Thoughts on the Nikkor T 360/500/720 set?

[Pere Casals]

Or have a favorite lens/lens set in that range that you'd recommend in its place?

At one point I also seriously considered the Nikon T system, I also wanted to experiment with something in the 600mm.

Tets by Mr Pérez (http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html), even being a DIY self test and not a lab test, points an acceptable optical performance for the T 360 but a lower rating for the T 500 and 720.

I asked around and that test is consistent with other opinions I heard from T owners.

Math points that, if using a really sharp film like TMX, probably Image Quality of a T 500 shot its is equivalent to the same framing cropped from a T 360 shot, but I don't know in practice.

Finally I got a Symmar 360 convertible to 620mm, Technika selected. Drawbaks: 2 kgs and single coated (well, one may also prefer single coating...). Advantage: cheap(I had a tight budget), and it covers even 11x14. If wanting to hike with the 620 conversion alone it is way lighter, because only real cell (it is smaller than the front one) is carried. Anyway I found that the excessive image circle can generate flare because most of the circle iluminates bellows, for 4x5 a front hub can be necessary, even for 8x10.

The T is a great system, ideal for fielding 3 long focals with limited overall weight, also using a single shutter for the 3 focals this good for exposure consistence, but IMHO this is only worth if one uses long focals a lot. An alternative would be using a Nikon M 450, and cropping to obtain the 720 framing,

[Stephen Willard]

I have this lens and all three of its rear elements. It produces tack sharp images for all three elements. All of the elements will cover a 5x7, however the 500mm and 720mm elements also covers my 4x10 camera. The lens is light and compact, and I never head in the backcountry with my llamas without this convertible lens. It has been a great reliable work horse for me.

I also have the 600/800/1200 Nikkor T-ED convertible lens. It to is amazing, but it is big and heavy. I only use it in the spring and fall when I am shooting from the car. The only short coming of this lens is the 400mm jump from 800mm to 1200mm. I wish that Nikon made a 1000mm rear element for this system. My signature image below was take with the 1200mm element.

With the exception of the 360mm element, I attach a shock cord from the back standard down between the crotch of my tripod and back up to the front standard. This stabilizes the entire camera configuration and eliminate 90% of any vibrations. In fact, I was never able to produce a sharp image with the 720mm element until I used the shock cord.

I have also attach a pic of my homemade bellows extension I use when I shoot with 800mm or 1200mm lenses so that I can get the bells length I need with my Wisner 4x10 and 5x7.

[Corran]

Bryan, if catalog isn't wrong, the T ED 720 covers only 5x7 with no movements.

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/pdf...rmatLenses.pdf

I've used it on 8x10. It covers and is sharp.

[neil poulsen]

That's a disappointment, because you would have had a really nice set of long lenses.

Make sure the store pays shipping both ways.

[EdSawyer]

It's a great set, I have all of it, there's nothing sharper for 4x5 in that focal length for teles. Maybe the plasmats equal it, but i'd be surprised, plus they are huge and heavy in comparison and need more bellows. For long lenses for 4x5, it's most certainly the best option and best value, I think.

[Jim Andrada]

I have the whole set as well. It's more than sharp enough with every combination (IMHO!)

I use them on both my 4 x 5 Technika and my 5 x 7 Kodak 2D. The 720 is a bit too long on the 4 x 5 but perfect on the 5 x 7.

[Pere Casals]

I've used it on 8x10. It covers and is sharp.

Perhaps you used it for near objects, but for infinite focus nikon says 210mm circle at f/22, so if you have a landscape shot in 8x10 it would be interesting you post it, to see how corners are...

[Corran]

Pere, you haven't used the lens, so please stop posting about the specs. I have used the lens, and you have seen the images I've posted from it here. I did post a crop once because I wanted that composition. Anyway, there's still a huge difference between "infinity" and a subject hundreds of feet away, so the images I've made has focus at 200+ feet. Of course infinity is therefore out of focus with such a huge focal length, but the image circle is not appreciably different. It covers with room to spare and the in-focus subject near the periphery is sharp. My guess is however the focal length is changed, the image circle scales with it. Therefore it stands to reason the 720mm element has an image circle double the size of the 360mm, but Nikon spec'd out the lens at the lowest focal length.

[Pfsor]

Pere, you haven't used the lens, so please stop posting about the specs. I have used the lens, and you have seen the images I've posted from it here...

Carey Bird Photography source agrees with Pere's affirmation, indicating the image circle as 210mm at F/22 (5x7).Pere's supposition about your use of the lens is fully legit, no need to intimidate him. No manufacturer in its common sense would like to limit a lens characteristics to a smaller format than it can cover, hence the suspicion.

[Corran]

I'm not intimidating him, but as has been said on other threads, the official specs are only part of the story, and someone who has used the lens can generally say something about the coverage. You can second-guess Nikon's reasoning all you want, but the lens (720) covers 8x10 just fine.

I do not have a photograph that I focused at "infinity" with, but this tree was hundreds of feet away - infinity on any typical lens, but with a 720mm lens obviously the background goes out of focus. The image circle is massive and I have room for movements (I looked). I posted this cropped before, because that's what I wanted the composition to be, but here is the full sheet:



It clearly does not go crazy in the corners like some lenses pushed past their limit but it is out of focus at infinity here. Overall sharpness will be more of a function of vibration, wind, atmospheric conditions, etc., with such a FL.