Best 250 for architecture from a distance for a field camera

[Doremus Scudder]

IM-HO, the last thing you need on a 4x5 camera is a huge 300mm f/5.6 Plasmat with more image circle than you could possibly use. They're in #3 shutters, require huge filters and weigh more than some field cameras. They were really designed for use on 8x10 cameras.

For 4x5, smaller tessars like the 300mm Nikkor M or one of the smaller "super Plasmats" like the G-Clarons or Fuji A or C series are much more practical, even though they have a smaller maximum aperture (f/9 usually).

Heck, a 210mm f/5.6 Plasmat is too large for my tastes. Coverage is not an issue with 4x5 and lenses longer than 200mm or so in just about any design, unless you use extreme movements. So, unless you like bulky lenses that take huge filters, look for more compact designs than the f/5.6 Plasmats. Again, the G-Clarons and the Fujinon A lenses in the 240mm range are really compact and a pleasure to work with (and carry), as are the Fujinon A 180mm, the G-Claron 200mm and 210mm and the Nikkor M 200mm (if you can find one!). I really like my vintage Ektar 203mm f/7.7.


The shorter focal lengths are where you need to be careful of image circle size if you use lots of movements. 150mm Plasmats are usually adequate, but smaller than that often requires wide-angle designs if you need to use significant amounts of rise, shift or front tilts and swings.

Best,

Doremus

[Bernice Loui]

Any 250mm modern plasmat will easily cover 8x10 at f22, any of these lenses will exceed the ability of the Technika.
Back to chose any 250mm_ish modern plasmat that meets your fancy. Fujinon, Nikkor or ...

Observation, most new to this view camera stuff tend to be drawn to Japanese brands like Fujinon or Nikkor. This is likely due to being around Japan brands like Nikon, Canon, Fuji or .... Carrying forth habits and familiarity..

Historically, the prime brands in the LF view camera universe were Schneider or Rodenstock, they were the prime brands for LF sheet film cameras back in the days when the 4x5 monorail was the most commonly used. That generation of photographers that applied sheet film to put a roof over their studio and meals on their table are essentially gone, long gone. Those that continue to do that kind of image making have moved on to a view camera with a digital back and related digital post image processing... which is an essential means of image production today.

Nikon tried to get a footing in the view camera lens market back then, failed. Stopped producing view camera lenses. Their view camera lenses found a following among landscape photographers for specific lenses such as their Nikkor M series. Nikon's other view camera offerings were not that special other than promo and notoriety by John Sexton doing ADs for Nikkor back in them days.. Fujinon was mostly lesser known in the US market, they had limited distribution but very popular in Japan. Looking at the price sheets from back then, Nikkor and Fujinon lenses were lower cost than Schneider or Rodenstock for the same lens formula and focal length.. Optical performance wise, they are as mention too many times, essentially identical making Nikkor or Fujinon a good value back then..Yet the majority of working photographers deeply preferred Schneider or Rodenstock... Then the web-internet happened dispersing info and promo and informing folks new to this view camera stuff about lenses.. based on their opinions and ...

~So much for that history..

Be careful with the "APO" marketing moniker, don't react like a moth drawn to the light of "APO"... might get burned..
as the metric/definition of "APO" as it is not a solid and well defined description of how the lens might actually perform.
What the last generation of modern Plasmat formula lenses did offer was improved contrast (typically higher), better flare control (by not much, easily equaled by a good compendium lens shade unless there is extreme back lighting conditions where the most modern lens coatings do help to a degree), slightly improved image circle.. These are incremental improvements and IMO, not worth the current extra cost.. having tried-demo them back when they were neu...

If you're hankering for an APO lens, the APO "process" lens with the Dialyte lens formula (another Dagor variant). These will have smaller image circles compared to a Plasmat, with optical performance higher than the typical Plasmat. They are an excellent choice for longer than normal focal length lenses.
Examples are APO ronar, APO artar, APO nikkor (often in barrel only) and others.. they are excellent from f16 to f45.. at infinity to life-size 1:1 with modest size for their focal length.

Comparasion between a 300mm f5.6 Symmar S, Plasmat -vs- 300mm f9 APO ronar, Dialyte.



Bernice

Thank you all for the vast information!!

Total noob on 4x5 lens design so completely missed the obvious!!

I found a few Nikkors but man do they look hefty! I think I am settling on the fujinon. Relatively small and the 6.3 and image circel seem more than adequate.

Unless of course I find another brand cheaper or in better condition etc

Is there a beneifit in getting the black Fujinon W over the not black??

Would like a Symmar APO but besides the physical heft, the price also seems to be on the higher end.

Thank you!

[Bernice Loui]

Oh, might consider a 300mm lens instead of 250_ish mm lens, this is one of the most often used longer focal lengths for 4x5..
No issues with using a 300mm non-telephoto design lens on a Technika.

Bernice

[Christianganko]

Thank you all for the info and insights!

@bernice thanks for the info and history lesson. I appreciate any and all information. In some manner its kind of a similar thing with products being made in china but people believing only american or European will do. All a lie of course. Its all down to quality control and management. Maybe a few years back it would have held true though.

I have landed on a fujhinon W black. I would like a schneider just to try and keep all my lenses similar brand etc (OCD on my part) but my budget ceiling is 350 and they go for more. Also they are pretty large. On a slight tangent is 240 the actual focal leangth on them????

Happy Saturday!

[Drew Wiley]

Fuji has been a leader in lens quality for the past 50 years; they just didn't market their LF products as aggressively in this country as Schneider and Rodenstock. And you don't need to worry about the minor distinction between nominal rounded-off focal length and the exact focal length at infinity. Gotta fine focus using a loupe anyway, factoring in view camera movements. I own both a 240 G-Claron and 250 Fuji A and use them interchangeably, though one is older and now due for a bit of rest, just like me, and neither is precisely the box label focal length. The official spec sheets give you that.

[Robert Opheim]

With a Technika I think a smaller lens would work best. I have a Limhof Technikardan and a Nikon W 240mm in a #3 Copal shutter. The lens is large and heavy for even the Technikardan.

[Christianganko]

@robert. I agree. As sturdy as the technika is, i wouldnt want to stick a hefty lens on it. If i did go down that route i would use the p2

[Bernice Loui]

Sinar P/P2, easily supports a 480mm f4.5 Xenar.. no issues..


Sinar Norma, does much the same with the 480mm f4.5 Xenar...


This would be an "issue" with a Technika..

Bernice

@robert. I agree. As sturdy as the technika is, i wouldnt want to stick a hefty lens on it. If i did go down that route i would use the p2

[Christianganko]

@bernice The P2 looks crazy with that lens hahaha but not surprised it holds firm. Its a beast

[Drew Wiley]

One could always go mongrel : Norma with a P2 front standard substitution to handle the extra lens weight better. That's what I'd do if I wanted to shoot with my 760 Apo Nikkor.