Do I need macro lens for 3:1 or similar ratio?

[Dan Fromm]

Drew, the 210 G Claron's cells are direct fits in a #1. I have one, older dagor type, in barrel. It weighs 180 g. You may be thinking of longer process lenses, and especially of Klimsch Apo-Ronars. Longer Klimsch Apo Ronars in particular seem overweight. Funny thing is that their 150 Apo Ronar, which just covers 4x5 at 1:3 and is fine at infinity on 6x9, is tiny, smaller and lighter than the normally mounted 150 Apo Ronar.

[Bernice Loui]

The common plasmat view camera lens will work OK for this. Do compensate for the amount of bellows draw and exposure as required.
Know stopping down past f32 is going to cost significant resolution in the resultant image. The trade off between DOF and resolution is going to be a balance between the two and what you're trying to achieve in the final image.


Moving beyond the typical plasmat:

Process lenses like APO Nikkor, G-Claron, APO Artar, APO Ronar, Kowa Graphic, and the rest will produce better results at these reproduction ratios.

What is often ignored as excellent lenses at these reproduction ratios are enlarger lenses like Componon, Rodagon and etc.. For magnifications grater than 1:1, reverse mount the enlarger lens to achieve excellent results.

Some years ago I had a collection of Zeiss Luminars (normally used on the Zeiss Ultraphot microscope) which are considered by many some of the finest macro lenses available for 4x5. A run of the mill chrome barrel Componon reversed mounted achieved better or equal results. Schneider offered a shutter mounted Componon, aka Componon-M which is their componon reverse mounted in a shutter.

There are macro specific view camera lenses made by Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikkor.. they cost more than the alternatives mentioned above and do not produce results that justify their added cost.


Bernice

Or will a 210mm f5.6 should deliver the goods as I'm planing to do with 6x9 back an occasionally 4x5.

I'm looking for 3:1 and extremely rare 2:1 mostly with medium format back "flowers under controlled environment"

Regards,
Mohammed

[mob81]

I have the g-claron 150mm but for my setup is a bit dim and hard to focus!

I meant by 210mm, regular 210mm like the nikkor-w not a macro 210mm! My fault as I didn't make it clear "kids are screaming today and can't even think )

[Bob Salomon]

The common plasmat view camera lens will work OK for this. Do compensate for the amount of bellows draw and exposure as required.
Know stopping down past f32 is going to cost significant resolution in the resultant image. The trade off between DOF and resolution is going to be a balance between the two and what you're trying to achieve in the final image.

For those flower pictures a macro lens like the 120 or 180mm Apo Macro Sironar or the older 210 or 300mm Makro Sironar will give the best results. The 120mm Apo Macro Sironar is the lens that was used for that elephant portfolio sized book on the rare orchids of the Smithsonian.
Moving beyond the typical plasmat:

Process lenses like APO Nikkor, G-Claron, APO Artar, APO Ronar, Kowa Graphic, and the rest will produce better results at these reproduction ratios.

What is often ignored as excellent lenses at these reproduction ratios are enlarger lenses like Componon, Rodagon and etc.. For magnifications grater than 1:1, reverse mount the enlarger lens to achieve excellent results.

Some years ago I had a collection of Zeiss Luminars (normally used on the Zeiss Ultraphot microscope) which are considered by many some of the finest macro lenses available for 4x5. A run of the mill chrome barrel Componon reversed mounted achieved better or equal results. Schneider offered a shutter mounted Componon, aka Componon-M which is their componon reverse mounted in a shutter.

There are macro specific view camera lenses made by Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikkor.. they cost more than the alternatives mentioned above and do not produce results that justify their added cost.


Bernice

[Sevo]

I'm looking for 3:1 and extremely rare 2:1 mostly with medium format back "flowers under controlled environment"

For flowers (or any other three-dimensional subject) any regular Plasmat will do. These don't show relevant amounts of CA at these modest ratios (I certainly have to go past 1:1 to get visible CA issues with my Nikkor-Ws and Symmars), but they are visibly worse than macro and process lenses where flatness of field is concerned (which obviously won't matter when lacking all flatness of subject).

[Drew Wiley]

Unless you are photographing individual bugs or diamond rings, I wouldn't be too fussy. What I'd be more concerning about
is whether or not you find the out-of-focus characteristics with a particular lens, rather than its ultimate sharpness relatively
close. You really have to enlarge such things quite a bit before you can tell the difference between a good general-purpose
plastmat and a close-range corrected one. Per G-Clarons specifically ... sorry, a bit of confusion. I was referring to their
taking series, plasmats already in shutter. They also made process lenses under this series, which are different, and certainly
not all plasmat.

[Dan Fromm]

Bernice, the longest Luminar is 100/6.3. A little shorter than the OP thinks he needs. Also quite expensive. AFAIK there are no lenses in the Luminar-Macro Nikkor-Photar class that are much longer. All are scarce and expensive, even now, most are for higher magnification than the OP wants. Answering a question is good, answering the question actually asked is usually better.

[Bob Salomon]

For flowers (or any other three-dimensional subject) any regular Plasmat will do. These don't show relevant amounts of CA at these modest ratios (I certainly have to go past 1:1 to get visible CA issues with my Nikkor-Ws and Symmars), but they are visibly worse than macro and process lenses where flatness of field is concerned (which obviously won't matter when lacking all flatness of subject).

Unless the center to edge perfomance and the corner to corner performance is important. Then you will see a difference.

[Drew Wiley]

Yeah Bob ... I just noticed he was referring to a "controlled environment", so assume this means studio conditions where
a dedicated macro lens might be chosen. In the field I'd rather have something more verstaile, even if it meant a little less
brighter viewing. Indoors, that extra stop would help. But I've got accustomed to doing 8x10 closeups here in the redwoods
with lenses with a max aperture of f/10, so it's all relative.

[Roger Hesketh]

A Series IIIb f6 8 1/2 inch x5 copying Cooke Aviar. It is a barrel lens that is single coated. Not too heavy. That will open up quite wide to allow a nice bright screen to assist in focusing before you stop down to the taking aperture. It is gives a good working distance and is perfect for use on something like an Anniversary Speed Graphic for the kind of reproduction ratios that you are talking about. Will work well at infinity too. Nice lens to use on a 4x5 Graflex SLR. The best thing of all is that they can be bought very cheap £30-£40 presumably because few appreciate their qualities.