760mm Apo Nikkor f/11 vs Nikkor-T ED 800mm f/12

[Drew Wiley]

Dan - when I state a 360 Apo Nikkor, for example, comfortably covers 8x10 at typical working apertures for field applications, I'm implying it will be even crisper in the corners and edges of the image than any other view camera lens I own, which includes some "cult" lenses. Overkill, really. These were designed to retain precise dot shape clear across, even rectangular dots (yes, they also made adjustable square-aperture 360's). But they aren't as compact as most field lenses, esp if you mount em in shutter. I'd guess the real-world coverage at f/32 might be around 70 degrees - more than Apo Ronars, but certainly not as much as 80 degrees.

[Pere Casals]

Manufacturer says 46º, http://www.savazzi.net/download/manuals/Apo-Nikkor.pdf (last page).

70º is what delivers a plasmat like Symmar-S.

Probably the APO Nikkor illuminates 70º, but beyond specified coverage the image soon should be pure blur.

At least it's what happens with my Lomo O-2 600mm, also a dyalite.

[Drew Wiley]

Did you even read what I just stated, Pere? I'M NOT GUESSING like you are. And I already explained at least twice on this thread why factory specs for graphics applications are FAR more stringent than for general photography use. That includes the definition of the image circle. Beyond the stated brochure image coverage, the edges are not a blur on 8X10, but probably crisper and better apo corrected than any lens of similar focal length you've ever seen. Its better than my 14 inch Kern Dagor and Fujinon f/10 360, which has a huge image circle. These are both classic lenses. But comparing a Lomo to an Apo Nikkor is like comparing a skateboard to a Ferrari.

[Pere Casals]

Did you even read what I just stated, Pere? I

Drew, a F=360mm/70º is a 500mm circle at infinite, as 11x14" requires 450mm then a 70º APO Nikkor 360 would be suitable for 11x14 ULF landscape with even some movements, and it isn't.

http://www.angusparkerphoto.com/blog...ndations-14x17

In fact the shortest APO Nikkor recommended for ULF is the 600 or 610 that has a 518mm circle at infinite.

The APO Nikkor 360 has a 600mm circle at 1:1, but the half for focus at infinite. Would you recommend the APO Nikkor 360 for 11x14 landscape?

Even the Wide Angle plasmat version of APO Nikkor delivers 54º only coverage for the 360mm, but here we are speaking about your 46º dyalite...

It would be interesting to measure LP/mm from 46º to 70º, and to see how it falls...
____________

Of course the LOMO O-2 is not the same quality than Nikkor, but I got it so cheap (44€) for experimeneting with dyalites, this delivers 41º coverage, from russian specs.



Russian specs also speaks about Lp/mm , but test shots look better than the 25 lp/mm specified in the center, I've been told that those specs are with a different normative, perhaps not at extintion, so I've pending measuring the optical performance, just for fun.

[Drew Wiley]

Pere - Lomos were obviously designed either to mimic certain flaws in 19th Century lenses or market new kinds of optical flaws which current photographers might find creatively interesting. That's fine. But Apo Nikkors were marketed for high-end commercial reproduction purposes. You're trying to compare oranges and apples. Just looking at the number of lens elements doesn't begin to tell the whole story. I have three cats napping around me right now, and they're truly felines as lions or tigers, but with respect to having felines in a house, there's a big difference. And you're trying to make arguments based on assumption instead of going to the horse's mouth. I've got some of these Apo Nikkors mounted on Sinar boards. I know what they are capable of. You are trying to crunch numbers based on spec sheets you plainly don't understand. Several of my Apo Nikkors were cannibalized off a $200,000 process camera 22ft long, with a bellows so big you could have walked through it if it could have held your weight.

[Pere Casals]

Drew, I've no APO Nikkor for the moment, but I guess one day I'll get one, it would be interesting viewing how it perfoms beyond the 46º official coverage and until the 70º you say .

Have you image samples that would show how it works at say 65º ?

I ask something like this enlarged 7mm crop (bellow, seen 40x or 50x) taken from the center, but asking the same at 65º, for example...

(This would be a little crop of the negative that would be 330mm away from center, using the APO 360)


http://www.largeformatphotography.in...=1#post1440564


_________________

LOMO O-2 600 isn't a taking lens one can find in a FK Russian camera for vintage aesthetics, it's a process lens, apo corrected, a dyalite for process work like the apo nikkor.

[Drew Wiley]

Hi again, Pere. Image circle is really related to application and how far one is willing to stop down the lens. For example, for reproduction purposes, Apo Nikkors were typically used at f/22. But for general phoitiography, I'd no doubt often stop it down to f/45 with no visible loss in a 20x24 b&w fiber print from
8X10 film. But a contact printer might successfully employ f/90. It also depends on how much movements are used, esp on the front standard. Guess I could
put an Apo-Nikkor in the pack tommorrow, but I don't like making lens cap exposures unless its a very long exposure. G-Claron lenses are analogous. They're close-range corrected plasmats also excellent at infinity. But because the series name was first attached by Schnieder to repro usage, the published specs for
image circles remain extremely conservative. Everybody knows by now that a 355 G-claron will easily cover 11X14, and even 12X16 or larger for contact purposes. The very similar Fuji A 360 is also effectively an 80 degree lens for typical landscape or architectural purposes. It has loads of wiggle room on 8X10 film, but barely covers 8x10 head-on with no spare room for movements at all. Why? It's because it's equipped with a no.1 shutter and at a certain point runs into mechanical vignetting, whereas the equivalent 355 G-Claron is mounted on a wider no.3 shutter; and contact printers aren't annoyed by minor
reductions in image quality toward the edges of the field like we enlarger types are. Sorry, but I have no means to scan and post my own images. You should have seen the stitched NASA images of the backside of the moon my nephew made using a monitor six feet wide up here at the the Lawrence Livermore Lab,
well before the public had access to that kind of software. I later saw a mounted print of just a quarter of the moon twenty feet across. But more down to
earth, at least if I was up in the mtns in clear air rather than on the foggy coast, I'm certain I could get a sharper image of the moon from my Pentax 6X7 300EDIF than what you posted. Lots of amateur astrophotographers use them. I'm trying to remember the name of a local telephotographer who uses Apo Nikkors; he had quite a website at one time, but must be getting way up there in age by now. If I remember I'll tell you. But in the meantime, Nikon still has an extremely high reputation for technical lenses - microscopes, machine optics, medical optics, very high-end repro work. I doubt anything Russian mfg has
equivalent quality.

[Drew Wiley]

OK. His name is Francis Sakamoto, and he's still connected with the Blackhawk Museum a half hour from here. But I can't find images of him using his gear.
His own website has been stripped down to comparison images which are too tiny to make out any detail, though I've seen his big Ciba prints in person.
Because he was once a telescope and Pentax dealer he's used a remarkable variety of tele options. There are some posted shots taken with a 450 Apo Nikkor
on a Toyo 8X10 with a P67 body at the film plane. But whatever happened to his more extensive informational site I have no idea. Guess I could just stop by
the museum. He lives not far from me too. But Blackhawk, other than the public museum, is the habitat of the "new rich" in northern California, and I got sick
of em as clients when working. Rich sports figures, drug kingpins, family members of despotic kingdoms, etc - a few nice people, but a lot of absolute jerks
with very tacky taste and a reputation for stiffing workers. Not many tech billionaires - they mostly live either across the Bay or on big ranches out of town.
Frank (Francis) is a nice guy. He just works out there running their own website and event calendar, which is up to date and interesting.

[Pere Casals]

I'd no doubt often stop it down to f/45 with no visible loss in a 20x24 b&w fiber print from
8X10 film. But a contact printer might successfully employ f/90.

I agree with those values, at f/90 diffraction limit is 17 Lp/mm, so a contact print is perfectly sharp, at f/45 limit is 35 Lp/mm so even a x3 enlargement still can show more than 10 Lp/mm.

Regarding soviet lenses, there are interesting models, for sure that QC and performance could not compete aganist western products, but they also had "islands of excellence"

It is interesting to note that they invented the tilted pupil, the sitall glass and the forerunners of biogons and super-angulons.

[Drew Wiley]

I know who makes many of the lenses for NASA, the DEA, NSA, etc., - lenses which were more sophisticated 30 yrs ago than anything the public can buy today, or probably even imagine. Well, maybe they would make one of us something super if we had a credit card without any limit. But the Soviets certainly knew how to turn ballpoint pens into recorders, cameras, and lethal injection guns; so who knows.