Asher, I have been meaning to check the coverage of my 360 Kowa.....will do soon. Then will sell either the 360 Kowa or the 355 G-Claron. Ditto my 305 Kowa and GC.Originally Posted by Asher Kelman
Asher, I have been meaning to check the coverage of my 360 Kowa.....will do soon. Then will sell either the 360 Kowa or the 355 G-Claron. Ditto my 305 Kowa and GC.
Tracy,
I bet you keep the G-Claron....
Cheers, Steve
Could be that the Kowa has a better coating, LOL! After all, these were the most mature of the line. Next, if the G Claron has more money locked inside, does that really show in the picture or in the portrait taken with just the rear element.
If not, then it makes more sense to keep the Kowa and harvest the hidden $ in the G-Claron.
Asher
When I get a chance to do the side by side comparison, "usable" coverage will be a factor for sure, but will not be the only deciding factor for me.
I've never seen a 360m Graphic Kowa that wasn't a 4/4 construction with MUCH narrower coverage than the 6/4 Computars and also considerably narrower angle of coverage than the 6/6 210mm Graphic-Kowas.
In terms of coverage, the 360mm Graphic-Kowa will be much closer to a 14" Red Dot Artar than the ULF-capable Computars (about 95 - 96 degrees), or even a G Claron (about 80 degrees). I know some sellers on eBay, who have never actually shot with one of these lenses, will make all kinds of crazy inflated coverage claims, but it's basically a very nice, compact, single coated 8x10 lens that's a direct fit in a reasonably modern Copal 3S shutter. It might be usable on 11x14, if you don't mind the corners going a little soft, but if you need 11x14 (or greater) coverage, there a LOT of better choices in the 355mm/360mm/14" focal length range (355mm G Claron, 14" f7.7 Dagor, 14" f11 Trigor, 355mm/360mm Convertible Symmar, 360mm APO Gerogon, 360mm f6.3 Fujinon-W, etc.).
The problem is all of these lenses (f9 Computars, f6.8 APO KYVVYTARs and f9 Graphic-Kowas) all look exactly alike, but unless you count reflections and determine the construction of the lens (6/4, 6/6 or 4/4 - in descending order of coverage), you won't really know what they cover.
Obviously, I haven't seen every sample of every lens in every focal length, but all f9 Computars I've seen, in all focal lengths, are 6/4 construction with enormous coverage. All 150mm f6.8 and 150mm f9 Graphic-Kowas I've seen are 6/4 construction with an observed usable image circle of about 290mm (I shot for years with a 150mm f9 Graphic-Kowa on 4x10 and it covered with room for modest movements). All 210mm f9 Graphic-Kowas I've seen are 6/6 construction with a usable image circle of around 380mm (compared to about 450mm for the 210mm f9 6/4 Computar). Some 240mm Graphic-Kowas I've seen are 6/4 and some are 6/6. And, as I said above EVERY 360mm Graphic-Kowa I've seen is a 4/4 design with much narrower coverage.
Better even than counting reflections is putting the lens on a camera and exposing some film and examining the results with a loupe. If possible, compare a few different types of lenses (Graphic-Kowa, G Claron, Fujinon-W, Dagor, Convertible Symmar etc.) with the lens centered and again with a couple inches of front rise and/or shift and examine the corners of the negatives with a loupe to determine which offers the most usable coverage.
On the longer focal length Computars (240mm, 270mm and 305mm), my experience echos the coverage numbers Sandy quoted earlier in this thread.
In my experience, in this focal length range, the G Claron offers the best compromise in terms of size, cost and coverage. If you don't mind the heavy weight and enormous filter size, the 355mm/360mm Convertible Symmar (officially, just plain Symmar) offers the best combination of price and coverage. Sany clued me into this one several year ago. It is readily available in barrel and a variety of shutters (Compound, Ilex and Copal - depending on age) at VERY reasonable prices and offers huge coverage - even more than the smaller G Claron. The only bad things I can say about the 355mm/360mm Symmar are: it's big and heavy; and it tends to develop contrast robbing haze on the inner surfaces of the air-spaced elements. This is easily removed by any competent lens repair technician.
Kerry
From the large format department of Lens and Repro we are offering this 360mm f9 Graphic Kowa in excellent condition. The lens is mounted in a Copal 3S shutter. Glass is clean with no cleaning marks, scratches, haze or recementing issues. Shutter works properly and the aperture scale is calibrated in 1/3 stops with stops indicated down to f90 with 1 1/2 more uncalibrated stops. The Graphic Kowa lenses were the 3rd reincarnation of the original Computar lenses imported by Jack Callahan of KYVYX Korporation in the early 1980's. They were later called the Apo-Kyvytar and then the Graphic Kowa. They are 6 element symmetrical Plasmats with an image circle which increased to 86 degrees as the lenses were stopped down. Great for ultra large formats they are physically small as well. Now is your chance to buy one of these highly regarded lenses. Original lens hood, front and rear lens caps and the mounting flange are included. Check our ebay store and www.lensandrepro.com for more large format cameras, accessories and the largest selection of used view camera lenses in the US (including a 305mm f9 Graphic Kowa). Sold as described, final sale."
whereas Jm Galli advertises one for us in APUG as a more sober price of $595 and no one is taking it! I have suggested to him it might move faster next to this so well hyped up lens and repro specimen! Amazingly, the price direct from the Lens and Repro store is $1550, whereas on ebay one can grab it for a mere $1300!
I have one on the way for myself for $560 total, lens and Copal S shutter. My needs are satisfied with 8x10 but I'd have preferred to have a much wider coverage. I have yet to see any pictures with these lenses! I'd love the flexibility of being able to use this for 11x14, 16x20 and even 20x24! That would be a great lens!
Asher
I've owned one example, and it was not a plasmat. The 360mm Kowas were 4/4, like the Artar. They're great lenses, but trying to get much, if any more sharp coverage out of the 360mm Kowa than a 14" Artar is most likely wishful thinking.
If you buy a 360mm Kowa with the expectation you'll have 90 degrees or more of sharp coverage, be sure you can return it.
Cheers, Steve
Steve,
I've chose the 360mm Graphic Kowa just to cover generously 8x10 at its focal lengths; rear cell and complete lens. My current lenses have limitations in uniform, non-vignetting coverage, so this 360mm Graphic Kowa, for just $315 for the pristine lens & hood, (and Copal 3S on the way), is going to be my general workhorse, where I can have whatever movements I need, without limitations. What's interesting is the many statements of ownership. Even Jim Galli! However, I've searched and haven't found any pictures taken with this so much praised optic!
Still, I'm happy to learn of other such lenses with giant FOV and stellar optics! That's for my Camera Obscura where film or Cibachrome paper will go on a vacuum board and there are no film holders.
Asher
Kerry, to add one more to your list, I have a 270mm Graphic-Kowa and it appears to be a 4/4. Never tried it on a camera, was keeping it around to use on an enlarger someday.
Don't belive everything you read...
I bought my 360mm f9 Graphic-Kowa from Lens & Repro many years ago based on the same optimisitc coverage claims. I tracked down a Copal 3S sutter and had custom engraved aperture scales made by the late Steve Grimes. My goal was a nice 360mm lens for 11x14, and possibly larger formats.
After all this trouble and expense, when I actually put the lens on the camera and tested it, I was very disappointed in the actual usable coverage. It was MUCH less than the claimed 86 degrees, and not really suitable for ULF (MAYBE 11x14 contact printing, definitely 10x12, if that's considered ULF). As I mentioned in my previous post, there are many better choices in this focal length range for 11x14 and larger formats. The tested lens illuminated 11x14 and 7x17, but that was the max. Chris Perez tested it on his 12x20a and it wouldn't come close to covering that format.
I verified that the construction was 4/4, and definitely NOT a 6/4 plasmat. Several other owners of this lens have also veriified that their samples are also 4/4 construction with coverage similar to a 14" Red Dot Artar. Other than inflated advertising claims, I'm not sure why this issue is still being debated.
The 360mm Graphic-Kowa is a 4/4 design with coverage consistent with other lenses of similar construction - no more, no less. It does have the advantage that the cells are a direct fit in a modern Copal 3S shutter, and it takes standard threaded filters. It makes a very fine lens for 8x10.
I happen to have a Kyvyx Korporation Katalog from 1980 that has specs and comments from Jack Callahan on these lenses. The specs are comments are full of inconsistencies, peculiarities and errors. The design and construction of these lenses was in flux at that time, and I suspect Jack Callahan himself didn't even know exactly what changes the OEM that produced these lenses was implementing at any given moment. But, from his comments, he knew the 305mm and 360mm APO Kyvytars he was selling had substantially less coverage than the some of the shorter focal lengths in the same series.
In a letter signed by J. D. Callahan, he states the coverage of the APO-Kyvytar lenses as:
"The 1/2 field angle is 38 degrees".
This is equal to a coverage angle of 76 degrees.
In the price sheet, the coverage is listed as:
"The field angle is up to 86 degrees".
The spec sheet is where things get really confusing. The Field Angle for all focal lengths from 150mm - 480mm is listed as "up to 86 degrees". However, the Image Size at Inifinity (image circle) is inconsistent. For the 150mm, 210mm and 240mm focal lengths, the specified image circles (277mm, 386mm and 438mm) are pretty close to what you'd get using an 86 degree coverage angle. However, the listed image circle for the 270mm APO-Kyvytar is much bigger (591mm) and equates to 95 degrees of coverage. BTW, this is consistent withe the usable coverage Sandy reported for the 270mm f9 Computar and also my own personal experience with the 270mm f9 Computar. The image circle specs listed for the 305mm, 360mm and 480mm APO Kyvytars are much smaller (relative to focal length). They are 443mm, 523mm and 698mm - which correspond to an angular coverage of 72 degrees for these focal lengths.
And, there is an asterisk in the 270mm column of the spec table. The note associated with that asterisk says:
"It should be pointed out that the APO-KYVYTAR CONVERTIBLE 6.8/270 in Cop III covers more than either the 305mm or 360mm and costs far less".
There are no details provided anywhere in the catalog about the construction of the lenses, or why some focal lenths cover substantially less than others. But, from the above quote, it is very clear that Jack Callahan knew some of the lenses performed differently than others. Given that this was a transitional period between the f9 Computars and the Graphic-Kowas, I wouldn't really believe any of the specs listed in the table and would recommend testing the coverage of any lens you plan to buy - or ask any seller that claims enormous coverage to put it on a 12x20, or larger camera, focus at infinity, take a test shot and either scan the negative or send it to you for inspection.
From the anecdotal evidence, it's clear that the construction of some of these lenses changed over time (the 210mm F9 Computars were 6/4, the 210mm Graphic-Kowas were 6/6 - some for the 240mm Computar and SOME 240mm Graphic-Kowas were 6/4). Since the vast majority of these lenses were sold in barrels, I suspect many were targeted for use on process cameras, and were probably built to order based on the required specs of these large customers. That may explain why some of the designs changed over time.
In any case, not all Computars, APO-Kyvytars and Graphic-Kowas are created equal. Count those reflections and test those lenses. It's the only way to know for sure what they are capable of covering.
So, what if the lens received is not as described. What if the 360mm purchased from Lens and Repro is not a 6/4 wide field plasmat? What if it is a 4/4 with much narrower coverage. One would hope they would take it back and issue a full refund. After learning the true coverage of the 360mm Graphic-Kowa I purchased from them, I never tried to get my money back. I just kept it for a while and used it on 8x10. It was a fine lens for that application.
[/quote]My needs are satisfied with 8x10 but I'd have preferred to have a much wider coverage. I have yet to see any pictures with these lenses! I'd love the flexibility of being able to use this for 11x14, 16x20 and even 20x24! That would be a great lens![/quote]
And, it wouldn't be a 360mm Graphic-Kowa. The 305mm f9 Computar easily covers up to 16x20. I had two and they were absolutelyt amazing. I recently sold both. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any lens in the 300 - 360mm focal length range that covers 20x24 at infinity. Maybe a long Series V Protar, but the coverage specs of those lenses tended to decrease with focal length. In the 360mm focal length, you'd need a lens with 96 degrees of coverage to hit the corners of 20x24. A 300mm would need 106 degrees of coverege for 20x24.
Kerry
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks