Impressions on Nikkor M 450mm f9

[Drew Wiley]

Don't worry about the "data tests". A point blank test chart might make sense if that is what you do - simply aim a lens at flat copy at a consistent set aperture. But outdoors, I am looking at details on an 8X10 groundglass through a 7X magnifier - as if nose to nose with a 6 ft wide prints, using all kinds of potential combinations of tilt, swing, and rise, at various apertures and magnification scales, close-up to infinity, year after year, then printing and evaluating the results. So what kind of testing is truly more informative? The guy crunching numbers at his desk might or might not be right. But the battlefield itself will make apparent if the design is good or not. Just take the word of those with real-life experience with these lenses.

[scerto]

Don't worry about the "data tests". A point blank test chart might make sense if that is what you do - simply aim a lens at flat copy at a consistent set aperture. But outdoors, I am looking at details on an 8X10 groundglass through a 7X magnifier - as if nose to nose with a 6 ft wide prints, using all kinds of potential combinations of tilt, swing, and rise, at various apertures and magnification scales, close-up to infinity, year after year, then printing and evaluating the results. So what kind of testing is truly more informative? The guy crunching numbers at his desk might or might not be right. But the battlefield itself will make apparent if the design is good or not. Just take the word of those with real-life experience with these lenses.

Hi Drew, this is what I meant. Interested in people using gear everyday or so, developing scanning, printing and actually experiencing on the field.

I0m that kind of person. Get bored in front of data

Thanks

[Pere Casals]

The proof is in the pudding. Shading your lens is important, and even the specific design of a bellows can affect how much surplus light bounces around. But so do air/glass interfaces, even with modern multicoated lenses. I could easily see the difference in my chromes, and even quit using a MC dagor for chromes because the contrast was so high. Nikkor M's are more similar to my single-coated Kern dagor. Truly nice microtonality in B&W, and very clean hue reproduction.

Drew, if there is something easier to measure than Lp/mm it is measuring flare, it needs a cheap luxmeter and some cardboard.

You won't find a flaw in the reasoning in that post: http://www.largeformatphotography.in...=1#post1425514

Today DSLR Pro zooms can sport 16 groups inside, being low flare. Glass surface induced flare in LF lenses is completely irrelevant since the 1980s, even for high group count designs.

No boring data: flare is in the photographer's methods, not in a MC lens.

[Corran]

How about this - here's an actual photo from the 450M on 8x10:

[Pere Casals]

How about this - here's an actual photo from the 450M on 8x10:

Bryan, it looks pretty nice, anyway to judge the lens nature you should post a 100% crop of a 4000 dpi scan of the corners, with detail in focus, and also it would be interesting a crop with a shift showing the circle boundary.

Nobody has a doubt that the M450 is a perfectly capable lens for 810 work, just saying that a 1000pix wide picture cannot show what a lens does in a 810 work.

[Corran]

just saying that a 1000pix wide picture cannot show what a lens does in a 810 work.

You're right, and neither does a horribly oversharpened scan on a consumer flatbed .

[Pere Casals]

You're right, and neither does a horribly oversharpened scan on a consumer flatbed .

Better that than a 1000 dpi in a pre press massive counterweight

Anyway you could take a 1 inch strip of the corner at 8000...

[Drew Wiley]

Thanks, Pere. Yes, I have a lux meter, but also a special instrument about a thousand times more accurate. I'm familiar with these variables.

[Drew Wiley]

I almost stepped on a dpi barefoot one night - dead porcupine injectors.

[sanking]

And if you stop it down to f/64 or f/90 the 450 M will cover 20X24". I know this for a fact because I have actually used the lens on a 20X24" camera.

Yes, resolution is limited by diffraction at f/90 to around 15-17 lpm, and on the corners of 20X24 resolution is much less than that. But for contact printing it is more than enough.

For 12X20 and 14X17 you get huge coverage with the 450 M, enough to allow up to several inches of lateral or up/down movement.

Simple design maybe, but extremely effective use of glass.

Sandy