Impressions on Nikkor M 450mm f9

[scerto]

Hello everybody

I have the chance to get a Nikkor 450mm M f9 in mint conditions for my 8x10 work

Just like to hear your impressions about the lens

Will use for landscape mostly

Thanks

[karl french]

It's a great lens. Excellent optically and quite compact for a lens in a Copal 3 shutter. A very good focal length for 8x10 landscape work.

[scerto]

It's a great lens. Excellent optically and quite compact for a lens in a Copal 3 shutter. A very good focal length for 8x10 landscape work.

Thanks Karl!

I love working with the 240mm on a 4x5” and quite sure this would be a great choice for 8x10

I reckon it has got the same quality as other Nikkor lenses

Thanks again


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pepeguitarra]

It's a great lens. Excellent optically and quite compact for a lens in a Copal 3 shutter. A very good focal length for 8x10 landscape work.

Thanks Karl. The whole 14 pages is a very interesting discussion. However, you got me from your first post. I just bought a Nikkor M 450/9. I am waiting for my 8x10 to arrive in five weeks.

[John Kasaian]

What karl french says. Lots of coverage, too.

[Pali K]

I use and love mine on 11x14. You will enjoy it.

Pali

[David Karp]

I had one that I used for 4x5. I sold it and purchased a 450mm Fujinon C. It had nothing to do with the quality of the photos. I just did not want to carry a big Copal No. 3 shutter around.

I made some very nice photos with it. They have a very nice quality to them. If I was using it on an 8x10 I would likely still have it.

[Pere Casals]

Best of M 450 is weight, 650grs for 450mm focal and 440mm circle.

It is a highly regarded lens for 8x10 Pros, it is multicoated and the simple design with less groups makes it flare resistant.

Drawback is that it only has 4 elements in 3 groups, tessar design, so it is a simple design that is less refined than a regular plasmat type lens, for example, a plasmat would probably deliver a larger circle, but for 450mm a plasmat would be huge. This is seen in then 300mm focal, for example, comparing Nikkor M 300 vs W 300, just to realize the M meaning.

The 450 focal needs only 52º to cover that 440mm circle, so with only 4 elements necessary performance can be reached, and manufacturing was also cheaper.

So it is a perfectly good lens for 8x10 landscape, if wanting more circle for architecture there is Fujinon CM-W 450 f/8 with 520mm circle, but weight is 1140grs.

The M 450 it is a lens that I was to acquire, I had a good opportunity, finally I judged that having a 360mm I can always crop the 8x10 negative and still having lots of image quality, and first I should deserve a lens like this.

[Bernice Loui]

Poor judgement to judge a lens by the number of elements in it's design. What matters is the results of images produced.
Most every design has trade offs, learning to used a given design's good and bad promotes a symbiotic relationship between lens and expressive image making.


Bernice

Drawback is that it only has 4 elements in 3 groups, tessar design, so it is a simple design that is less refined than a regular plasmat type lens, for example, a plasmat would probably deliver a larger circle, but for 450mm a plasmat would be huge. This is seen in then 300mm focal, for example, comparing Nikkor M 300 vs W 300, just to realize the M meaning.

[Pere Casals]

Poor judgement to judge a lens by the number of elements in it's design. What matters is the results of images produced.

Bernice

Bernice, what matters in the images produced it's not the lenses, but the photographer and how inspired he is. A true artist (I'm not one) makes wonders by using the plain bottom of a coke bottle.

Regarding the number of elements of a LF lens, are you sure that 4/3 tessar will perform as good than a 6/4 plasmat if wanting 70º coverage ? don't think that the 6 elements would allow more refined corrections than 4 and that this is important when going beyond 50º ?