Nikkor Process lens as enlarging lens

[Drew Wiley]

OK. So you buy a microscope. What comes with it? Something called a microscope lens. You want to select lenses for your "large format view camera"; so you shop for something called "view camera lenses" or "large format lenses". So when a graphic arts supplier sold a "process camera" to a print shop, what kind of lenses do you think it came equipped with ????????? Or do you think all those Apo Nikkors were intended for focusing grow light bulbs onto indoor daffodils?
That little marketing brochure on the link didn't even list the whole selection. Did you know there was an option for adjustable rectangular apertures instead
of circular? Did you know one of the fellows here in techie-land, known as the local expert on telephotography, uses Apo Nikkor process lenses on a big Toyo G, with various SLR's on the film plane, because they are sharper at INFINITY than ordinary SLR lenses and even mid-level pricey telescopes (which he formerly specialized in as a dealer). And Stone, you're headed for the ignore list again if you start spouting more of your ole slander. You know better than that. Time to get your trigger finger off the web browser and go out and actually learn something hands-on. These web forums can become like a gathering of medieval
schoolmen, who go to Aristotle instead of the horse's mouth.

[StoneNYC]

*drops mic, walks off stage*

[Dan Fromm]

When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.

[Drew Wiley]

OK... now for the more reasonable, polite question. Although Apo Nikkors and other specific flavors of what were generically termed process lenses were logically distributed through graphics suppliers, word caught on that they worked exceptionally well as enlarging lenses for large format too, so a number were sold to labs through certain photo suppliers too. Being basic barrel lenses, it was easy enough for whomever to put them on a view camera lensboard, and a number of people discovered just how good they are at that. Ken Lee is one of them, and there are past threads which attest to their versatility in this respect, including some with web visuals for those youngsters who don't yet believe a world exists apart from the web. I'm not an optics engineer, but with a max aperture of f/9 or so, a lot of the potential aberrations and unevenness toward the distal parts of the image circle are automatically cropped out. This characteristic is certainly not unique to Apo Nikkors. Apo Ronars and Apo Artars were originally designed for process applications, but became coveted by landscape photographers for infinity use, as well as closeups. Same with G-Clarons, at least in their later plastmat rendition. Lots of us on this forum have
discovered this tendency, and its based on actual usage. Most Apo Nikkors were not intended for 1:1, but optimized for a given range. But I must reassert that
what was classified as optimal for dot reproduction thru multiple filter separations does not preclude outstanding other applications. F/22 was just the standardized basis for comparison for these things. For hypothetical infinity use, one merely has to stick one of these things onto a camera board and view the
image through a good loupe. Even wide open, some of the Apo Nikkors are ridiculously sharp. That of course is related to the focal length, and hence what part
of the image circle applies. The only reason I don't shoot with them myself is pretty simple. They need to be mounted in shutters, which is an extra expense.
They aren't necessarily as compact as certain lenses in equivalent focal length I already own. And with the modest degree of enlargement needed with 8x10 film,
the difference between a very very sharp modern view lens and an even sharper Apo Nikkor is never going to be perceived in the print anyway. I do have an older single-coated Zeiss tessar process lens I like to use on the 8x10, but that because of the pleasant background blur. Apo Nikkors tends to have an annoying
"double-lined" bokeh. If you just want to work with long exposure and use the lens cap method of timing, Apo Nikkors can represent an extremely good value.
Without shutter, they are relatively light and compact, though not in the sense of something like a Fujinon C lens.

[Dan Fromm]

The original question was how to orient a 260/10 Nikkor-Q (a 4/4 double Gauss type later sold as Process Nikkor) for use as an enlarging lens. The OP answered it himself, and correctly. The lens is symmetrical so it doesn't matter.

Since then the thread has drifted. Boy, has it drifted. But the lens in question is and always will be a Process Nikkor (formerly Nikkor-Q), will never be an apochromat, and will never be a dialyte or a tessar.

[mdarnton]

If the lens enlarges, and the user is satisfied with the results, the lens can be used for enlarging by that person. That's ALL anyone really needs to know.

[pdmoylan]

"Did you know one of the fellows here in techie-land, known as the local expert on telephotography, uses Apo Nikkor process lenses on a big Toyo G, with various SLR's on the film plane, because they are sharper at INFINITY than ordinary SLR lenses and even mid-level pricey telescopes (which he formerly specialized in as a dealer)."


Drew, I have been struggling with finding not overly expensive options for improving on and expanding the FLs of lenses which perform well with movements when attached to a DSLR via a view camera. If you would kindly entrust me with the contact, website etc, and any details I would be most appreciative. Unfortunately the Nikon PC-E lens selection ends at 85mm and I would like to push well beyond up to say 400mm. The Hasselblad tilt accessory with their telephoto lenses is too expensive to purchase (and rent for that matter).

Thanks.

PDM

[StoneNYC]

Well I received a 305mm Repro-Claron as a starter lens for my 8x10 enlarger until I can get an actual enlarging lens, so we shall see how sharp it is, I'll do a comparison to my 135mm EL-Nikkor, I know they aren't the same FL but if this repro lens can show to give good results that's a good sign.

The Schneider 150 Symmar-S I have is ridiculously sharp closer than 1:1 so anything is possible.

I don't know lens optics like others so I go off of my real world testing, that's always best I think.

[Dan Fromm]

"Did you know one of the fellows here in techie-land, known as the local expert on telephotography, uses Apo Nikkor process lenses on a big Toyo G, with various SLR's on the film plane, because they are sharper at INFINITY than ordinary SLR lenses and even mid-level pricey telescopes (which he formerly specialized in as a dealer)."


Drew, I have been struggling with finding not overly expensive options for improving on and expanding the FLs of lenses which perform well with movements when attached to a DSLR via a view camera. If you would kindly entrust me with the contact, website etc, and any details I would be most appreciative. Unfortunately the Nikon PC-E lens selection ends at 85mm and I would like to push well beyond up to say 400mm. The Hasselblad tilt accessory with their telephoto lenses is too expensive to purchase (and rent for that matter).

Thanks.

PDM

Interesting on several counts. As I've already pointed out Rodenstock has claimed that Apo-Ronars are sharper at distance than conventional tele lenses for LF. There's a hint.

Re telescopes, look into TeleVue refractors and competitive 'scopes.

Re actually using an Apo Nikkor, um, er, ah, I use mine (305, 420, 485, 610, all dialyte type), also other process lenses (Apo Ronar: 150; Apo Saphir, 135, 180, 240, 300, 360) on 2x3 and, more recently, 6x12 hung in front of a Copal #1 with adapters from SKGrimes. Vignetting is not a problem. Just go shopping and then start shooting. Oh, and by the way, my Apo Nikkors are sharper than my Apo Saphirs at apertures larger than f/16; at smaller apertures they're equally good.

[pdmoylan]

Dan,

I will start shopping. Good info.

Regards,

PDM