Nikkor 200M or G-Claron 210mm for backpacking
J. Lim
I am having a tough time to trying to decide which to purchase
between the two lens.Have any one made any side by side comparision
shooting chromes with the Nikkor 200M or G-Claron 210mm? In terms of
color saturation, contrast and sharpness, which lens will be
a better bet for backpacking and landscape work?
Keeping weight down will also be one of my criteria in my selection of
lens
but the final color quality of chromes most likely take first priority.
I mainly shoot chromes and does a fair bit of shooting under
dimly-lit rainforest canopy in Asia. I wonder if I would be better off
going for the faster plasmat F5.6 lens instead of F8 or F9 lens with the
tradeoff in weight?
Does anyone actually know of people using them and what their
experience has been? Any advice or suggestion or recommendations would
be greatly appreciated.
Lim
kir...@msn.com
I have used neither lens, I own and use a 240mm G-Claron and a Nikkor M
300mm so you can take or leave my opinion. The short answer is to buy
the f9.0 200mm M-Nikkor. It is optimized for infinity and is
multicoated. Terrific contrast as it is a modern tessar design (4
elements in 3 groups) 6 air glass surfaces. The G-Claron on the other
hand is designed for 5:1 to 1:5 mags (close ups) and needs to be
stopped down to f16-22 to be really sharp at infinity (At f9.0 I think
I can tell mine is fuzzy with an 8 power loupe on the GG). It is only
single coated and is a small plasmat with 6 elements in 4 groups.
Don't worry about the speed, no one uses f5.6 for the actual pictures
because the depth of field is essentially zero (Except for the nuts
that take star pictures at night and that is not what you want to do).
Kirk
In article <39C7B174...@vectrapoint.com>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
J. Lim
Thanks for the helpful advice, looks like the Nikkor M
is a better bet, however, I have yet seen any results from the
use of Nikkor lens. i am not too sure if the color saturaturation
and constrast are to my liking in compasion to German lens.
I have had only a late model Super Angulon 75mm F5.6 and
a classic Fujinon-w 150mm f6.3 for comparsion, the results for the SA 75
chromes seems to pop out at you whereas the Fujinon-w
image color saturation on the chrome appears flat and washed out.
Maybe it is not a realistic comparision between modern plasmat
and a classic single -coat sample.
Let say if you stop down both your 240mm G-Claron and your Nikkor M 300mm
to f22 at infinity, is there a visible difference you notice between
Japanese or German lens,
in terms of both sharpness and color cast?
Cheers
Lim
Roy Harrington
Hi Lim,
I have both the Nikkor-M lenses 200-M and 300-M and have been very
happy with them both. I do mostly B & W so I can't comment on the
color cast, but as Kirk said they are multicoated and optimized for
infinity. The 200-M is also considerably lighter and smaller:
180 grams versus 285 grams for the G-claron.
Roy
"J. Lim" wrote:
>
> Kirk,
>
> Thanks for the helpful advice, looks like the Nikkor M
> is a better bet, however, I have yet seen any results from the
> use of Nikkor lens. i am not too sure if the color saturaturation
> and constrast are to my liking in compasion to German lens.
> I have had only a late model Super Angulon 75mm F5.6 and
> a classic Fujinon-w 150mm f6.3 for comparsion, the results for the SA 75
> chromes seems to pop out at you whereas the Fujinon-w
> image color saturation on the chrome appears flat and washed out.
> Maybe it is not a realistic comparision between modern plasmat
> and a classic single -coat sample.
>
> Let say if you stop down both your 240mm G-Claron and your Nikkor M 300mm
> to f22 at infinity, is there a visible difference you notice between
> Japanese or German lens,
> in terms of both sharpness and color cast?
>
> Cheers
>
> Lim
>
> kir...@msn.com wrote:
>
> > Lim,
> >
> > I have used neither lens, I own and use a 240mm G-Claron and a Nikkor M
> > 300mm so you can take or leave my opinion. The short answer is to buy
> > the f9.0 200mm M-Nikkor. It is optimized for infinity and is
> > multicoated. Terrific contrast as it is a modern tessar design (4
> > elements in 3 groups) 6 air glass surfaces. The G-Claron on the other
> > hand is designed for 5:1 to 1:5 mags (close ups) and needs to be
> > stopped down to f16-22 to be really sharp at infinity (At f9.0 I think
> > I can tell mine is fuzzy with an 8 power loupe on the GG). It is only
> > single coated and is a small plasmat with 6 elements in 4 groups.
> >
> > Don't worry about the speed, no one uses f5.6 for the actual pictures
> > because the depth of field is essentially zero (Except for the nuts
> > that take star pictures at night and that is not what you want to do).
> >
> > Kirk
> >
> >
--
Roy Harrington
r...@harrington.com
Black & White Photography Gallery
http://www.harrington.com
Kerry L. Thalmann
Hi Lim,
I haven't used the G Claron in the 210mm focal lengths, but I have used
the 150mm f9 G Claron (an obsolutely TINY lens). I do have a 200mm
Nikkor M (and a 300mm M) that I use regularly for hiking and
backpacking. As others have mentioned, the Nikkor is multicoated and
the G Claron single coated. The G Claron will have more coverage, but
it is also heavier (by about 100g). The Nikkor is in a Copal #0, the G
Claron in a Copal #1 (which accounts for some of the weight difference).
With respect to color, contrast and sharpness, I have found the Nikkor
to be top notch within it's limited circle of coverage. For general
purpose 4x5 shooting, I prefer the greater coverage of my 210mm APO
Symmar, but for backpacking, I'll happily take the much smaller and
lighter 200mm Nikkor. Shooting under natural light (which changes color
temperature significantly with alititude time of day, atmospheric
conditions, etc.), I doubt you'd notice any color difference between the
Nikkor and your German glass. In fact, unless you're shooting fabric
swatches for a catalog under controled lighting, I think this whole
color cast issue is overrated (assuming modern multicoated lenses with
good contrast and sharpness).
Another lens you might consider is the 240mm F9 Fujinon A. It's also
very tiny and in a Copal #0 shutter like the Nikkor. It is also a 6/4
process plasmat like the G Claron - however, it is multicoated. It has
great coverage and I have found it an excellent lens for both close
focusing and general purpose landscape work.
I have more info and comments on both lenses in the lightweight lenses
section of my largeformat.homepage.com site at:
http://largeformat.homepage.com/mid-rang.htm
Kerry
--
Kerry's Large Format Homepage
http://largeformat.homepage.com
Your online source for totally biased and opinionated
large format equipment reviews and recommendations
Charles Pezeshki
I exclusively backpack and carry LF gear. The Nikkor 200M is a centerpiece
of my trail kit-- super-sharp and lovely contrast on the colors. And it will
also fit inside my Wista VX. I've never used a G-Claron, but it still seems
like a no-brainer-- the Nikkor is the lens, considering the weight. With a
~210 mm image circle, I can never really get to the edge with movements.
Check out the photos on my web page-- about 1/2 were taken with the 200M.
Chuck
Chuck Pezeshki
http://users.moscow.com/pezeshki
Kerry L. Thalmann
>
> Kerry hi,
>
> Thanks for the info and taking the time to write. In fact, I
> did place a back order from Japan for a 240mm F9 Fujinon A
> after reading your in-depth review about a month back. However,
> during my recent shooting, I feel that I may need to bridge the gap
> between my current lens I have - SA 75mm F5.6, SA 90mm F5.6,
> Apo-Sironar -S 135mm ( Due to arrive anytime), Fujinon -W 150mm F6.3
> and of course, the lens you have earlier recommend - the Nikkor M 300mm F9
> (just arrived but still in the box).
>
> Looking at the above combination,there seems to be a big gap between the
> focal length in the intermediate range.
> Dropping the Fujinon -W 150mm F6.3 out of the scenario, my lens does not
> seems terribily well spaced
> out between my 135mm and the 300mm. Because of his reason, I now comtemplated
>
> on cancelling my order for 240mm Fujinon and go for sometime in between -
> like
> a 200mm or a 210mm. I am kind of lost right now and wondered if I'll make
> a right decision to forgo the 240mm in favor of the Nikkor M 200mm F8?
Hi James,
The 200mm focal length does seem to be a better fit within your current
lens assortment. I've always found a 1.5x spacing to be "comfortable".
So, 90, 135, 200, 300 works (for me) better than 90, 135 (or 150), 240,
300. The 240 would work better if you had something like 80, 110, 150,
240, 360, but since I assume you intend to use these light weight lenses
on your little Ikeda, the only 360mm that would work would be a heavy
telephoto.
> BTW, did you ever make any direct chrome comparision between your Fujinon
> 240mm and Nikkor M 200mm?
> I do not want to like sound like splitting hair here, but as you know that
> I am from
> related industry where color, defination and superior sharpness will
> definately a plus point.
Both lenses exhibit excellent color and contrast. The NIC coatings on
the Nikkor and the EBC coatings on the Fujinon are both top notch. The
Fujinon has the edge in coverage and is maybe a little better for
close-ups, but I have never been disappointed with the little Nikkor.
The Nikkor is a little smaller, lighter and less expensive. If you're
concerned about exact color matching, it should be a perfect match for
your 300mm Nikkor M.
A friend of mine just bought a used 200mm Nikkor M yesterday. He also
has 90mm (f8 Super Angulon - may soon be replaced by 80mm f4.5 SS XL),
135mm (Sironar-N) and 300mm (Nikkor M). Coincidentally, he shoots with
a Nagaoka that is almost identical to your Ikeda. Makes a real nice,
light 4x5 outfit for backpacking.
> Somehow, I seems to be losing more sleep in making this decision in choosing
> the "right" lens
> than in stock market.
Yes, but there's a lot less at risk than betting on the stock market.
If you buy either the 200mm Nikkor M or the 240mm Fujinon A and decide
it's not the right lens for you, you can always resell it at a minimal
loss. No such guarantees on the stock market.
VILNTFLUID
Just my 2 cents.
Keith
J. Lim
Thanks for the info and taking the time to write. In fact, I
did place a back order from Japan for a 240mm F9 Fujinon A
after reading your in-depth review about a month back. However,
during my recent shooting, I feel that I may need to bridge the gap
between my current lens I have - SA 75mm F5.6, SA 90mm F5.6,
Apo-Sironar -S 135mm ( Due to arrive anytime), Fujinon -W 150mm F6.3
and of course, the lens you have earlier recommend - the Nikkor M 300mm F9
(just arrived but still in the box).
Looking at the above combination,there seems to be a big gap between the
focal length in the intermediate range.
Dropping the Fujinon -W 150mm F6.3 out of the scenario, my lens does not
seems terribily well spaced
out between my 135mm and the 300mm. Because of his reason, I now comtemplated
on cancelling my order for 240mm Fujinon and go for sometime in between -
like
a 200mm or a 210mm. I am kind of lost right now and wondered if I'll make
a right decision to forgo the 240mm in favor of the Nikkor M 200mm F8?
BTW, did you ever make any direct chrome comparision between your Fujinon
240mm and Nikkor M 200mm?
I do not want to like sound like splitting hair here, but as you know that
I am from
related industry where color, defination and superior sharpness will
definately a plus point.
Somehow, I seems to be losing more sleep in making this decision in choosing
the "right" lens
than in stock market.
Rgds,
J.Lim
"Kerry L. Thalmann" wrote:
Hi Lim,
J. Lim
Seems like the Nikkor 200M is the lens of choice here among the Pro Large
format
backpacker community here :-). From the Nikkor lens catalog, it indicate that
210mm coverage is at F22, where as at F8, we are only looking at 166mm.
Does any one has any idea what is the optimum working aperture for 1:1 and
infinity
for the Nikkor M 200mm?
rgds,
J.Lim
Charles Pezeshki wrote:
> HI Lim,
>
> I exclusively backpack and carry LF gear. The Nikkor 200M is a centerpiece
> of my trail kit-- super-sharp and lovely contrast on the colors. And it will
> also fit inside my Wista VX. I've never used a G-Claron, but it still seems
> like a no-brainer-- the Nikkor is the lens, considering the weight. With a
> ~210 mm image circle, I can never really get to the edge with movements.
>
> Check out the photos on my web page-- about 1/2 were taken with the 200M.
>
> Chuck
> Chuck Pezeshki
> http://users.moscow.com/pezeshki
>
> > From: "J. Lim" <j...@vectrapoint.com>
> > Organization: SCV Cablemodem News site
> > Reply-To: j...@vectrapoint.com
> > Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
> > Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:33:27 +0800
> > Subject: Nikkor 200M or G-Claron 210mm for backpacking
> >
lam
but i would really really like to know
who/how do you place a order with Japan for Fuji lens ?
do you deal with someone in Japan directly ?
Thanks
Lam
J. Lim <j...@vectrapoint.com> wrote in message
news:39CA4695...@vectrapoint.com...
Brian Ellis
unless one was a special purpose lens (e.g. macro). In 35 mm terms, that's
like carrying a 50 mm and a 55 mm lens. However, I know some people
obviously do it. Why?
"lam" <lam...@singnet.com.sg> wrote in message
news:8qeevb$m42$1...@violet.singnet.com.sg...
J. Lim
The answer is yes, it is better if you deal with a personal contact in Japan
although you can work with a smaller store directly on ordering specific lens
(provided you converse in Japanese, most major stores usually don't bother with
overseas order.
Primarily because of the communication barrier. If your email is encoded with
Kanji Text and you
can send them msg in Kanji, that would not be a problem.
Japanese residents can order over the internet, but as far as I know, they
still won't
ship overseas unless you communicate with them in Japanese. Overseas orders can
get quite messy -
often ending in a chicken or egg story.
The best deal for Fujinon LF lens comes out of Osaka, not Toyko - where I got
mine from.
The other thing about buying out from Japan, you will have to be rather familar
with
the different store that stock the same LF lens at different prices, some work
on point
system with extensive rebate to regulars - sometimes, as much as 25% to 40% off
prices in States for the
brand new Fujinons. The big camera stores like Yodobashi offer a point-discount
system
where you get 10 to 12% of your purchase back in the form of points that can
be used like cash.
Recently, Yodobashi Camera store in Toyko has begun a web page at
http://www.yodobashi.co.jp.
Although it's virtually all in Japanese, click over the first few frames until
you see the main page with product icons.
If you like to know more in going about ordering LF lens out of Japan, email me
privately off the list.
J.Lim
J. Lim
I'll only pick one that would be more appropriate. The reason
why I end up with a Fujinon W- 150mm f6.3, it came packaged
with a used Anba Ikeda Field camera that I had pick up. It also
came with many other stuff I don't need - a bunch of old film holder,
readyload holder and etc. In fact, what I really want is the ultra light weight
Ikeda. The results from the Fujinon W- 150mm f6.3 was a little disappointing
to me although it was a pretty sharp len. The image is tack sharp, I could
pick up the details of a dragon-fly among a mass of floating weed couple
of feet away from my camera, I didn't even notice it was there when I took the
shot.
However, the chromes I tested with the 150 lacks the color contrast which I
expect.
I figure that if I am going to hike 5-10 miles up some treacherous
rainforest terrain to get just one shot, I better go with the trial and test
Apo-Sironar -S 135mm
rather than to end up with a half-way decent image with the 150mm after all the
hardwork.
Maybe the single coat 150mm sample I had is the odd one out of the lot that is
lacking
in contrast. I hardly used it any more. Perhaps Kerry or any other user could
comment?
J.Lim
Michael Briggs
>
> The results from the Fujinon W- 150mm f6.3 was a little disappointing
> However, the chromes I tested with the 150 lacks the color contrast which I
> expect.
>
> I figure that if I am going to hike 5-10 miles up some treacherous
> rainforest terrain to get just one shot, I better go with the trial and test
> Maybe the single coat 150mm sample I had is the odd one out of the lot that is
> lacking in contrast. I hardly used it any more. Perhaps Kerry or any other
> user could comment?
It is to be expected that a multicoated less would have better contrast
than a single-coated lens. It isn't really fair to Fuji to compare a
single-coated lens, which is probably 20 or more years old, with a
current multicoated lens. I think if you did the comparison with a
multicoated Fuji lens the results would be different. The Fuji EBC
multicoating is very good.
--Michael
J. Lim
I wonder if it would be difficult to sell the Fujinon A 240mm on the used since I
hardly
see anyone mentioning about it often? BTW, do have have data on the actual
coverage
of the Fujinon 240, would it be able to cover up to 8x10? I may eventually go that
route someday.
I kinda enjoy using the Nikkor 300M, it is marvelously light and compact.
Goes well with my Ikeda. How nice would it be if it is offered in copal 0
instead.
You were right about using a tele-Nikkor, it would have defeated
my purpose in chosing an Ultralight body. The only drawback about the Ikeda, the
front
tilt is kind of flimsy, initially, when I started using it, I alway ended up in
frustration. I even
comtemplated on switching back to my Sinar, since I was so used to the fine geared
movement.
During one of my shoot outdoor with the Ikeda, I tried to hold down the front tilt
with 2 blobs of
Blu-tack, guess what - viola, the front standard actually holds out quite well.
These days, I don't even leave
home without them. The blu-tack works well with my various odd size filters too.
rgds,
James
>
> Hi James,
>
> The 200mm focal length does seem to be a better fit within your current
> lens assortment. I've always found a 1.5x spacing to be "comfortable".
> So, 90, 135, 200, 300 works (for me) better than 90, 135 (or 150), 240,
> 300. The 240 would work better if you had something like 80, 110, 150,
> 240, 360, but since I assume you intend to use these light weight lenses
> on your little Ikeda, the only 360mm that would work would be a heavy
> telephoto.
>
> > BTW, did you ever make any direct chrome comparision between your Fujinon
> > 240mm and Nikkor M 200mm?
> > I do not want to like sound like splitting hair here, but as you know that
> > I am from
> > related industry where color, defination and superior sharpness will
> > definately a plus point.
>
> Both lenses exhibit excellent color and contrast. The NIC coatings on
> the Nikkor and the EBC coatings on the Fujinon are both top notch. The
> Fujinon has the edge in coverage and is maybe a little better for
> close-ups, but I have never been disappointed with the little Nikkor.
> The Nikkor is a little smaller, lighter and less expensive. If you're
> concerned about exact color matching, it should be a perfect match for
> your 300mm Nikkor M.
>
> A friend of mine just bought a used 200mm Nikkor M yesterday. He also
> has 90mm (f8 Super Angulon - may soon be replaced by 80mm f4.5 SS XL),
> 135mm (Sironar-N) and 300mm (Nikkor M). Coincidentally, he shoots with
> a Nagaoka that is almost identical to your Ikeda. Makes a real nice,
> light 4x5 outfit for backpacking.
>
> > Somehow, I seems to be losing more sleep in making this decision in choosing
> > the "right" lens
> > than in stock market.
>
> Yes, but there's a lot less at risk than betting on the stock market.
> If you buy either the 200mm Nikkor M or the 240mm Fujinon A and decide
> it's not the right lens for you, you can always resell it at a minimal
> loss. No such guarantees on the stock market.
>
J. Lim
will
be packable on its own, not with the whole lot of lens I'll be carry. The
weight of each len adds up.
Lim
J. Lim
> Hi Tan,
Your posting couldn't have come at a more appropriate time. It stuck a chord today
as I was shooting along a foggy beach during dawn. I actually wanted the color
rendition
of the scene to be as subtle and subdued, like one of them impressionist painting
effect.
The Fujinon F6.3 150mm came in really handy. Thank you for making me see older
single coated
lens under a whole new light, I wouldn't have even thought about it.
Amazingly, the 20-30year old Fujinon I had arrived in almost - mint condition,
thank goodness
there ain't any haze or fungus at all. BTW, do you think it is possible to have a
look at some of the
results from your G-Claron lens?
Lim
>
> Hi
>
> Here's my two cents on this interesting topic:
>
> I own a couple of Schneider G-Clarons (and at least 4 EBC'ed Fujinons) which are
> single coated and has more air-glass interfaces as your 150mm 6.3 Fujinon (which
> is a Tessar type) and should be less contrasty by default.
>
> Compared to my multicoated Fujinons, yes, the G-Clarons are less contrasty, but
> I don't find it an inherent disadvantage when used appropriately. I shoot a lot
> in harsh light and I find the images from the G-Clarons pleasing because simply
> because they are LESS contrasty! Used with an inherently contrasty color film
> like Velvia (or RDPIII for that matter), the images are generally excellent with
> a nice smoothness to it. A multicoated Fujinon used in the same context would
> make these images too 'hard'. (In black and white, an appropriately coloured
> filter would generally help boost contrast.)
>
> However, if given the choice of a multicoated lens and one that is not, I'd take
> a multicoated lens anytime. But such decisions are often mediated by technical
> considerations (the G-Clarons in anything longer than a 210mm have tremendous
> coverage for their size and weight and cost) and finances, other than out and
> out colour contrast.
>
> Shooting conditions matter. There was an article (by Carl Weese) in the Oct 1997
> of PhotoTechniques (which, pardon me to digress a little, save for a few
> articles now and then is a generally BAD magazine) that ran a test of a 254mm
> (10 inch) Wide Field Ektar (that's a 4 E 4 G design with 6 internal air-glass
> interfaces) against a modern multicoated lens, a 240mm Sironar S (a Plasmat with
> 6E 4G - the same no. of internal air-glass interfaces). He tested using colour
> Ektar neg film.
>
> Both lenses performed equally well in subdued lighting conditions ("nearly
> indistinguishable"), but the benefits of multicoating shown through in much
> brighter conditions. The WF Ektar had more flare and in Weese' own words:
> ".......the Ektar displayed a veiling fog in the thinner shadow areas that
> looked almost like a flashing or a pre-exposure density.....(the article
> continues and he doesn't necessarily think the 'veiling' is a bad thing mind
> you)". As you'd expect, the modern Sironar S with Rodenstock's excellent MC
> performed wonderfully in bright conditions. But a significant advantage of the
> WF Ektar over the 240mm Sironar is the MUCH larger coverage (which he uses), as
> Weese points out, so it isn't just all about contrast.
>
> Kinda substantiates what I said about the G-Clarons having less contrast in
> bright conditions.
>
> If I can just quote Weese from his article a little more (any typos mine): "If
> your idea of a perfect location is the Scottish moors in a rain, a foggy beach
> before dawn, or an overcast day in the woods, the WF Ektar could be entirely up
> to the task of exposing your film. You might even prefer its rendition of these
> subjects to that of a modern lens....................(a lot in between here
> snipped)......................... However, if your favorite shooting scenario is
> the Mojave desert at high noon or leafy trees backlit by blazing sunlight, you
> will prefer a first rate modern lens, despite its cost."
>
> Weese goes to suggest that that you might want to own both a WF Ektar and a
> Sironar S for their own special abilities - the WF esp. for its coverage.
>
> Finally, shine a strong light through your 150m Fujinon and check for haze.
> That's a sure contrast killer. Haze is sometimes not immediately obvious and
> often afflicts used lenses.
>
> I'd also pay attention to adequate stray light shielding.
>
> Regards,
> K H Tan
> STUDIO Q
> http://StudioQ.com
>
> *************************************
> Remove "DELETETHIS" in my return address
> to send a private message.
> *************************************
Ronald R. Levandoski, DMD.
What is blu tack?
Peter De Smidt
> What is blu tack?
>
Blue tack is some kneadable, Playdo like stuff that is normally used for
hanging posters on dorm room walls. It stays pliable, and comes off fairly
well.
Peter
Thom
<rlev...@citilink.com> wrote:
I used a FUJI 250mm for years before it was stolen. It easily covered
8x10 and was great for what I used it for (Railroad Photography)
because it had 1-1/500 speeds. Sharp as a razor too.
Cheers THOM
J.Lim
> by Bostik Ltd, UK, Ulverscroft Road, Leicester, LE4 6 BW Tel: (016) 251 0015. No, I
> have nothing
> to do with them, just thought it may be useful to someone. Beside keeping filmsy
> camera parts in place
> temporarily, it is great for holding all odd size filters and large glass filter
> 150mm x 100mm filter. No need
> for any fancy filter holders, the best part about Blu-tack, it works virtually with
> any brand of filter you have.
> Just in case you may want to look for it, it is sold in most major stationary stores
> everywhere for a song.
> What is blu tack?
Ronald R. Levandoski, DMD.
OK, now that I know what it is, where do I get it in the USA?
Peter De Smidt
Ronald R. Levandoski, DMD. <rlev...@citilink.com> wrote in message
news:39FA2C7E...@citilink.com...
Walmart, Walgreens...
Peter