For 4x5 portraits in that focal range, I use a 240mm Technika Heliar. I used to use a 240mm Rodenstock Sironar which was also excellent.
For 4x5 portraits in that focal range, I use a 240mm Technika Heliar. I used to use a 240mm Rodenstock Sironar which was also excellent.
Previously discussed on LFF, not gonna re-do this again..
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...anthars-needed
~APO remains a worthy marketing moniker to this day, Cosina (Japan) markets "APO Lanther" lenses for digital cameras to this day.
Yet, there has yet to be a photography industry agreement/metric/standards for the absolute definition of "APO"..
~Lanthar also remains a worthy marketing moniker rooted back to the APO Lanthar myth & legend.
Lanthanum optical glass, invented in the USA circa WW-II in response to Germany's Schott cutting off the supply of optical glass to the USA.
Lanthanum optical glass began with George W. Morey in the late 1920’s at the US Geophysical Laboratory, ended up being mass produced at Eastman Kodak's Hawkeye optical division.. Kodak used LOTs of Lanthanum optical glass in their lenses, yet made little mention of this fact..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpziDTklPs0
Prof. Arne Cröll wrote a paper on Voigtländer Large Format Lenses from 1949-1972:
https://www.arnecroell.com/voigtlaender.pdf
Take in this info and previous stuff on LFF, then decided.
Bernice
Originally Posted by Kiwi7475
Schott not Scott
Heh, auto spell correct as no clue of "Schott"..
Schott optical glass has a very interesting history:
https://www.schott.com/en-gb/about-u...porate-history
Bernice
Just as there isn't, and never will be, a definition of "multi-coating". It can pretty much be whatever a manufacturer wants it to be.
Or why "APO" and other marketing monikers, branding sells "stuff"... Much about projected perception, lesser about actual content or value to the specific need.
Bernice
It doesn't and IMO it's not over-rated at all. Of course this is my opinion but I think they are phenomenal lenses. In contrast, the oft-suggested Tessar I find to have poor out-of-focus rendering at wider stops.
Lots of options and even run-of-the-mill Symmar lenses can make fine portrait lenses. What's more important is the photographer, sitter, and everything related to portraiture beyond the basic camera/lens/operation.
Apochromatic lenses bring three colors into sharp focus on the same plane, typically red, blue, and green. Achromatic lenses focus only two colors on the same plane, typically red and blue. Most modern (post-WWII) lenses are pretty darn close to apochromatic anyways. And of course, "sharp focus" is in the eye of the beholder, or in this case, the manufacturer.
"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
The Heliar is another great option - I keep forgetting about those even though I have a 240mm Heliar. That's about the largest you'll find in a shutter - the 300 on up are too big to fit in most leaf shutters, and certainly the 360, 420 and 480 are waaaay too big for any Ilex or Betax #5. You'll need a big Packard shutter to go behind one of those - at least a 7" if not 8" shutter, with an opening bigger than 3.5". So you're not putting one of them on a 4x5 anyway.
Do you assume that lenses marked as APO are also coated?
Flickr Home Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks