When to Use a Close-Up Lens like a G-Claron

[neil poulsen]

As a multiple of focal length, at what distance should one be definitely considering a close-up type of lens like a G-Claron to get sharp focus, versus a standard taking lens like a 250mm?

[Drew Wiley]

I simply carry around the G-Claron all the time, since it's excellent at infinity too, and
is also a decent wide-angle for 8x10. But on the 4x5. without going into a lot of
complicated optics math which I never pay attention to anyway, I'd say that anything
closer than about two feet away from this 250 lens is going to benefit from this kind of lens formula, or the analogous Fujinon 240A. I notice that closeup views of things
like lichens on rocks are much better with these kinds of lenses than general purpose
lenses, at least at a significant degree of enlargement or viewed under a strong loupe.

[Brian Ellis]

I don't know about G Clarons and closeups (I've owned a lot of G Clarons but used them as general purpose lenses) but some of the makers of LF macro lenses say their optimum usage is with magnification ratios ranging from 4:1 to 1:4. Maybe you could use that as a rough guide.

[Bjorn Nilsson]

The (well, my...) Fujinon A240 is very good at close range as well as at long ranges. It's probably one of the last lenses I will part with. I recently got hold of a soft filter set which fits a Sinar holder, and it will eledegely fit other holders as well.(It's so much easier for a 4x5 tog' to choose lenses than e.g. for a 8x10 tog.)
To conclude what have been said about the A240 is that it's constucted as a close range lens but corrected for long range. I.e. close to the G Clarons.
My A240 performs very well at all distances where I use it and I cannot do anything but recommend it. I have also heard lots of good words about the G Clarons, so whichever lens you find (preferably already mounted in a good shutter) will serve you good.

//Björn

[John Kasaian]

IMHO G Clarons are ouchy sharp both close up and at infinity. I wouldn't stress over it! :)

[Mark Sawyer]

A quick note that as process lenses, G Clarons fall inbetween general-purpose and true macro lenses, and show remarkable versatility at the far ends of either range. The Cooke Series V process lenses, Konica GR II's and Eskofot Ultragons are also very nice at any distance I've tried them. The big advantage for the G Claron is that it goes right into a Copal shutter, which is nice for a landscape lens. For close-up work, exposure times are usually so long a shutter doesn't matter.

How close a general-purpose lens will resolve depends on the particular lens. I've done well with tessars, dagors, and plasmats, and even a Verito at 1:1, but found a Super Angulon to be unsatisfactory even for contact printing at that range.

[Dan Fromm]

<snip>
For close-up work, exposure times are usually so long a shutter doesn't matter.
<snip>

I take it that you're not acquainted with electronic flash.

[Mark Sawyer]

I take it that you're not acquainted with electronic flash.

I admit, tend to be a more ambient/natural light photographer for close-ups, which tend to be still-lifes in my case...

But when I do use a strobe, taking into account the small apertures usually associated with close-up work due to the reduced depth of field, and the bellows extension factor, multiple pops are often the rule. Even for studio portraiture, which I tend to do with a single pop, wide open and with less extension, a barrel lens isn't much of an inconvenience. Maybe it's just me, though... We learn to work with what we have, and I have a lot of old barrel lenses.

[Dan Fromm]

Mark, here's a serious hint: a small flash near the subject gives the same effect as a large one at a distance. I try to shoot flowers and such closeup at around f/16 set (no smaller than f/45 effective, more often from f/22 to f/32 effective), use a pair of tiny fixed-output flashes with ND gels. One pop does it.

My alternative setup involves a single 283 with VP-1, still close to the subject.

Lenses used are in barrel, mounted on (not in) a #1 with an adapter, and the #1 set at its highest speed to reduce uncontrolled exposure from ambient light. I shoot mainly out-of-doors with ISO 100 film. Do the calculations and you'll see that ambient can be a big problem. I used to use Kodachrome 25 and flash when I shot flowers with Nikons, still mourn Kodachrome's discontinuation.

Not your situation at all ...

Cheers,

Dan

[Mark Sawyer]

Yes, different situations, and I can see the advantages of your system, especially in outdoor/bright ambient situations where you want to use a strobe. I never use a strobe outdoors, but that's a personal, not universal, choice. So I'll qualify my original post:

"For some close-up working methods, exposure times are usually so long a shutter doesn't matter.


a small flash near the subject gives the same effect as a large one at a distance. ...except I'm always using an umbrella, softbox, or some sort of diffusing device, and they do change as you move them closer, making the illuminating area larger and the shadow break different. I tend to keep them at a normal working distance, though again, I'm more often using existing light, so I'm less familiar with it.

[Bruce A Cahn]

Though usable as an all purpose lens the G Claron (G stands for graphic arts, I think) is a copy lens, and best used for that purpose.

[Mark Sawyer]

Though usable as an all purpose lens the G Claron (G stands for graphic arts, I think) is a copy lens, and best used for that purpose.

A "general purpose" lens is optimized for use from infinity to near 1:1 at the film plane, and is well-corrected for all aberrations.

A "macro" lens is optimized for use at 1:1 and greater magnifications, and is well-corrected for all aberrations.

A "copy/process/graphic arts" lens is optimized for "close distances" (usually about 4:1 to 1:4), and is especially well-corrected for geometrically-distorting aberrations such as pin-cushion and barrel distortion so that "artwork" is not distorted when rephotographed for the printed page. Special attention is paid to making them as apochromatic as possible, though in modern lenses, all are apochromatic for nearly all practical purposes. Keeping the lens to these specifications usually means a smaller maximum aperture.

And I believe (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that eliminating focus shift is also a prime concern in making process lenses.

Any other differences I don't know of that someone can chime in on?

[Drew Wiley]

G-Clarons were made both as barrel copy lenses and as tabletop taking lenses. The
published specification are very conservative because they are linked to the apo standards of copy work. But the proof is in the pudding. For general photography they
excel most general purpose lenses, even at infinity at typical apertures. At close range
they're significantly better. I do big enlargements from these things all the time. They
are damn good lenses for general shooting.

[Merg Ross]

They
are damn good lenses for general shooting.

No doubt about it. I find the 270mm is terrific on 4x5. Got it used from Calumet many moons ago.