Looking into G Claron lenses

[Noah B]

Hi all, I'm thinking about lightening my lens and was looking at the G Clarons. Right now I've got a 210mm Nikkor W and was thinking about tracking a Claron down just for saving a little weight. Would there be any advantages besides this? Thanks to any input!

[vinny]

darker image on the ground glass.

[Noah B]

I've got a fresnel installed so I'm not too worried about that. I used to own the 305 G Claron when I had an 8x10 and it did just fine too. I remember that the G Claron is single coated? I rarely shoot into direct light so would that make any difference?

[C. D. Keth]

I think some are multi coated. I'm no copy lens expert though.

[Drew Wiley]

They are superb lenses and the single-coating is almost never an issue. They are optimized
for closeup work, but also are quite precise clear out to inifinity. The published image circles are really with reference to copy work, and in general photographic use are much
larger. The slightly darker viewing is also another non-issue unless you're photographing
caves. G-Clarons are popping up at good prices at the moment. If you want something
equivalent that's multi-coated, it would be a Fuji A, but they don't offer a 210, only a 180
and 240. I can barely tell the difference between shots taken with my 240A and 250 G,
except a tiny bit more contrast from the A. Compared to your Nikkor W, the G-Claron will
likely be crisper with close-up work, besides the smaller size.

[Noah B]

Sounds good, I'm starting to do more close up/macro photography but am unsure if I need to invest in a macro lens just yet.

[Heroique]

My 150 g-claron is my favorite lens, winning more affection than my Schneider XL 110mm or Fuji A 240. It’s tiny and light – of course, armchair photographers will tell field photographers that its smaller specs just don’t make much difference when you consider the total weight of your gear bag, but don’t let them fool you. The psychological benefit of this lighter, smaller, sharp lens makes a significant difference when you’re in the mountains making images. It’s a joy to pack, a joy to carry, a joy to handle, a joy to use – whether your subject is close-up, in the middle distance, or at infinity.

1) Close-up cactus
Tachi 4x5
Schneider 150mm/9 g-claron
Velvia-50 (refrigerated old version)
1/250th @ f/22 (effective approx. f/32)
Ries J-600 tripod w/ Manfrotto 488rc2 ball head
Manfrotto 454 micrometric sliding plate (w/ rc2 connection)
Synced w/ ancient Nikon SB-22s speedlight (hand-held)
Flash metered w/ Sekonic 308s
+1 ev flash compensation for snow-white fibers
And finally (pant), Epson 4990/Epson scan

2) Rushing creek in Wyoming (or “crick,” as they say)
Tachi 4x5
Schneider 150mm/9 g-claron
Astia 100-F
Epson 4990/Epson Scan

[C. D. Keth]

Those are both lovely, Heroique. Could you take a 100% crop of a really detailed spot of one of them? I'm interested in g-clarons, too, and would be interested in that view.

[Drew Wiley]

They were never multicoated, Chris. But it doesn't make any difference. There were a few
odd designs for graphics use; but the ones sold in modern field shutters are quite versatile
with big image circles. I particularly use the 250 on both 4x5 and 8x10 under all kinds of
lighting conditions and never have an issue with flare.

[C. D. Keth]

They were never multicoated, Chris. But it doesn't make any difference. There were a few
odd designs for graphics use; but the ones sold in modern field shutters are quite versatile
with big image circles. I particularly use the 250 on both 4x5 and 8x10 under all kinds of
lighting conditions and never have an issue with flare.

OK, thanks for the clarification on the coating. As you say, it's not a very functional difference. I have lenses coated different ways and I can rarely see a difference that's not probably more attributable to being an entirely different lens than coating being better or worse.

[Heroique]

Those are both lovely, Heroique. Could you take a 100% crop of a really detailed spot of one of them? I'm interested in g-clarons, too, and would be interested in that view.

Thanks – here’s a quick and aggressive center crop of the cactus on Velvia-50 (that was fun). As I recall, the cactus was taken w/ long bellows draw & high magnification, and is close to a full-frame scan. The Wyoming river is a crop from a full-frame scan using an approximate 2:3 aspect ratio for composition. In each case, the film was dry-mounted and scanned at 1,500 ppi on my Epson 4990 at the optimal height above the scanner bed...

[Mark Stahlke]

Drew, a 250mm G-Claron? I was only aware of the 150/210/240/270/305/355.

Noah, I have one of each and I like them all. I use the 150 and 210 regularly.

[Noah B]

Excellent, thanks all for the information! I think I'm going to make the plunge soon and pick one up. What's a fair price for one in good condition?

[Drew Wiley]

Mine is labeled 250, Mark. I don't know its precise FL - would have to check the tech
sheet. My Fuji is a 240. A 210 would be nice, but I opted for a 200 Nikkor M instead, since
my main application for this FL is 4x5 rather than 8x10. I might want to bag a 150 sometime. I have a 360 A as well, and in this instance the multicoating is a help when
shooting such a massize image circle on 4x5 with more risk of bellows flare than in the
8x10. I also prefer the no.1 shutter, though in a few instances it would have been helpful
to have the even greater coverage of the G, due to the larger shutter opening itself, I suspect. The lenses are very similar other than this mechanical vignetting limit, and the
associated wt difference. G Clarons are certainly more plentiful and more affordable at the
moment, and fully equal to conventional modern plasmats in terms of image quality, maybe
even better.

[evan clarke]

I have 3.. I use two of them on my 11x14.. Too sharp to believe..

[John Kasaian]

I use a 240 G Ckaron for 8x10 format---it's a superb lens.

[John NYC]

I had a 240 G-Claron and a 305 G-Claron. Both were used on 8x10 and both were superb for modern, sharp glass.

I do think the old-style (single coated) 250mm Fuji W had a slight advantage over the 240mm G-Claron to its overall look and to corner-to-corner sharpness, but this is really pixel peeping. At normal print sizes, either would be excellent.

[John O'Connell]

I like my 355 G Claron, but the multicoated modern plasmats I've used are sharper and higher contrast. Plus you don't gain a lot of image circle with the G Claron compared to a Nikkor W or a Rodensrock Sironar, unless you grab an early, Dagor-design G Claron.

[Roger Cole]

Single versus mutlicoating is almost never important in typical large format lenses. The change from uncoated to single coated is significant. Multicoating is a tiny additional improvement. Where it starts to make a real difference is in 35mm (or MF) zooms with many air/glass surfaces. Then the slight additional reduction in reflections starts to add up to something meaningful. In most LF lenses it just isn't an important difference.

I have no experience with the G-Clarons but have never heard any but good things about them.

[Joseph O'Neil]

I ahve and use the 150, 180, 240 and 270. Love them all. When backpacking and./or hiking, every ounce counts, and while dark to focus on the ground glass, you do get used to it.

Very sharp, very wide angle of coverage, so I always find lots of movements. Would not give them up

joe

[Drew Wiley]

The 250/6.7 Fuji might have a tad more coverage than the G-Claron equivalent, and is
obviously a little brighter viewing, but at slightly more size - still a no.1 shutter. It was also
single-coated but had some kind of special glass that made it behave as if it were actually
MC. A wonderful lens. I had mine stolen, then replaced it with both the G and Fuji A, which
for all practical purposes fill the same niche in both 4x5 and 8x10 work. Can't go wrong with any of these.