The Imagon 200 5.8 for 4x5?

I agree: coverage seems fine. If there's only slight fall-off on the landscape shot, there's definitely none on the portrait. Lighting was aimed at the face plus I printed it to fit in to an oval frame - so I sped up the fall-off. (BTW, thanks for the kind comments)

I used my 250mm Imagon from time to time on the 8x10 if I wanted a little distorted look, non covering problems! Its not a crime to use a lens for something it was not calculated;--)))

Cheers Armin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uphereinmytree

The 200mm imagon will DEFINITELY cover 4x5 and more! I use one all the time on 4x5 with movements and certainly at portrait distance on 5x7. The 'image circle' of 150mm is ridiculous. It is more likely that it has 150mm of corner to corner fine resolution. On 4x5 and wide open, the corners are a bit smeary with low resolution and I like it. It gets sharp all over as it's stopped down. No disrespect to the "imagon instructions', but in the real world it's great on 4x5. I never use the 'strainer' discs. They are for very controlled lighting situations. Also, I've never had to do any focal corrections with infrared film which I shoot 90% of the time.

included image is on 4x5 wide open, no disc, infrared film

---

very nice work 'Mr Tree'

..........but.......exactly what is this an image of, pse?

regards

andrew

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Armin Seeholzer

I used my 250mm Imagon from time to time on the 8x10 if I wanted a little distorted look, non covering problems! Its not a crime to use a lens for something it was not calculated;--)))

Cheers Armin

---

definitely agree

regards

andrew

I have an opportunity to pick up a beautiful copy of this lens at a very reasonable price. Here is my question. I am not a portrait photographer. I am more interested in creating soft focus landscapes, seascapes, cityscapes so I will be shooting closer to infinity than portrait distance. What are your thoughts on this lens for such landscape work? Thanks.

I guess I should add that the camera would be a Wista 45DX.

Ed

Imagons are typically used at H7.7 and not much smaller of an aperture. 200mm Imagon has been the standard 4x5 focal length for a very long time.


Bernice

More important than distance to subject is what F stop you intend to use, which is to say how much depth of field do you require. If you plan on a smaller aperture than f8, then I would not expect much of a strainer effect nor much by way of aberrations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bernice Loui

Imagons are typically used at H7.7 and not much smaller of an aperture. 200mm Imagon has been the standard 4x5 focal length for a very long time.


Bernice

---

No, the 250 is the proper focal length for 45 as it provides the expected halation, with proper lighting.

Here I used the 250 Imagon with H7.7 disk. 6.5x9cm Plaubel Makiflex Foma 200 film Microdol-X

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5723/...9d978110_z.jpg250 Imagon Makiflex Foma by Nokton48, on Flickr


https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5513/...f14ee418_z.jpgMakiflex Std 250 Imagon Foma 200 2 by Nokton48, on Flickr

So if I am understanding correctly the 200 would give me some vignetting in the corners. My question would be how much? I think I could live with a little. Otherwise I assume I would get a similar soft focus effect but possibly not as pronounced as with the 250. Correct?

Ed