PDA

View Full Version : Image Circles for 355 G-Claron and Nikon 450 M Lenses



neil poulsen
23-Apr-2015, 06:52
These two lenses are well known for their wide coverage at small apertures.

For the purposes of contact printing, what are the image circles at different apertures for these two lenses?

StoneNYC
23-Apr-2015, 14:05
If you use google and Wikipedia, the 355 should cover 20x24 so says wiki, I'm not sure that's right, or may be at 1:1, but that's what wiki says, certainly 14x17

The 450 M I've been told by a reliable well known person also covers 14x17/12x20 at f/22

evan clarke
23-Apr-2015, 16:08
Neil, I carry both with my 11x14. Both cover really well. If i had to pick one, It would be the G Claron

Drew Wiley
23-Apr-2015, 16:14
Depends on how you shoot, to what degree significant movements are involved. G-Claron specs were originally for process applications, not general photography. But the 355 G should be plenty versatile up thru 11x14. Using a camera point blank head-on, like for portraiture where the corners of the image don't always need
to be immaculate, is a whole different thing.

Lachlan 717
23-Apr-2015, 16:32
I carry both for 7x17" and have not come close to finding either's limit.

Whilst I haven't used the 450mm much, the G Claron is probably the sharpest lens that I have (all formats). I have a shot of an old pier's pillions and can see fishing line onside of these at 20-30 metres distance. Also, to my eye, there is not much apparent IQ loss on the edges of the film. Happy to produce images if required to substantiate these claims.

Oren Grad
23-Apr-2015, 18:33
Both should be good for 12x20, the 355 just barely when stopped all the way down and the 450 with some wiggle room.

lab black
23-Apr-2015, 19:18
Yes, as Oren noted, they both cover 12 x 20.

Roger Thoms
23-Apr-2015, 21:08
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?121286-ULF-Why-do-it&p=1233270&viewfull=1#post1233270

Post #118, Sandy King has used the 450M on 20x24 stopped way down.

Roger

neil poulsen
23-Apr-2015, 22:27
Thanks for the information. Let me rephrase a bit. What's the largest aperture (smallest f-stop) with either the 450M or the 355 G-Claron at which you would shoot, say 8x20, or 7x17, or 16x20, or any format with which you have experience? I'm trying to get an inkling of the apertures that tend to get used with different formats.

Lachlan 717
24-Apr-2015, 00:35
Wide open for both covers (i.e. usable) 7x17". Usually shot at at least f32.

Willie
24-Apr-2015, 02:01
What do you mean, "for the purposes of contact printing"?

As for the normal image coverage at f/22 you can check the chart on the front page of this site. Gives nice information on both of these lenses. On specific image circles at various apertures you will most likely find it varies a bit with individual samples of each lens. Close, but depends on who is measuring and what their quality standards are.

StoneNYC
24-Apr-2015, 08:21
Just get an Art 550 XXL and Art 1100 XXL then you won't have to worry about it ;)

koh303
25-Apr-2015, 05:01
If you use google and Wikipedia, the 355 should cover 20x24 so says wiki, I'm not sure that's right, or may be at 1:1, but that's what wiki says, certainly 14x17

The 450 M I've been told by a reliable well known person also covers 14x17/12x20 at f/22

Clearly, not.

neil poulsen
25-Apr-2015, 08:16
What do you mean, "for the purposes of contact printing" . . . ?

It's necessary to stop down to expand the image circle sufficiently to cover a given format. Given the blurring effects of diffraction, one can stop down further for a contact print, since there's no enlargement involved.

For example, I've seen comments from a knowledgeable member that a 450M can be stopped down sufficiently to cover 16x20. So, I was wondering what f-stop in practice on a 450M would cover 16x20?

Or, how far might one need to stop down a 355 G-Claron to cover 8x20? Etc.

It's kind of a "what works in practice," ULF related question that would help me with these two lenses.

ndg
25-Apr-2015, 09:41
Neil, the 355 G-Claron and the Nikon 450 are 2 of the 4 lenses in my 14x20 kit. Even wide open, they illuminate the whole GG. I then stop down to f64 to make a capture.

Tav Walraven
25-Apr-2015, 10:18
I concur. I've got a 355 on my Lotus 12x20 and it covers just fine, corner to corner.

neil poulsen
27-Apr-2015, 06:50
I concur. I've got a 355 on my Lotus 12x20 and it covers just fine, corner to corner.

Hi. I was wondering, at what apertures does it cover?

Scott Davis
4-May-2015, 11:01
Both fully cover my 14x17 wide open.

neil poulsen
12-May-2015, 11:50
Both fully cover my 14x17 wide open.

Jeepers!

I'm just getting to the point where I can process the negatives, what with the 8x20 trays that I'm currently making. I had no idea that coverage was this good. Of course, this is for contact prints with no enlargement factor.

Scott Davis
13-May-2015, 07:00
Jeepers!

I'm just getting to the point where I can process the negatives, what with the 8x20 trays that I'm currently making. I had no idea that coverage was this good. Of course, this is for contact prints with no enlargement factor.

Yes- we're talking about contact prints. I don't know that the corners would pass muster if you were enlarging when using these lenses wide open. But I've not had issues.

neil poulsen
13-May-2015, 09:10
Well, if they cover 14x17, they cover 8x20.

I've been wondering about this, because I don't like the idea of having to use super small apertures that will result in super long exposure times, reciprocity failure, and the like. Of course, I may need to beef up my depth of field tables.

Thanks for the posts; this is reassuring.