Suggested 360mm lens?

[Bill_1856]

The 15" Wollensak Tele-Raptar is cheap cheap, good good, and big big.
The 360mm Schneider Tele-Xenar is cheap, good, and light (considering), but the Compound shutters will probably need a little TLC from a good shutter technition.

[dh003i]

Sorry, I should have told you guys my camera: I have a monorail, the Linhof Kardan Super Color. The rail itself is 18.5 inches long. The bellows have about 13 inches of draw from the front inside standard to the rear inside standard.

However, the ground-glass is about 1.25 inches further behind the end of the bellows on the rear standard; and the front standard is about 0.75 inches wide. So does that mean I effectively have enough draw for a 15 inch (381mm) lens focused at infinity?

However, even if that's the case, I suppose I wouldn't want to push it. 305mm is probably the highest I can go, so I guess that leaves:

Fuji 300/8.5-64 Fujinon C (380mm image circle @ f22) - 250g
Nikon 300/9-128 Nikkor M (325mm image circle @ f22) - 290g - $790 (eBay)
Fuji 300/8-64 Fujinon T (213mm image circle @ f22) - 415g
Schneider 305/9-90 G-Claron (381mm image circle @ f22) - 460g - $350 (eBay)

The Nikkor M seems like a very sharp lens, at 42-67 lines/mm on T-max from f/11-f/22 according to C. Perez, but I could only find one without a shutter on eBay for $390; so I presume add $300 for a Copal 1, and $790 would be the price.

The 305/9 G Claron seems like the best option, I suppose. Enormous image circle, enough for 8x10 with a decent amount of movements (a nice normal lens if I ever want to move up). It is also very sharp, even sharper than the Nikkor, at 54-67 lines/mm from f16 - f22. And at 460g, it isn't too heavy, about as heavy as my 14-54mm zoom lens with my Oly E3.

Although it does definitely seem bigger than my Schneider 150/5.6 :-).

[Len Middleton]

I agree with Donald on the Repro-Claron.

I have the 355/f9 version in a Compur 2 shutter, and use it on 8x10 with movements, although I cannot say that I have used movements at infinity with it. Used it on my 4x5 Technika and with the 16" draw was able to focus down to about 10 feet.

It is sharp, and extremely compact. One of the really great things about its compact size is to be able to close up my field camera with it inside, just by flipping the board backwards with the lens pointing toward the ground glass.

Oh, and likely cheaper than the G-Claron as well.

Hope that helps,

Len

[Don Dudenbostel]

A 355 is really pushing the limits of your camera. You might be tight on bellows if you want to do anything close with a 300mm. I would suggest the Nikkor T 360. It takes about the same bellows draw as a 210mm and is a super performer and is in a copal #1. I replaced my 360 tele arton due to size, weight and the Nikkor outperformed it by a wide margin. I teach gifted photo students and have put together a 4x5 kit that includes a Osaka 400 tele. The Osaka pleasantly surprised me in how good it is. It's in a #1 copal, very light weight, resistant to flare and quite sharp and contrasty. I've seen a couple for sale here and on the bay. My lens is branded another name that I can't recall at the moment but it's a Osaka and I paid $150 for it in E+ condition.

With the limited bellows on your camera the Nikkor or another tele is the only thing I would consider.

[dh003i]

I agree with Donald on the Repro-Claron.

I have the 355/f9 version in a Compur 2 shutter, and use it on 8x10 with movements, although I cannot say that I have used movements at infinity with it. Used it on my 4x5 Technika and with the 16" draw was able to focus down to about 10 feet.

It is sharp, and extremely compact. One of the really great things about its compact size is to be able to close up my field camera with it inside, just by flipping the board backwards with the lens pointing toward the ground glass.

Oh, and likely cheaper than the G-Claron as well.

Hope that helps,

Len

Thanks for the suggestion on the Repro Claron, but the 305/9 Repro-Claron is actually more expensive right now ($695) than the G-Claron 305/9 ($450). It must have caught on to people that it's a nice small lens with excellent macro-capabilities.

[dh003i]

A 355 is really pushing the limits of your camera. You might be tight on bellows if you want to do anything close with a 300mm. I would suggest the Nikkor T 360. It takes about the same bellows draw as a 210mm and is a super performer and is in a copal #1. I replaced my 360 tele arton due to size, weight and the Nikkor outperformed it by a wide margin. I teach gifted photo students and have put together a 4x5 kit that includes a Osaka 400 tele. The Osaka pleasantly surprised me in how good it is. It's in a #1 copal, very light weight, resistant to flare and quite sharp and contrasty. I've seen a couple for sale here and on the bay. My lens is branded another name that I can't recall at the moment but it's a Osaka and I paid $150 for it in E+ condition.

With the limited bellows on your camera the Nikkor or another tele is the only thing I would consider.

Thanks for your response. The Nikkor T 360 is way out of my price-range at around $1000+. I paid less than $460 for Nikkor 90/4.5 in a Copal 0. That's a lens I'll be using a lot, and it is a ginormous piece of glass. $1000 seems a little bit too much for a focal length that I'm going to need in case I can't get physically closer to something and want to crop in on it.

Using the 1/S1 + 1/S2 = 1/f formula, I determined that with the 305mm lens, I can focus on something within 5 - 13 feet, depending on whether I assume I have 13in (330mm) or 15 in (381mm) of extension; although brightness (effective f-number) would diminish to f/11.2 if I can focus it on something 5 ft away:

S1 = 1/(1/F – 1/S2) = 1 / (1/305mm - 1/381mm) = 1529mm (5 ft)
Bc = S2 / F = 381mm / 305mm = 1.25x
Ne = Bc * N = 1.25 x 9 = 11.25

(where S1 = distance to object; S2 = lens-film distance; F = focal length; Bc = bellows correction factor; Ne = adjusted f-number; N = stated f-number)

I think that math is right.

For me, even 13 ft would be enough, as I wanted this lens for more distance landscape subjects where I want to crop in and can't get closer.

[Len Middleton]

Thanks for the suggestion on the Repro Claron, but the 305/9 Repro-Claron is actually more expensive right now ($695) than the G-Claron 305/9 ($450). It must have caught on to people that it's a nice small lens with excellent macro-capabilities.

Surprised at the price difference. The G-Claron has much greater coverage than the Repro-Claron, although as noted the Repro-Claron is much more compact. A $245 difference for more compact lens with less coverage seems a bit excessive. I expect it is not the same seller for both lenses. And there may be other differences (condition, shutter, etc.), that do not make it an apples to apples comparison.

Also with a Linhof Kardan, compact would not seem to be a major selection criteria. Both are good lenses (I have 150, 210, and 305 G-Claron, as well as the 355 Repro-Claron), and price may the be critical determinant.

Good luck,

Len

[Jiri Vasina]

I would also vote for a Schneider Repro-Claron 355mm. I have a 305mm one, and it's and excellent lens - use it on 5×8" and have never run out of coverage. It's very small, very light, very sharp...

Jiri

[Len Middleton]

If bellows draw is an issue for a non-telephoto lens, you might be able to use a "top hat" Technika style lensboard (as made by Ebony?).

If you do not have a Kardan to Technika converter board, you will need one of those as well for the above solution (also provide a small bit of extra extension). It would be possible to build / get built a Kardan top hat lensboard, but that would be a one-off from what I have seen.

I have the 305 G-Claron and the 355 Repro-Claron on Technika boards, so I know they will fit...

Len

[Armin Seeholzer]

The APO Ronar 300 mm is not on your list and is a wonderfull perfomer!!!
I don't sell mine!

Cheers Armin