how sharp are 8x10 wides

[peter ramm]

I bought a 200mm Grandagon a little while ago. Lovely lens but not very sharp. I have made a number of exposures, most at f32 and a distance of about 25 feet. I focus carefully but the film is a bit soft. That is true for material in front of and behind the point of focus, so DOF appears fine and I don't think it is a problem with the film plane.

My Apo Sironar S 240mm is tack sharp. What should I expect from the 200mm? Can one send such lenses to anyone to check cell spacings etc?

Peter

[Steve Hamley]

Give it a try at say f:16.

S.K. Grimes might have the cell spacing recorded. Do you know if the shutter is original?

Cheers, Steve

[MIke Sherck]

I have the older Fujinon 210mm, single coated, with 352mm of coverage. It is tack-sharp. I love this focal length for 8x10!

Mike

[IanG]

It should be very sharp at f22. The cell spacings are factory set and not always identical. My 90mm Grandagon has brass spacer rings, it's possible to loose them if your not careful when fitting cells into a shutter.

Ian

[mcfactor]

My Caltar-N 210 (a rodenstock sironar-n) is perfectly sharp all the way to the corners and covers 8x10 easily.

[peter ramm]

Thanks. The lens appears to be in great shape and in its original shutter, but who knows. There may well be a spacing issue. Any ideas as to someone who can check this out?

[Armin Seeholzer]

My Caltar-N 210 (a rodenstock sironar-n) is perfectly sharp all the way to the corners and covers 8x10 easily.

This is not a wide angle typ of lens, but my 155 mm Grandagon is tak sharp and also should be a 200mm!
But it need a strong front standard!

Cheers Armin

[Louis Pacilla]

This is not a wide angle typ of lens, but my 155 mm Grandagon is tak sharp and also should be a 200mm!
But it need a strong front standard!

Cheers Armin

I agree with Armin. I also own & use a 155 Grandagon N & I find it's razor sharp all the way to edges of the image circle. I see no reason why the 200mm Grandagon would not preform equally as well if it's spaced correctly.

It may be worth your time to send it off to SK Grimes or even better a Rodenstock trained repair center( If that exists) To have it put on an optical bench & spacers then added as needed. You may find out that no problem is found & then Maybe it's operator error. It can happen.

[peter ramm]

The 200mm has a large IC and lots of complex glass in it. That affects its potential to be sharp, as the attached MTF data show (supplied by my friendly local Rodenstock dealer).

Difficult part here is that all of my previous experience is with very sharp lenses and I may just be seeing what is normal for a lens with a 500mm IC. Hate to send it Germany if there is nothing wrong but I guess I will have to do that or live with the uncertainty.

[Ole Tjugen]

A WA lens should be as sharp as a normal lens, if not sharper. Central sharpness, at least should be VERY sharp.

IN all the lenses I have used, only a very few very fast lenses have been visibly unsharp, unless tortured well beyond their intended use - or perhaps due to operator error.

Is your GG and film plane exactly in the same place? The shorter the lens, the more critical that is - what gives tack sharp pictures with a 300mm lens might well be far out of tolerance with a very wide lens.