FWIW, in your photos of the 210/6.8 Angulons the second and third photos are of a lens I bought a couple of months back. Its a 1949 vintage set of cells mounted in a late model Copal 1 shutter and is definitely a custom mount job, right down to the engraved aperture scale. It almost looks like a blending of Copal and Compound, except that the barrels are matt black, not silver as is usual on Compounds.
What about Nikkor 210W? I use it on my 8x10. It has enough image circle to cover 8x10 but no movements. It's compact as I used to use it on tech V.
YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/andy8x10
Flickr Site: https://www.flickr.com/photos/62974341@N02/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/andrew.oneill.artist/
I agree that just about any of the 210mm lenses for 4x5 cameras that have image circles in the 290 range will just cover. In fact I have two that I use regularly on 8x10 (Symmar-S MC and Topcor 210mm).
For a lens with some movement, I arbitrarily was looking for lenses with a manufacturer specification image circle larger than 350mm.
BTW I got my Angulon 210mm in the mail today. It is nice but no ring. I need to track down a 60mm ring for the older Copal 3 (per SK Grimes site). My other Copal #3 rings are 65mm.
Isn't the G Claron WA f11 a four element lens, like the Repro Claron as opposed to the f9 G Claron, which is six elements. I've never heard any complaints about the coverage or sharpness of the six element f9 G Clarons, of which I have three and find them blazingly sharp at infinity.
Denise Libby
Each is four elements, true, but they are completely different constructions. The Repro-Claron is a dialyte like the Apo-Artar, -Ronar etc, with two biconvex lenses on the outside and two biconcave ones next to the aperture. Dialytes are not very sensitive to magnification changes in their performance. The G-Claron WA is a double Gauss type consisting of 4 deeply curved meniscus lenses, similar to the Zeiss Topogon. In contrast to the original Topogon (an aerial lens), the G-Claron WA is corrected for unity magnification, or close to it. Apparently, this type performs poorly outside the magnification range it was designed for.
I found this photo on eBay.
I purchased one of these (in Sinar DB mount) recently, and can't stop using it for 5x7 work.
By the way, lenses like this are optimized for 1:1 to 1:3. On 8x10 the subject ranges from 8x10 to... 24x30 inches ! Because the lens will do very nicely at 1:5, one can probably use them for almost anything other than landscape or architecture.
Last edited by Ken Lee; 13-May-2010 at 09:00.
I actually initially posted that same picture from e-bay, but after reviewing the post I deleted the picture because I realized that one says SIRONAR rather than SINARON as specified in the chart link from the OP. I'm no expert on these names and have never owned a Rodenstock LF lens.
Quote from chart.210 5.6 Sinar Macro Sinaron 350mm
With respect to the G-Claron WA lenses. A picture of one that does NOT cover is just as important as a picture of one that DOES cover 8x10.
Jason Greenberg Motamedi, would you have a picture of your lens??
Bookmarks