Apo-Gerogon lens as a photographic lens

How good is it to use a graphic lens ]Rodenstock 240mm APO Gerogon Lens[

as a photographic lens what are the thoughts on such a set up if at all

feasible:\\Lauren

They work fine, photographers have been using them for decades, including me. They just don't have the coverage of a "regular" lens.

Mike, Apo Gerogons cover around 68 degrees, just like G-Clarons. You must be thinking of Apo Ronars, which are completely different.

 

Lauren, I've tried out two 210 Apo Gerogons. Both shot very well at distance. I've sold one of them and when I get around to it will sell the second.

 

Their cells don't go into a standard shutter and because they don't have rear filter threads they're hard to front mount. Fine lenses for a Speed Graphic or other camera with a built-in shutter. Might work in front of a Sinar-DB shutter too.

 

For most of us, Apo Gerogons completely unusable. That's why they're so inexpensive.

Sorry about that Dan, you're no doubt correct. I've never used Gerogons. Just assumed most copy lenses were similar. I'm use to G-Clarons, Red Dot Artars and Apo Tessars. Since they all had rear threads I just had adapters made for them so they would front mount into old Ilex shutters. Good lenses, worked fine.

The 240 apo gerogon will cover 8x10 easily at infinity. The lens is practically identical to the g-claron other than the barrel as mentioned above. I have used one on 8x10 at around f32 and its a very good lens, maybe even a tiny bit better than the g-claron imo. Read Ron Wisners article on his website about shooting with process lenses, he states the relevant issues. I forget what the article title is on the wisner site but there aren't that many.

<p>I have an Rodenstock 210mm APO Gerogon I would like to use as a 1:1 repro lens built into a bellows slide copy system replacing a scanner ... The photo scanners simply got too expensive for the risk one takes with them having little service and support ...<br>

Can you guys help me with a few questions, since I am not really to tech savvy?<br>

1. Is this lens capable of 1:1 reproduction?<br />2. What would be the approximate working distance?<br />3. How the hell do I bridge from an exotic M50 mount to a more common mount found on bellows?<br />4. Would bridging be easier onto a MF bellows, like Hasselblad? <br /><br />I immensely appreciate all your answers and thoughts! <br>

Thank you in advance!</p>

<p>I have an Rodenstock 210mm APO Gerogon I would like to use as a 1:1 repro lens built into a bellows slide copy system replacing a scanner ... The photo scanners simply got too expensive for the risk one takes with them having little service and support ...<br>

Can you guys help me with a few questions, since I am not really to tech savvy?<br>

1. Is this lens capable of 1:1 reproduction?<br />2. What would be the approximate working distance?<br />3. How the hell do I bridge from an exotic M50 mount to a more common mount found on bellows?<br />4. Would bridging be easier onto a MF bellows, like Hasselblad? <br /><br />I immensely appreciate all your answers and thoughts! <br>

Thank you in advance!</p>

It would be much easier, as well as better, to use an actual duplicating lens like the 75mm 4.0 Apo Rodagon-D or the

75mm 4.5 Apo Rodagon-D or the 120mm Apo Rodagon-D.

<p>Dear Bob,<br>

thank you for your answer. I bet there are better lenses, but this is a ¥€$ question. I just have this lens from my fathers abandoned analogue graphic studio and thought I might put it to use.<br>

I have no idea how this was mounted on a repro camera either so I am struggling with a setup. I might just get a small repro camera, but then I can't find much info on those dinosaurs ...<br>

So the "D" means duplication? </p>

<p>And another novice question - this lenses would perform at a reduction from MF to FF chip well too?</p>

 

D means duplication. For MF to FF chip the 75mm 4.5 would be the best, it is also the least popular.