Looking into G Claron lenses

[Heroique]

Those are both lovely, Heroique. Could you take a 100% crop of a really detailed spot of one of them? I'm interested in g-clarons, too, and would be interested in that view.

Thanks – here’s a quick and aggressive center crop of the cactus on Velvia-50 (that was fun). As I recall, the cactus was taken w/ long bellows draw & high magnification, and is close to a full-frame scan. The Wyoming river is a crop from a full-frame scan using an approximate 2:3 aspect ratio for composition. In each case, the film was dry-mounted and scanned at 1,500 ppi on my Epson 4990 at the optimal height above the scanner bed...

[Mark Stahlke]

Drew, a 250mm G-Claron? I was only aware of the 150/210/240/270/305/355.

Noah, I have one of each and I like them all. I use the 150 and 210 regularly.

[Noah B]

Excellent, thanks all for the information! I think I'm going to make the plunge soon and pick one up. What's a fair price for one in good condition?

[Drew Wiley]

Mine is labeled 250, Mark. I don't know its precise FL - would have to check the tech
sheet. My Fuji is a 240. A 210 would be nice, but I opted for a 200 Nikkor M instead, since
my main application for this FL is 4x5 rather than 8x10. I might want to bag a 150 sometime. I have a 360 A as well, and in this instance the multicoating is a help when
shooting such a massize image circle on 4x5 with more risk of bellows flare than in the
8x10. I also prefer the no.1 shutter, though in a few instances it would have been helpful
to have the even greater coverage of the G, due to the larger shutter opening itself, I suspect. The lenses are very similar other than this mechanical vignetting limit, and the
associated wt difference. G Clarons are certainly more plentiful and more affordable at the
moment, and fully equal to conventional modern plasmats in terms of image quality, maybe
even better.

[evan clarke]

I have 3.. I use two of them on my 11x14.. Too sharp to believe..

[John Kasaian]

I use a 240 G Ckaron for 8x10 format---it's a superb lens.

[John NYC]

I had a 240 G-Claron and a 305 G-Claron. Both were used on 8x10 and both were superb for modern, sharp glass.

I do think the old-style (single coated) 250mm Fuji W had a slight advantage over the 240mm G-Claron to its overall look and to corner-to-corner sharpness, but this is really pixel peeping. At normal print sizes, either would be excellent.

[John O'Connell]

I like my 355 G Claron, but the multicoated modern plasmats I've used are sharper and higher contrast. Plus you don't gain a lot of image circle with the G Claron compared to a Nikkor W or a Rodensrock Sironar, unless you grab an early, Dagor-design G Claron.

[Roger Cole]

Single versus mutlicoating is almost never important in typical large format lenses. The change from uncoated to single coated is significant. Multicoating is a tiny additional improvement. Where it starts to make a real difference is in 35mm (or MF) zooms with many air/glass surfaces. Then the slight additional reduction in reflections starts to add up to something meaningful. In most LF lenses it just isn't an important difference.

I have no experience with the G-Clarons but have never heard any but good things about them.

[Joseph O'Neil]

I ahve and use the 150, 180, 240 and 270. Love them all. When backpacking and./or hiking, every ounce counts, and while dark to focus on the ground glass, you do get used to it.

Very sharp, very wide angle of coverage, so I always find lots of movements. Would not give them up

joe