300mm lens 4x5" landscape

[annaneves]

Hmm, I think there is no one right solution in such matters. Personally, I would choose a lens with an aperture of 5.6. But still, you should always choose according to the situation. But when you gain experience, it becomes much easier to choose what fits better. Maybe this time everything will not be super with the quality of the photo, but next time you will understand that it is perfect for your particular photo. After all, in any creative business, you can never strictly adhere to the rules. Often it is the violation of classical rules that helps to create something really new and beautiful. And be sure to save your first pictures. My father actually ordered a frame for my first photo on https://www.frameshop.com.au/custom-picture-frames and he gave me this photo 5 years after my photography class. I was very happy about it and you will be glad to see your first attempts to take pictures.

[Jim Noel]

It is difficult to beat the Nikkor M, f9, 300mm within your specifications.
It is small, light, sharp and will fold into many field cameras.

[xkaes]

Agree completely. I own both. The Fuji A 300 is harder to find, heavier, and has a weird filter ring size (55 or 58mm I can't remember). I would go with the Nikkor M 300mm f9. The Fujinon C 300 f8.5 is basically the same lens, harder to find and usually a bit more expensive.

The Fujinon A 300mm has a 55mm filter thread, while the C 300mm has a 52mm thread. They both use a #1 shutter and are very small and light for their focal length.

[Bob Salomon]

Agree completely. I own both. The Fuji A 300 is harder to find, heavier, and has a weird filter ring size (55 or 58mm I can't remember). I would go with the Nikkor M 300mm f9. The Fujinon C 300 f8.5 is basically the same lens, harder to find and usually a bit more expensive.

Why would 55 or 58mm be a “weird filter size?”

[Drew Wiley]

All different lenses. The Fuji A 300 is a close-range correct "super plasmat" excellent at infinity too, with a relatively large image circle. The Fuji 300 C stands for "compact", which it really is, but a completely different optical formula - a 4/4 airspaced dialyte, infinity optimized. The Nikkor 300 M is a very modern tessar formula with excellent contrast, but a more limited image circle barely usable on 8X10 format.

All three are in no. 1 shutter, so relatively light for their focal length, though the C and M are even lighter and more compact than the A. The Nikkor M takes 52mm filters; but when it's in the same kit as somewhat larger lenses, I standardize on 67mm filters, and just bring along a 52-67 step ring, as well as a 58-67 step ring, cumulatively about as much extra weight as a few pennies!

[angusparker]

All different lenses. The Fuji A 300 is a close-range correct "super plasmat" excellent at infinity too, with a relatively large image circle. The Fuji 300 C stands for "compact", which it really is, but a completely different optical formula - a 4/4 airspaced dialyte, infinity optimized. The Nikkor 300 M is a very modern tessar formula with excellent contrast, but a more limited image circle barely usable on 8X10 format.

All three are in no. 1 shutter, so relatively light for their focal length, though the C and M are even lighter and more compact than the A. The Nikkor M takes 52mm filters; but when it's in the same kit as somewhat larger lenses, I standardize on 67mm filters, and just bring along a 52-67 step ring, as well as a 58-67 step ring, cumulatively about as much extra weight as a few pennies!

I would stay away from the Fujinon A 300 (which I own) simply because it is quite a bit heavier and has a weird filter size. The Fujinon C 300 (which I have owned) is generally more expensive than the Nikkor M 300 but comparable otherwise. So based on price, filter size, and weight I would pick the Nikkor.

[Kevin Crisp]

Eric is right. I've gone with the g claron in this focal length. Still easy to focus with f:9 max aperture. MUCH smaller than a faster one. The R Claron would have plenty of coverage for 4X5 and it is smaller still but usually needs a larger Compur 2 shutter.

[ic-racer]

The Horseman focal length converter is pretty nice in actual use. The converter is almost no extra space or weight to carry along in the field. How convienient to in a moment just screw that on the back of the lens. Obviously the comparison here is a 300/150 convertible. In my camera bag, the Horseman converter wins over convertibles i tried.

[Joseph Kashi]

Eric is right. I've gone with the g claron in this focal length. Still easy to focus with f:9 max aperture. MUCH smaller than a faster one. The R Claron would have plenty of coverage for 4X5 and it is smaller still but usually needs a larger Compur 2 shutter.

FWIW, my 305mm Repro-Claron is in a factory Compur 1 shutter. It's an excellent long lens for 4x5 and covers 5x7 with some movement, very small and light yet sharp. Just right for very lightweight field use. That said, I slightly prefer the 305/9 G-Claron, also in a #1 shutter.

[xkaes]

The Horseman focal length converter is pretty nice in actual use. The converter is almost no extra space or weight to carry along in the field. How convienient to in a moment just screw that on the back of the lens. Obviously the comparison here is a 300/150 convertible. In my camera bag, the Horseman converter wins over convertibles i tried.

Calumet sold one as well -- probably the same thing. That might be a good option to a typical 300mm f5.6 in a #3 shutter, but I opted for the Fujinon C 300mm f8.5 in a #1. A little heavier, and more expensive than the converter, but saves a whole f-stop of light loss. And even stopped down, the converters can't be that good.