10 for several years and it works just fine for that purpose when stopped down to F22 and smaller (sorry Ted, I sold it a couple weeks ago through rec.photo.marketplace). The design of the G Claron lenses is such that the more you stop down the larger the image circle becomes so that especially when you get down to F45 or F64 you have plenty of room for movements, at least I always did using it for landscape and exterior architectuve. I've always thought that the effects of diffraction with small apertures even on enlarged images is often overstated but since I was making only contact prints diffraction was no concern at all. There used to be a more scientific explanation by Ron wisner of why the G Clarons' quoted image circles are so small but their actual working image circles are so large in the bulletin board on the Wisner web site. I don't know if it's still there or not.

Brian Ellis
6-Nov-2003, 07:35
Ooops - the "sorry Ted" should have been "sorry David."

Kevin Crisp
6-Nov-2003, 08:05
David: I did what others have suggested. Bought an inexpensive barrel mounted G Claron, screwed it into a Compur 1 I had left over from something else, checked the element spacing (which was perfect)and used it. If you don't want a homemade f stop scale (copy it over from the stops on the barrel the lens comes with), SKGrimes Co. can engrave you one for $45, more or less. The lens does cover 8X10 with some limited movements, even though officially it isn't supposed to. It isn't just sharp enough for contact prints on an 8X10 negative, you can enlarge it without apologies. (An a 150 G Claron will cover 5X7 with some movements, but it isn't supposed to, the 240 G Claron gives quite a bit of room for movements, and a 270 G Claron will max out movements on any camera...) Make sure what you buy or bid on is a G Claron, not a Repro-Claron, since those have significantly smaller circles. Good luck.

tim atherton
6-Nov-2003, 08:27
Yes, the 210 G-claron will cover 8x10 at f22 and smaller and will give you an inch or two of movement at the smaller apertures.

If you can find a Kowa/Computar/Kyvytar 210 f9 on ebay in or out of shutter (most fit straight in a copal 1) it will cover significantly more, become a f6.8 once it's in the shutter, probably be sharper and most likely cost less.... only problem is lack of filter threads

Ted Harris
6-Nov-2003, 10:08
Brian, no sorry needed! In fact, I have never owned a G-Claron but will not put it on my list. I used to try and shoot 8x10 every once in a while with a 210 Apo Symmar and, as we all know, it just didn't cover. I will research the lens design and look at Ron's site. If I didn't already own 2 240 mm's I would actively start to look for one ... perhaps after I get rid of one of the 240's.

Michael Mutmansky
6-Nov-2003, 10:47
Kevin,

For 'normal' use, you are better off getting a more modern G Claron in a factory shutter, because the modern lenses are actually spaced to be optimized at infinity.

I know, I know, this is counter to accepted understanding of the G Clarons, but I was specifically told this recently by a Schneider rep. He said that in the early 90's, Schneider decided to optimize the shutter G Clarons for infinity because that's what they were mostly being used for (as a wide angle for large cameras mostly). The barrel versions were still optimized for infinity to the end of the production runs.

---Michael

Kevin Crisp
6-Nov-2003, 11:10
Michael: That's interesting. I had noticed that the later ones sometimes had larger diameters (at least in the 240 mm lens) so I guess I'll check serial numbers to see when mine were made. Since they all work fine (stopped down to f:22 or below) I'm not going to do anything about it, but it is interesting.

Michael Mutmansky
6-Nov-2003, 11:35
Kevin,

It really is counter to what every believes about copy lenses, and I actually asked the rep to repeat himself so that I was sure that I got it right. He was very clear (in his German eaccent) that they made that change some time in the early 90's.

Generally, it is known that the Fujinon A series and the Nikkor M series were set for infinity, but most people group the G Claron and the Ronars together at 1:1, when the modern G Claron in shutter should really be grouped with the Fujinon and Nikkor.

So, unless you need to stop down the lens to achieve better corner sharpness or better DOF, there isn't a compelling reason to go down to f/22.

This only applies to normal camera use, not an application where the coverage is being pushed due to the large size of the film, or tilts, etc. At this point, stopping down is the only way to improve the corner performance of lenses being pushed beyond what they are intended for.

---Michael

Bob Salomon - HP Marketing
6-Nov-2003, 13:36
"ut most people group the G Claron and the Ronars"

The Rodenstock process lens most like the G Claron is the wide field Apo Gerogon series. But these will not just screw into a shutter.

John Kasaian
7-Nov-2003, 21:29
Another really wide lens for an 8x10 is the Wollensak WA anastigmat or raptar, 159mm f9,5. Single coated, usually in an alphax shutter. I see them alot(as well as the f12.5 EWA version) on ebay & they go for cheap. Nice lenses though, with an entirely different feel than the G Claron, but also not much available room for movements. I only mention this in the unlikely event that the last 210 G Claron for sale on earth was the target of a martian abduction.

Edward (Halifax,NS)
15-Jan-2004, 07:19
If you are still looking a 210mm G Claron (in barrel), one just went up for auction on ebay. It has a buy it now price of $150. I would buy it myself but I am broke until I get my income tax refund in May. I even have a Prontor Press shutter that it would screw into. :(

Jeffrey Goggin
15-Jan-2004, 11:26
FYI, I'm using a fairly recent, factory-mounted 210mm G-Claron with my 8x10 and have observed the following: 1) To my eyes, images apprear to be sharpest when shot at f/16 and progressively less so when it's stopped down; 2) While it will cover 8x10, it does get quite soft around around the edges in the process, which effectively limits the amount of movement available.

The former isn't a problem for me as a lot of what I shoot are flat walls, so I don't need to stop down for DOF; the latter, however, is often a problem for me even though I compose for a square 8x8 format, which, in theory, means I don't need as much coverage as someone shooting full 8x10s. I often have to reposition the camera if I need more than, say, 20mm of shift, otherwise I will end up with one side of the image noticeably softer than the other.

For the money, though, I have no complaints. I'm sure I will ultimately buy another lens with more coverage to replace it, but for now, I can happily put up with its limitations.

Kevin Crisp
15-Jan-2004, 20:30
Lee: Apparently my prior statement was misinterpretted. What I was trying to say was that in my experience the suggestion that it would be just sharp enough for contacts was incorrect -- that you CAN enlarge the negatives without any difficulty. Sorry this was confusing.

Kevin

lee\c
15-Jan-2004, 21:15
thanks for clearing that up Kevin. I have and use a 210 and 305 G-Clarons and I love mine. I use both on my 8x10 and soon maybe I will use the 305 on an 11x14 camera.

leec

Hening Bettermann
31-Aug-2005, 18:18
Hi

I have recently been in contact with Hr. Werner Bayer from the Schneider Service in Germany concerning mounting of lenses into shutters. Encouraged by my success with having the Apo Ronar spaced for infinity by Linos, I asked if the same was possible for the Repro- and G- Clarons. The answer is no. I used the opportunity to ask if he could confirm that G-Clarons in shutters from the beginning of the 1990s were spaced for infinity. Here is his answer, translated:

"This is not quite correct. Ca. 1974 to 1976, the G-Clarons were completeley re-calculated. The new lens with the new optics was still a lens optimized for 1:1. Due to the new calculation of the optics, these systems could yield good performance also at infinity. G-Clarons were never optimized for infinity. It is beeing stated, that with a serial number over 12.000.000, you can assume to have a lens with the new system. But even that is not always correct. Even after this time, lenses of the preceeding series were delivered to many users, because the older G-Clarons had advantages for these users. The last series of G-Clarons has now been dicontiued for 8 years."

Kind regards - Hening.