Nikon 450mm f9 how much?

[Gary Tarbert]

Hi , I have been offered this lens in pristine condition ,the seller has not established his price yet , how much is fair and indeed is it a good optic it will be used on a 8x10
.cheers Gary

[Gary Tarbert]

Sorry ,this lens maybe 480mm can't recall .cheers Gary

[Steve Hamley]

Gary,

The first thing you're going to have to do to establish worth is be sure of what it is. If we don't know what it is, your question is unanswerable. Nikon made several different large format lenses in the 480 mm/450 mm focal length. Additionally, value is greater if the lens is in shutter rather than barrel, and the condition is also important.

Steve

[Gary Tarbert]

Now i have it right it is a 450M f9 does not appear to very old has current look about it!!

[Michael Kadillak]

In prestine condition a great deal would be $675-$725. These are truly outstanding excellent lenses for 8x10 and will cover 12x20 without a problem. Things soften up with Tessar lenses for ULF, but you are contact printing so it is more than acceptable. With 8x10 they are center cut and just fabulous. Since they stopped making them prices have gone up.

[Carsten Wolff]

Gary, Gary.......
Nikon has recently discontinued their large format lens offerings, but I've seen a new 450/9Nikkor-M on amazon for US$1175. Given the competition, used ones should start at about US$500, I guess: Recently, I bought a used 450/12.5 Fujinon-C lens for US$600 in exc. cond (v. small ding in rim, apart from that it was basically like new); new you get this one for US$895. In Australia, these things RETAIL usually for much more, but the s/h market is "globalised".

[Carsten Wolff]

Michael,
I'm not an ULF kinda guy, but am somewhat intrigued about your comment that "Things soften up with Tessar lenses for ULF". This is not something for "Mythbusters" I presume, but known amongst ULF users and quantifyable? :)

Carsten

[Matus Kalisky]

My statistics says that it goes mostly between $650 to $850 with a few exceptions on both sides.

[Gary Tarbert]

Thank you everyone, i guess around the $1,000 AU mark would be about right .cheers Gary

[fix_se]

I assume that the prices are for a Nikon 450mm in a Copal shutter? Does anyone know how much difference there is for a lens in a copal shutter or a Sinar dbm mount?

[Joseph O'Neil]

I assume that the prices are for a Nikon 450mm in a Copal shutter? Does anyone know how much difference there is for a lens in a copal shutter or a Sinar dbm mount?


Depends on what the market will bear, but as a general rule, I find that barrel lenses will sell for roughly 1/3rd the price of the exact same lens mounted in a shutter when you are dealing with lenses under 300mm (give or take), and above 300mm, about 1/4 the price. Bear in mind this "general rule" has more holes in it than a slice of Swiss Cheese, but it's a place to start. :)

Part of it, I think, is the fact that some of these larger lenses need a #5 shutter - not an easy item to come by - or they require some major machining to fit, and the "fun part" then is getting both your alignment and spacing exactly right.

The last factor is how a lens is mounted - for example, I have a RD Artar that is front mounted in an Ilex shuuter - works great, but the same lens machined and fitted "properly" into a smaller copal/compur shutter sells for a lot more than my front mounted lens does.

I have a couple of big process lenses I am saving for the day when I grow up and get to use an 8x10 (or larger). :) The way I see it, my best solution will likely be a packard shutter.

good luck
joe

[fix_se]

Hi!

Thanks for the info. So, in general, a Nikkor M 450mm in a Sinar DBM mount goes for 1/4 of the price of one in a copal 3 shutter?

Regards,
fix_se

[Seymour]

I ;shoot 8x10 and make color enlargements to 30x40 optically. Current lens is a Schneider 210mm F5.6 Super Symmar HM which produces excellent results. Would the Nikkor 450mm F9 vs. Fujinon 450mm F12.4 C produce similar results... any difference between the Nikkor and Fujinon? Would a Schneider Apo Symmar L 300mm F5.6 and Rodenstock Apo Sironar S 300mm f5.6 outperform the two 450mm lenses... any preference between the Rodenstock and Schneider. Thanks

[Sheldon N]

Would the Nikkor 450mm F9 vs. Fujinon 450mm F12.4 C produce similar results... any difference between the Nikkor and Fujinon?

The Nikkor would be a little more contrasty, but both are very good lenses. The Fujinon is smaller, and has a little less coverage according to common consensus (still plenty of coverage for 8x10).


Would a Schneider Apo Symmar L 300mm F5.6 and Rodenstock Apo Sironar S 300mm f5.6 outperform the two 450mm lenses... any preference between the Rodenstock and Schneider.

Yes, they probably would slightly outperform the Nikkor/Fuji. It wouldn't be that big of a difference though. Certainly not enough of a different that you could shoot a 300mm and crop to 450mm and get better results. The APO Symmar-L and APO Sironar-S are also much larger and more expensive.

No real preference between the APO L and the Sironar S, I have both (in different focal lengths) and they are both amazing lenses. I also have the little brother to the Nikkor (300-M) and it is also very good.

Sheldon

[Nick_3536]

I think you could put the Fuji F/12.5 inside one of the big 300mm and have room left over for a car. I'm only half joking. Just compare the filter sizes. The Fuji manages with 52mm. My Fuji-W F/5.6 300mm is I think 86mm.

[Ted Harris]

Sheldon didn't mention the difference in size and weight. Both of the f5.6 lenses are huge, read huge. I have one of the Apo Symmar's and the only time it ever leaves the studio is to show to folks in workshops so they can see and feel a real monster. A great lens but not, repeat not for use in the field. BTW, it is neither sharper nor more contrasty than the Fujinon A series 300 and 360. The 300A is one of my go everywhere lenses since it is in a #1 shutter. I also use a Nikkor 450M and it is a fine lens. Chose it over the Fuji for the slight additional coverage.

[Joseph O'Neil]

Sheldon didn't mention the difference in size and weight. Both of the f5.6 lenses are huge, read huge.
-snip-

One way to describe it is like this - at 300mm, even F9 lenses are big. The "average" 300mm, F9 lens is - oh rough estimate here - just as physically large and heavy, if not larger, than an "average" 210mm at f5.6. 300mm at F5.6 - ouch! :)

The other thing I find, after you have been walking around with a backpack for a couple of hours, it is amazing just how heavy those lenses seem to get, as if they somehow put on weight without you knowing it. :)

joe