Lens Recommendation in 360mm range

[kcrisp]

Using my 14" Ektar on my Canham 5X7 is a little ridiculous. Any

suggestions (money is an object) for a lens in this focal length that

will cover 5X7 with at least a little movement. I can live with a

sharp lens which is not the latest in multi-coating. Thanks in

advance for your suggestions.

[donald_miller1]

Kevin, The lens that comes to mind is the 355 mm G Claron by Schneider. Can be found from time to time on Ebay at reasonable prices. Sharp as a tack and will cover your format with ease.

Regards,

Donald Miller

[jeffrey_scott]

I second the recommendation for the G-Claron. I used to have the 270mm version and currently I have the 240mm and 305mm lenses; all are awesome, with more coverage than you will probably need. It is not too large and although single coated I have never run into any problems with that.

[Troll]

The Wollensak/Graflex Tele-Raptar 15" f:5.6 covers a 5x7 plate nicely with plenty of wiggle room. It's quite sharp and contrasty.

[jim_galli4]

I'm using a Schneider 355 Repro Claron in the older Compur compound shutter. A single coated lens from the late 1960's it is startlingly sharp and much smaller than all the Copal 3 types. There are also APO Ronars around which is the same lens formula but even smaller than the Schneider in the now defunct Compur #2 shutter. The Compur #2's are bigger than a Copal 1 but much smaller than the 3. About the same size as the old US #3's but metric. Both mentioned would JUST cover an 8X10 but excel on 5X7.

[john_kasaian1]

kevin, a 14" Artar would make a good alternative, not much room on an 8x10 but should have plenty on a 5x7. A lot smaller and lighter than my 14" Ektar and really quite bright on the gg considering wide open its only f9. If you can stand an uncoated lens, the APO Artars go for pretty cheap prices. Probably (maybe?) cheaper than some of the other lenses already mentioned---I'm thinking $300-400 max in a working compur shutter and excellent glass. A red dot would generally cost more and offer more contrast and less chance of flair, but I find the uncoated APO quite useable. Another piece of vintage glass that'll cover 5x7 is the coated 203 f7.7 Ektar going for $210-250 in a good Supermatic shutter. You've got a lot of good recommendations so far, these are just two more to add to the list.-------Cheers!

[roger hein]

Kevin,

 

Yes, as others have already stated, definitely a 355 G-Claron. Very sharp and

contrasty but more importantly it has gobs of coverage (for use with your

12x20 when you eventually get bitten by the ULF 'bug'). <s>

 

Cheers,

Roger...

[kcrisp]

Thanks for your suggestions, hadn't thought of some of these options.

[tedharris]

One more option that has not been mentioned is the Docter (Zeiss Jena) Apo

Germinar. The published specs are nto correct in terms of its coverage, it

covers way more. I can't give you exact numbers but can tell you Ihave plenty

of movement with this lens at infinity and f22 when used on an 8x10 so you

should ahve scads at 5x7. They are no longer available at bargain new

prices but keep yoru eyes peeled for a used one. I do know that, at least a

few months ago, the View Camera Store still ahd a new one and by now may

aprt with it at a reasonable price.

 

This a a great performer, no longer produced since Rodenstock absorbed the

Docter LF lens production company about 4 years ago.

 

Cheers,

 

Ted

[arne_croell]

Apparently, Mr. Cad in Croydon, UK (http://www.mrcad.co.uk/) still has new 360mm Apo-Germinars, they are listed on their web site (go for large format and then for Doctar in the next menue). Price is about $580.

[neil_poulsen1]

I think that you have to be careful with Artars in 4x5. I know they're used a lot in formats where contact printing is the only option, but for 4x5, they might not be sharp at infinity.

 

I had a 12 inch Red Dot Artar whose reputation for sharpness is legendary. But, I did not obtain good results with this lens at infinity. I obtained excellent results closeup. So, I sold it, because I needed a lens that would work well at longer distances.

 

The Artars are process lenses, and as such, they are designed for distances just a few multiples of it's focal length. Some were optimized by Goerz for infinity, but this wasn't necessarily indicated on the lens. I suspect Steve Grimes could optize these lenses for infinity. I know that Ron Wisner can do this, if he can get the time.

[struan_gray]

The old 360 mm convertible Symmar has a massive 500 mm

coverage, and is no slouch as a performer. In barrel or Sinar DB

mount they can be as cheap as or cheaper than the barrel

process lenses. They take a copal 3 shutter though, so they can

be a bit more once put into a shutter.

[kcrisp]

Just to follow up on this, I followed Bill's suggestion and obtained a 15" Wollensak telephoto. The lens is very big and heavy, though I suspect it is a half pound or more lighter than the big Ektar. Being a telephoto, of course, you don't have to extend the camera so far so it makes for a more stable package. I too find the lens to be amazingly sharp. I used it yesterday for the first time for a 5X7 negative that had some cattle in it, probably 1/2 to 3/4 mile away. They look like little dots on the negative. With a magnifier you can see their tails rather distinctly and count the legs and see the difference in coloration from steer to steer. This is a nice lens.

[ole_tjugen]

A Tele-Xenar? Sharp, covers well with a little movement, shorter draw, big aperture...