12 inch or 300mm lenses for 8x10

[Henry Ambrose]

I have a Fuji 300mm f5.6 CMW that I'm pleased with for 8X10.

Now I want a lens that performs like or near the Fuji, has the same or nearly the same coverage (the Fuji is listed at 412mm) and that will fit in the Kodak Master camera when folded. Of course it won't be as fast, but I can live with that.

I understand the 12 inch Commercial Ektar will fit and I suspect the 12 inch Goerz Dagor will as well as they are both in a #4 shutter - I think. Any users care to comment on these two for 8X10 use?

What are some other choices?

Any suggestions?

[Henry Ambrose]

To be clear I am only interested in the 300mm/12 inch length. Any longer and I can't reach around the camera while working.

[John Kasaian]

I used to have a KMV. As I recall, you won't be able to reverse the lensboard to make the "outy" part of the lens an "inny" I'd Try something like a 240mm, 270mm or 305mm G Claron in a copal #1 shutter---or a 12" Protar Both very small---I'd doubt if the protar would even extend out past the shutter housing, but I can't say for certain as I've never seen one in a shutter. All these lenses would cover 8x10 nicely. FWIW The 240 G Claron is a favorite of mine. Looking at my 12" Dagor I suspect it wouldn't fit inside a KMV, but of course YMMV. Good luck!

[jonathan smith]

Did you see the thread about this, posted about 8-9 threads ago?

I only have the Nikkor M 300mm and it's small, will fold up in my camera. But it's not known for coverage. I have had no problems but I don't push it. It's a great lens, very sharp.

[Scott Davis]

Thinking of coverage, anyone have specs on the Kodak 12" Ektar F4.5? NOT the Commercial Ektar 12" f6.3 . This monster must weigh in around 5 lbs by itself, and is in an Ilex #5 shutter.

[Henry Ambrose]

Yes, I saw the previous thread and I've read the archives carefully. I'm looking for more information from people who have used lenses that might do what I want.

Please keep it up folks, I'm all ears.

[John D Gerndt]

Not having a KMV (I have an Ansco) I can only comment on Ektar matching the Fuji.

I think they are both fine lenses. For the money I'd have to pick the Kodak. You have little reason n-o-t to try it.

I also have a 12 inch Dagor (late model, coated). It is not at all like Fuji or Kodak. I might change my mind if I had a Kern multicoated model but I might find $1500 dollars hard to let loose of.

Single coated lenses just can't hang with a good multicoated lens, for color. If you are shooting only B&W then all bets are off as you can compensate for the lack of contrast and it becomes more a matter of MTF /signature. At this moment I cannot think of a single modern multicoated 12 inch lens that is compact unless you get the Nikon 300M. I have not shot with a Nikon M.

Cheers,

[John D Gerndt]

I am assuming Henry, you have not found a Fuji that is smaller, the CMW is pretty large.

Cheers,

[Jim Galli]

Actually, you've just described a 300mm Nikkor-M. (http://www.apug.org/classifieds/showproduct.php?product=248&sort=1&cat=2&page=1)

[Henry Ambrose]

John, Yes I've looked at smaller Fujis. I don't think they will give the movement I'd like, primarily direct rise and fall. I might be wrong. Jim, I think its the same for the Nikon 300 f9 - not enough coverage for movements.

John, how do you compare the image of the Dagor and modern lenses?Just lower contrast for the older lens? I could live with that, but I definitely want sharp coverage over the whole frame. I'm good now with the Fuji f5.6 at 412mm I.C.

A $1500 normal lens is not going to happen here. I gave less than one-third of that for the Fuji, its just too big to fold in the camera - its a very, very nice lens in all other respects.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Henry,

Did you look at the 300mm Fujinon A? It's a lot smaller (Copal No. 1 shutter, 55mm filter size) than the 300mm CMW, but not quite as small as the 300mm Fujinon C or 300mm Nikkor M. Coverage is 70 degrees for an image circle of 420mm at f22. It was discontinued about 15 years ago, but can occasionally be found on the used market. I'm not sure if it will fold up inside your camera, but it offers a good combination of small size and big coverage. Early samples made duing the 1970s are single coated, but samples made during the 1980s are EBC multicoated (and are more common on the used market). Complete specs can be found here (http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/as-sfs.htm).

Kerry

[John Kasaian]

Henry,

Can you pop the back of your KMV and measure the distance between the lensboard and the bed so we can have a better idea of how small this lens needs to be in order to fit in situ?

[Jeff Morfit]

The Nikkor-W 300mm lens is also a good choice for use on an 8x10 camera, Henry.

[David Hempenstall]

Henry,

I have a nikkor 300 f9 on my Kodak Master right now. It folds up inside with heaps of room to spare. I think you'll be surprised how big a lens you can get in there.

I find that I need to make some pretty decent movements to run out of 'useful' coverage.

Now this must come with a disclaimer. When I am making generous movements, I am usually focused much closer than infinity. I guess this may be common. That means I can take adavantage of more area.

I just don't seem to twist the kodak into any real wierd shapes at infinity. YMMV.

Therefore, the Nikon is a great little lens that can fold inside my Kodak and technika, takes small filters and has a modern shutter.

I think the recommendation for the G-Claron is one of the best yet, even for colour.

enjoy whatever you purchase!

D.

[Gregory Gomez]

I use the 305mm G-Claron.