Nikkor APO 450mm F9 lens information needed

Hi all,

 

I'd like to know if someone has any experience with this lens? Its

coverage,image quality,original price,etc.I have a 12"x10" field

camera with a packard shutter. Could this lens be used on this

camera and get good results?

 

thanks for any input

 

Zhang<div></div>

And here is the 12" wooden field camera.<div></div>

<p>The Apo-Nikkor are "process" lenses, designed for the printing and graphics arts industries. The are fairly narrow coverage. A complication is that there seemed to have been two designs, depending upon age: see <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004O81">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004O81</a>.

The words "Nippon Kogaku" on your lens indicate that your lens is fairly old. I _speculate_ that these words mean that your lens is the first design that Nikon used for their Apo-Nikkors.</p>

 

<p>The later Apo-Nikkors are dialyte designs, like the Apo-Ronars and Apo-Artars. I have a brochure on this type -- Nikon listed the coverage of most of these as 46 degrees. This type was made in a 455 mm version, but not a 450 mm. The 455 mm version was listed as covering 770 mm diameter at 1:1. Used for distant subjects, the coverage would be about half of this: 385 mm.</p>

 

<p>But your lens is probably the early type, which is said to be a Tessar-type design. Tessars commonly cover 55 or even 60 degrees, so perhaps your lens has more coverage. At 55 degrees, the diameter of coverage (for distant subjects) would be 468 mm. This compares favorably to the approx 400 mm diagonal of 10x12 inches. So perhaps your lens will cover. This is guess work since I don't have any information from Nikon on the older version. Your lens is certainly worth trying for 10x12.</p>

 

<p>Particulary for contact prints, you may find that a lens has more coverage than specified by the manufacturer. When the manufacturer specified the coverage of a lens, they were making a guarantee, and would want the lens to be usable even in demanding applications such as large enlargements.</p>

Thanks Michael for the input and the link. Someone mentioned a Nikkor apo 450/9 in the dicussions and that lens seems like the same model as mine with a smaller s/n.

Your answer is very helpful as I am confused of the different Nikon APO 455/9,450/9M and 450/9 Nikkor. If the lens is a Tessar design, I think it should have no problem for focusing at infinity with good results.

I've been using a 450mm f/9 Nikkor for 18 months now, and LOVE it. I was worried it would be too dark (I had a 36mm f/6.8 before) but it is just lovely to work with - great wide open or stopped down...highly recommended!

The 1971 Graphics arts photocatalog here lists only the 420 and 480mm F9 Apo-Nikkor for process cameras. Under "plate size covered" in the "1:10 ratio column" there is 390 and 450 listed. Probably mm dimensions. In the "advertising blurb" on the Apo Nikkors it mentions "best sharpness achieved when stopped down 2 to 3 stops from maximum aperture." also "symmetrical design lenses give wide; almost 46 degree effective angle"<BR><BR>There are alot of transposing errors with data on graphics arts lenses; sometimes entire columns of data are shifted; so use caution. <BR><BR>These process lenses when used in the field should be used with a giant well made darkened lens hood. With pour set of Apo ronars; there is curvature of field; these are not flat field lenses by any means. In process camera work; the PRIME consideration is linearity of scale. In enlarging lenses; this is not usually worried about. With a process camera; sections of maps are fit together; and a low distortion lens makes matching radically easiier. <BR><BR>There are also some variants of process lesnes that have a radically better linearity in scale; like lower distortion. The USGS and specialized mapping places had/have these. When we got our process camera setup long ago; the "better" apo ronars cost an extra penny. The 36" ronar of ours was a grand; the better one was double or something close. Some older books listed once both variants. These were available in the larger sizes; I think 24" FL and longer. <BR><BR>Goerz Red dot Artar had a "low distortion" variant too; these had a 0.005 percent of focal length spec; the 35" job was 2072 bucks in 1971; the 42" model was 2690 dollars. In the regular versions; they were only 1160 and 1412 dollars. The low distortion variant in red dot artar was available from a 4" lens to a 42" lens. In the standard red dot model; there was a 70"/1780mm F16 lens; that cost 3625 dollars in 1971. Out 1971 VW car cost new 1999 in 1971.

I have a 45cm Apo-Nikkor (Nippon Kogaku No.5781) with Waterhouse stops.This was purchased around 1960. The accompanying brochure lists coverage @ 1:1 as 35x43 cm or 14 x 17 inches. There were also 30cm and 60cm versions.

 

Merg Ross

Merg, the lens that you have is probably earlier than the that Zhang has -- labeling focal lengths in cm instead of mm is a sign of age. We can only guess whether the lenses are of the same design.

 

A coverage 35x43 cm or 14x17 in at 1:1 is a diagonal of about 560 mm -- this isn't hopeful for covering 10x12 in (diagonal approx 400 mm) at infinity because the coverage at infinity will be approx half that at 1:1, i.e., approx 280 mm. This is because a lens at 1:1 is twice the distance from the film compared to focused on infinity, so the angular cone of coverage encompases a larger circle on the film. But this is all guess work, and the coverage might be good enough when stopped down enough, so it is worth trying.

I also have a 45cm Apo Nikkor f/9, mounted in an Ilex #5 shutter. It is sharper than two friends newer 450 Nikkors. It covers 8x10 with no problems and on movements I have never run out of room. Haven't tried it on larger negs yet.

Thanks everyone for your help. I thought I paid too much for the lens,$80, but now I think I made a good deal. it has some very tiny cleanning marks at the rear surface.But I guess it will not affect the image quality too much. These lenses were much more expensive when new! My lens has a S/N of 7257 so it must be a fairly old lens.

I have never tried LF before.What if I just shot some 12" b/w print paper and reverse the image with a Photoshop on the scanned image? I think it must be very expensive to shoot a lot of color and slide 12" negatives and have them enlarged? What do you usually do with such a large camera? For fun or for customers?

I also have a Chinese 210/4.5 lens of 3 groups 5 elements design and on the instruction paper, it says the lens has a minimum 250 lp/mm resolution wide open!? I have never heard of any lens that could resolve so much.

 

Kind regards