Sandy King (sanking@hubcap.clemson.edu)
Tue, 02 Feb 1999 19:46:57 -0400
Carl,
Thanks for the information. Although I have not had an opportuity to use
the 355mm G-Claron your report confirms other first-hand accounts of use.
About 6 months ago I shopped around for a 355 G-Claron and made a few
offers to folks who had them for sale but could not find one at a price I
wanted to pay. That is when I picked up a 360mm Symmar which was offered at
a real good price (around $400 in a Compound shutter as I recall). The fact
that it actually covered 12X20 was a big surprise to me because I had not
seen this information mentioned in the literature, and the generally
accepted 70 degree coverage of the Symmar at f/22 would not suffice to
cover 12X20. I guess you could say the same about the G-Claron also,
because the Schneider literature gives a maximum coverage of 8X10.
Your report of the coverage of the 16.5" Dagor is very interesting. If
coverage were determined only by the optical characteristics of the Dagor
this lens should cover 12X20 with quite a bit of movement, but it seems
that many Dagors (particulary of this focal length if personal experience
counts) were mounted in such a way that barrel vignetting results in less
coverage than could be anticipated.
BTW, do you know if the 360 Fujinon-W will cover 12X20? The shorter
Fujinon-W lenses (of f/5.6 aperture) had coverage of around 80 degrees but
I have never been able to determine from the literature if the 360 has as
much coverage.
Sandy King
cover >Sandy,
>
>The 355mm G-Claron (intended primarily as a studio close-up lens) does a
>great job of covering 12x20 with even a little bit of movement
>available. Contrast and sharpness are quite smooth out to the corners,
>and it turns up used with some frequency. I'm currently using one (only
>borrowed unfortunately) on 7x17 where it's length is very pleasing and
>it allows tons of camera adjustments. My own current ultra-large lens is
>an old American Optical Co. Goertz Dagor, 16.5 inches, f/7.7. It covers
>12x20 adequately by f/32 but with little room for adjustment. It
>delivers simply gorgeous images with smoother tone than many modern
>lenses and is particularly good at smooth transitions into out-of-focus
>areas when total pan-focus isn't possible for a particular picture.
>Large and very heavy though.---Carl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:49