Best (sharp) 450mm 'Portable' lens for 8" x 10"?

[Murray Fredericks]

Hi All,

I need to purchase a 450mm 8" x 10" lens that is reasonably portable and sharp.

Any favourites or suggestions?

Thanks

Murray

[John Kasaian]

Murray,

I'm very happy with the 450 Nikkor M. You might also look at the 16-1/2" Artar.

Good Luck!

[Ralph Barker]

I like the Nikkor 450 M, too. But, I also have a 16½" Red Dot Artar, which is only slightly less "portable" (Ilex #4 shutter vs a Copal 3 on the Nikkor). I haven't done any head-to-head comparisons between the two, however, as I need to have a CLA done on the Artar's shutter.

[Donald Hutton]

There can be no better lens for your purposes than the Fuji 450mm C - coverage is huge and it's in a Copal 1 shutter so it weighs considerably less than any other 450mm. I had a Nikkor 450 M which is a great lens, but it's in a Copal 3 shutter so heavy enough. I finally just bought the 450 Fuji. And as sharp as anything out there.

[Michael Kadillak]

I have both the Fuji and the Nikon and they are both great lenses. Yes, the Fuji is a sharp and compact lens at f12.5, but it is also more expensive. The Nikon is as sharp but has better contrast to my liking, has larger coverage and is a hell of a lot cheaper than the Fuji. I purchased two of the Nikon 450 M's (I use one for 8x10 and another for ULF) for the price I paid for the Fuji.

Come on - Copal #3's are not that big a deal. I also shoot the Fuji 600 that is in a Copal #3. Try carrying around a 42" Red Dot in an Ilex #5.

It is what the optics produce that should be the cominant criteria. If you are contacting 8x10, give me contrast every day of the week. Anything will be sharp enough. Weston used some pretty cheap glass (all he could afford at the time) and his images blow your mind with clarity. If you are enlarging 4x5, then sharpness becomes more of a concern.

Cheers!

[Ted Harris]

If weight and size are the prime consideration the go for the Fuji C. If not, then the Nikon 450 M. IMHO, the Nikon slightly outperforms the Fuji but YMMV. I do think that both of these lenses outperform any of the earlier designs. I used a late model Schneider 480 mm Apo Artar for some years and definitely prefer the Nikon or the Fuji.

[Donald Hutton]

Michael

The 450 C Fuji is a bit cheaper than the Nikkor - the Fuji retails for around $900; the Nikkor for over $1000.

[Michael Kadillak]

When I purchased my Fuji 450 C, it cost me $1,000. My two Nikon 450M's cost me about $1,100 for the both of them in the used market in like new condition. I am pleased that the Fuji is less expensive now, but I see very few used Fuji's in the used market relative to the Nikon M.

That either tells me that there are fewer Fuji lens in circulation or many pleased users. Probably a combination of both.

Thanks for the information Don.

[Eric Leppanen]

If you intend to use your 450mm lens on both 4x5 and 8x10 field cameras then the Fuji-C would be the better fit. A Copol 3 shutter in this focal length is not a big deal on 8x10 but becomes a factor on 4x5 (Dykinga uses a separate support arm when using his 400mm Copol 3 lens due to the added vibration of the Copol 3 shutter).

If you are exclusively using 8x10, then it comes down to your weight and coverage requirements. If the added weight and bulk of the Nikkor doesn't bother you then you might as well take the Nikkor's added coverage and slightly brighter focusing (Nikkor f/9 vs. Fuji f/12.5) and run. The Nikkor image circle spec is very conservative and actual coverage is greater than the Fuji.

[Robert Skeoch]

I'm very happy with my Fuji 450C, but have never owned/used the nikon.
-Rob