I currently have a 240 Caltar and a 450 Nikkor for my 8x10 Deardorff. I find I s eldom use the Nikkor, and the 240 is often too wide, so I'm considering just a 3 00mm to simplify things. Any thoughts on this? Also, which would be preferable for general/landscape photography: a 305 G-Claro n or the 300 f8.5 Fuji? I only contact print, but sometimes use a 4x5 back for c olor.
Neither. Get the Rodenstock Apo Ronar, but for 8X10 you will need the 360 or better, the 450 to get decent movements. G-Clarons are good lenses and liked by some, but their single coatings make them less as ideal as other lenses for landscapes. The Fuji is prone to flair as well. The Apo Ronar in shutter is multi-coated. Image quality for the AR according to MTFs and actual use, is excellent. Fuji? try before you buy, Fuji provides zero performance specs.
Rodenstock provides zero performance specs also. The MTF is an engineer's assumptions based on the design - they are not tests of actual lenses.
I have a 305 G-Claron and a 450 Fuji C, both are great lenses. Go here for some actual tests:
http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html#300mm_and_longer
I use the 300 f/8.5 Fuji C on 8x10. It is multicoated, and I have no problem with flare. Can't speak for G-Clarons (reportedly discontinued three days ago), except to note that they are only single coated. You'd be hard pressed to find a better 8x10 landscape lens than the Fuji; that's my application for it. It's small, light and takes 52mm filters.
Any of the choices mentioned so far here should do a wonderful job for 8x10. Especially if you're making contact prints. We're only talking four or six element lenses here. Multicoating is nice, but it's not as critical as for a 15 element zoom. I would probably pick among these based on price, coverage, compactness, and filter size compatablility with other lenses I already have.
The Fuji (very good, although I can't speak from 8x10 background) costs $725 fro m Badger. If you are on tight budget, you should find easily a barrel G-Claron 305 for $100 and mount it on a new Copal #1 ($205). Going for a new G-Claron would cost you #310 -$560 from Robert White. Another lens you can consi der is a Nikkor M300. The Nikkor, some say, has more coverage than the Fujinon despite what is written on the spec s sheet. The G-Claron is advisable if you do product photography as well. Otherwise, the Nikkor and the Fuji would be better choice because they are optimized for distance and multicoated.
Paul - I've recently read warnings of some barrel-mount G-Clarons that don't fit into a standard shutter. Do you have any info on this?
Wayne
Hi Bruce:
Agree with Mike. Single coating or multiple coating is not a big deal for your 8x10 contact printing, if you know how to shade your lens. I have compared my G-Claron 355/9 (single-coated, 15 years old) with my friend's Apo-Ronar 360/9 (multi-coated, brand new) on Fuji Astia 8x10. No one can tell the difference. But I know I paid 70% less. A similar test was done using Apo-Germinar (Doctor Optics) 600/11.5 (IC=520mm@22) and 750/14.5 (IC=615mm@22) (All are 6 elements in 6 groups, air spacing, single-coated) vs. Nikkor-T 600/9 and 800/12 (multi-coated, IC=310mm@22). The resulting chromes were quite surprising! The Apo-Germinars consistently gave more contrasty images over Nikkor-Ts. Who said multi-coating is always better???
I would find a dealer, order both G-Claron and Fuji, do a side by side comparison, then weigh the factors such as price, compactness, filter size, etc. and make a final purchase (return one). Good luck!
Barrel G-Claron lenses are a funny thing. A certain portion of them do not fit into shutters at all. If you are buying a G-Claron in a barrel, make sure you have a chance to see if it will fit into a shutter.
Wayne, I'm sorry to hear that! this makes things a bit more difficult indeed. I guess I have had a good luck!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks