Greetings, If anyone on the forum has developed an opinion on which of these two is superior to the other for image quality I would like to hear your reasons. I'm looking for a long lens for 8x10 and possible 7x17 b&w landscapes. Thanks, Jim
Greetings, If anyone on the forum has developed an opinion on which of these two is superior to the other for image quality I would like to hear your reasons. I'm looking for a long lens for 8x10 and possible 7x17 b&w landscapes. Thanks, Jim
Hello Jim,
I used a fairly late Schneider Apo Artar for a number of years. I was never totallyhappy with the contrast of the lens and found the maximum aperature of f11 a bit difficult to focus in dusk or dawn light. The single coating could also have contributed to the lack of contrast. When I finally decided to switch I considered botht he Fujinon 450 C and the Nikkor 450 M. I believe you should consider the Nikkor as well.
I decided in the Nikkor. Here is the important comparative information and my comments on the lens. New the Nikkor will cost you a bit more than the Fujinon, used they run about the same. The Fujinon i sin a #1 shutter and the Nikkor in a #3. The Nikkor has a slightly smaller published image circle but I have never run out of room with the lens. I am very happy with the performance of this lens. It it is sharp and contrasty and I like the color rendition (although you did say b&w). I also find it very useful in the studio. Both the Fujinon and Nikkor are multicoated.
I thought long and hard about the Fujinon as well but when I finally made my choice it was based largely on maximum aperature ... f9 v f12.5. The Nikkor is a joy to focus and, given my ecperiences with the Apo Artar I decided I didn't want an even slower lens. The slight difference in weight was a price I was willing to pay.
The two lenses that are always part of my 8x10 kit in the field are the 450M Nikkor and a 300A Fujinon.
One suggestion, MidWest usuallyhas both lenses in stock in like new condition (that is where I got mine). Try one an dif you don't likeit Jim will let you switch for the other. But I'd try the nikkor first, just my opinion.
Ted could quite possibly be the first photographer EVER to be disappointed with the contrast of an Artar. I stand completely contrary to his opinion. Artars are cheap and plentiful, offer excellent sharpness and contrast, and the 19" (480mm) will cover 11x14 and 7x17. I have no experience with the other lenses, so place as much stock in what I have to say as you will...
Jim,
I have no experience with the Fuji, but my 19" Artar is one of the very finest lenses around. I agree that the 450 Nikkor M is also a champ and worthy of consideration if you're in the market for a lens in this focal length---I think it would come down to a preference for a multi coated lens(Nikkor) over a single coated one(Artar) and a new shutter(copal on the Nikkor) verses a classic(Ilex or betax on the Artar.) Either way IMHO, its a winning combination.
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
Jim,
I have both lenses, although I received the Artar only recently and right now it's off having the shutter CLAed. I tend to agree with Ted. The Artar is single coated and is a lower contrast lens compared to the Fuji. I don't think you'll complain about the sharpness of either lens.
Just before posting I checked prices on Midwest Photo Exchange's website and here's how the prices stack up: Apo Artar in Copal, cond 9, $1,269; Fuji 450 C new, $895; Apo Artar I assume in Ilex, cond 9, $599; 450 Nikkor M, cond 9+, $695, 450 Nikkor M, new, $995. I purchased my Fuji 450 C from them about 18 months ago that you couldn't tell from new for $795, IIRC.
The most direct comparisons are the Artar in Copal to the Fuji 450 C or Nikkor M. I have asked people why someone would pay 50 - 100 percent more for an older, single coated lens of lower contrast (unless you are looking for lower contrast), and have never gotten a good answer.
If you want a second lens with lower contrast, I'd say go for it. If you're only going to have 1 lens, the Fuji or the Nikkor are the obvious choices.
Steve
BTW, according to conversations with Steve Grimes when I had my Artar mounted if you use a Copal #3 instead of an Ilex #4 you will not be able to get the full f11.
Bookmarks