5x7 1:5 to 1:1, 150 G-Claron vs. "Macro" Lens?

[John Layton]

So I've got a couple of 150mm G-Claron lenses kicking around...one of which is in a shutter and the other (in barrel) which I press into use for doing vertical enlargements at 30x40 inches from 5x7, for which it performs admirably.

While I've been less than impressed with the performance of the 150mm G-Claron for general photography with the 5x7 format, I'm thinking that it might be perfect in the range of 1/5th to full lifesize, as I gather this is the range that this lens was designed for.

So my question is this - how would the 150mm G-Claron stack up against a so-called "macro" lens (thinking of those of either 120mm or 180mm focal length)?

Secondarily...how would the 150 G-Claron fare, in this macro range...against my two other 150's (Apo Symmar-L and Sinaron W/Apo Sironar W equivalent)?

Yes, I know I could (and will) run a few tests at some point...but I'm also curious to know of other folks' experiences with these lenses in the macro range.

Interesting aside: that while I'm less than impressed with the 150mm G-Claron for general work with the 5x7, my 305mm G-Claron performs stunningly in this format at any distance/repro ratio...which I suspect relates to the equation of reproduction ratio to performance as a function of focal length (the longer the lens, the less visible variation in performance per focus distance). But I digress!

[xkaes]

The G-Claron are designed for table-top & macro work -- 1:5 - 1:1 -- so you'd expect that's where you would get the best results, but with the Fujinon A series, and others, that are optimized for that range, many find them very useful outside of that range. I have no problem with my Fujinon A 180mm f9 at infinity, for example. I can't use it closer than 1:1 because of my 360mm bellows limit, but I'm sure it would do fine, but the further away from 1:5 - 1:1 ?????????

[Mark Sampson]

When i worked for Kodak, we used a 150/9 G-Claron for closeups and some copy work. It did a great job- plenty of resolution and contrast.
But being assignment-driven, I/we never tested it against any of the other lenses in the cabinet- in any case, the comparable lenses we had were all general-purpose optics.
BTW, in about 1988, Calumet had that lens on sale (in a Compur shutter) for $299. Quite the bargain, then and now.

[John Layton]

I will test my G-Claron soon at close range against my other two 150mm lenses, because if it performs visibly better at these ranges, I'll likely always take it with me as it is so compact and weighs very little, and I very often like to get close to things.

[Dan Fromm]

John, I've tested a plasmat type 150/9 G-Claron against two 150/9 Apo-Ronars for close-up work on 2x3. The Apo-Ronars won. They won't cover 4x5 at distance, so aren't good for general use on 4x5.

[Drew Wiley]

I use both G-Clarons and the similar Fuji A lenses. Both are superb all the way from close-up to infinity. But I don't own a 150 GC, so can't comment on that specifically. I do have the shortest Fuji A, the 180, and it's excellent for near-macro work in 4X5, and has enough image circle for 5X7 film even at infinity. No, these lenses might not be ideal for giant enlargements of the eye of a housefly; but up to 1:1, no worries. The Fuji A differs from the GC in generally being multicoated, and being lighter weight in the longer focal lengths. My 360/10 Fuji A is a wonderful 8x10 closeup lens, yet so well corrected at infinity too, that I even use it as a long focal length for 6x9 backs.

Sorry that I didn't answer your question directly; but I really do recommend taking into account the parallel Fuji A series. If it were me taking macro shots on 5x7, I'd reach for either my 240 GC or 250 Fuji A, with the 180 A being the second choice.