Printable View
I'm going to support Berenice's stance. Most of the "modern" lenses are going to be so close to one another in performance that seeing any real difference at standard print size/viewing distance is going to be unlikely. Especially with B&W. With significant enlargement, perhaps. However by going with something like a 6.5" anastigmat or a 6" tessar, you are likely to see a difference in image character.
Another vote for the G-Claron...a great little lens!
Oh wow I went to lunch and this thread exploded with some great advice. Thanks everyone! I'll check out the G-claron see what's up about it. I do tend to like contrast in lenses particularly since I don't shoot people that much (when I do I try to use the 210). I was trying to think of a lens that might give a different look than my Fujinon just so I don't have a lens that's almost the same sitting around. Main goal is for the kiddo to have a lens to shoot with but, yeah, if I can gain other benefits, I should.
Curious, what makes the close-up performance good on the G-claron? I do tend to like doing close up detail shots of things, at least when indoors. I have found the Fujinon W can be a bit tricky to figure out - but I guess they all can when trying to get things setup for macro style work. Of the lenses I have, I've found it takes me the longest to focus with the W at close-up.
The G-Claron was designed for close-up work, mostly on large graphic-arts (process) cameras. Which explains its slow maximum aperture of f/9.
But it performed well at longer distances, and Schneider sold it as a general-purpose lens at least through the 1990s.
There are a few threads on this forum about them, many dealing with the longer focal lengths.
I used one for close-up work and copying when I worked at Kodak, and it was very sharp and contrasty; thus my recommendation.
Awesome thanks Mark! Seems like it may be harder to track down at the usual suspects but I'm gonna keep digging (both for more info and for where I may be able to find one). The process nature might explain why I'm seeing more G-claron enlarger lenses than ones with shutters?
I'm with Pere. I have multiple cameras, and with one exception, by using reduction lens boards, all my lenses fit all cameras. For example, there's a reduction lens board for Linhof Technika boards made for just about any camera.
Yep this is true but my particular issue is slightly different I think. All my lenses work on both cameras (they're all using Linhof boards I believe). But I only have 1 of each length. Fine for me but since the kiddo will be shooting, I'd like to give the him a complete setup and starting him on the 150mm makes sense. But since I only have a single 150mm lens that would present a problem if I need to use it since I tend to use it the most often as well. I don't want to discourage him by forcing him to use a non-standard length but I also don't want to miss my own compositions.Quote:
Originally Posted by neil poulsen
My thought is if I have to get another 150mm, I might try something that is more different than the Fujinon. I mean it's a great lens and getting just another Fujinon would be inexpensive but I figure, if nothing else, I could try another brand at least.
The G-claron seems interesting. The normal Schneider 5.6 lenses also look awesome but Nikon seems to have a good price/performance for modern-ish lenses so might end up being my first choice if I didn't go with a G-claron or tessar (or a vintage Ektar or some such).
This might sound like a solution looking for a problem haha or maybe a waste of money but I think he'll enjoy learning LF more if he has his own setup he can call his own and he's taken a big interest in my Intrepid. For whatever reason, he's not as much a fan of my 45F2 (even though it is glorious!). Kinda neat too because this way Intrepid's mission (bringing LF to more people) comes to fruition twice (once for me as it was my first LF camera, and once for him).
What capability do you want for the additional 150?
Cheap? Lightweight? Large circle for architecture? Great bokeh for portraiture?
Hmm good question! Of those my current 150mm is cheap (when I bought it anyway), it's pretty lightweight, I rarely ran into the image circle as a downside. Only thing I might think of is the bokeh isn't quite as buttery if memory serves. I spent too much time with movements though haha to remember but I do like having awesome bokeh. I think my Fujinon 90mm f8 also maybe was a bit sharper?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pere Casals
No ills to speak of with my current 150mm but since the kiddo needs one, now is a good opportunity to explore features found in other lenses. So yeah of those, I would rank them in order of:
bokeh, cheap, image circle, lightweight
For contrast, though that might be subtle, I'd prefer higher contrast I think.
I recognize most of the modern lenses will be very close to each other, so this thread is maybe a bit loaded haha. But hey I found out about the G-claron and was reminded about tesser designs, and Ektar lenses so gave me a lot of food for thought just the same! Again thanks for everyone chipping in with such great info!