I am interested in getting a 300mm lens for my 4 X 5 Arca-Swiss F-line. I have read alot of good things about the Nikon M. The other lenses I am considering are the Rodenstock Apo-Ronar and Fujinon. Can anyone share their experiences wi th any of these lenses? I do have a bias toward Rodentock lenses!
Thank you very much,
Ken Gewant
I've owned a Nikkor 300 f9 M for a couple of months now and although that hasn't been long the results seem to be great. The lens is small (a very Nikon 52mm filter size and 280 grams compared to the 5.6's 1.2 kg!) very sharp and surprisingly bright. There is no doubt in my mind that it's as bright looking as my Symmar 210 f5.6. I know that f9 is f9 but I guess with the concentration of light into my eye it appears brighter.
Anyway, with the size, weight and expense I just don't know why anyone would chose the 5.6 versions for 4X5 use.
I have had my 300mm M-Nikkor for a couple of years. It is a great performer, huge coverage (especially for 4x5), very sharp with excellent resolution.
If you plan on buying new, the APO Ronar 300 mms are no longer manufactured and are no longer available. I have a 240 mm APO Ronar which is amazingly sharp (at infinity focus as well) and the color rendition matches that of my other Rodenstock lenses. Mine is multi-coated, but it's hard on the used market to find multi-coated APO Ronars, if that matters to you.
All the 300mm f5.6 lenses are rather large and heavy. The smallest of the lot is probably the Fuji w but it is still rather heavy and comes in a #3 shutter. I would get a f5.6 lens only if you dont plan to carry your equipment far from car. An f5.6 lens is noticably brighter on the ground glass and may double as a 8*10 lens. If you plan to carry the lens far, then I would option for one of the slower 300mm lenses (f8-9). There is the Fujinon 300mm f8.5 C, the Nikkor300mm f9 M, both corrected for infinity where they perform well indeed. The Nikkor barely covers 8*10 but has lots of movement for 4*5. The Fujinon covers 8*10 with some movement, and is slightly lighter. They would be my first choice. Then there are process lenses. The Apo Ronar 300mm f9 and the Clarion 305mm f9. They are about as small as the previously mentioned lenses but corrected for repro work. At working apertures (f22) I dont think you would notice a difference their performance. The Apo ronars have a rather narrow angle of view so the 300mm will not cover 8*10 adequately but the 305mm clarion will. Although there are differences in "performance" with each of the lenses mentioned it is unlikely that you pick them up if you are just starting out. Many of these differences can be subtle indeed. So, whatever you choice I expect that you will be happy, at least for awhile.
There is a terrific discussion of long lenses for large format photography at the hompage for this forum. Here is the URL for the discussion: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~qtluong/photography/lf/lenses- long.html
Ken,
I have been using my Nikkor-M 300/f8 for about a year now. The only down side to this lens is bellows draw. I use an Arca Swiss Basic B with a 40cm rail. With the lens racked out all the way, minimum focus is about 6 feet with no movements. On the plus side, the lens is very sharp and contrasty. As mentioned in an earlier reply, It does seem brighter than an F/9. In general, I have been very happy with the lens.
Good luck! ~Ted
Howard, I believe you are incorrect stating the Apo-Ronar 300mm is no longer manufactured. I just received a current brochure from Rodenstock, and that lens is very much alive in their product line.
I am cashing in my Nikkor-M 300/f9 in favor of the Apo-Ronar 300/9 lens. My Nikkor-M is a tessar formula, and performs very well within its field of true sharpness.
However, unless the Nikkor's version of the Tessar formula is different than all others (I really doubt this), it suffers the same image degradation and falloff that the other Tessars do at the 60% point of the image circle. I have examined the MTF charts on numerous Tessars, and they all appear to have this problem. I believe it is simply part of the design.
The Nikkor-M has a 325mm image circle, so at 60%, only 195mm is truly sharp. This is adequate for 4x5, but not for 8x10. Since I don't use 8x10, and very little movements on 4x5 with this lens, it would fill me needs. However, I am up for a change, and want to go for the sharpest lens possible in 300mm, which I believe is the Apo-Ronar.
Sorry Bruce,
The Apo Ronars are out of production but the brochures have not caught up to that yet. Currently there are only two 360.s left in stock
Bob,
Thanks for the heads-up. I contacted Robert White in Britain, and have an Apo-Ronar 300/9 on order now from them.
Is the entire Apo-Ronar line discontinued, or only specific models?
This is a drag, as this means the last of the modern Artar lenses are no longer being made. Not sure about Fuji lenses (4/4) being Artar types or not...
Anyway, I use 300mm strictly on 4x5, and am more than willing to trade extra sharpness for reduced image circle and movements. I've had an extensive email conversation with Julio Fernandez about the Apo-Ronar MTF performance data, etc, and am convinced this is right choice for my 300mm needs.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks