Best 3 Lenses for Galvin 2x3?
Joe Lacy
sizes and focal lengths. I plan on buying a recessed board as well as
a flat board. I probably need 3 lenses, something equal to a 22-24mm
in 35 mm and a 85-100mm in 35mm. I need a portrait, and wide angle
lens in 6x9. I also need a normal.
What shutter sizes should I be looking for on these stock Galvin
boards and which types of lenses are the sharpest/highest contrast
based on MTF ratings?
So that equates to a 55-60mm, 180mm-250, and something in a 90-105mm
range for this 6x9. ALL must focus at infinity and still have
movements.
Please send info to: jml...@home.com
Thanks,
Joe Lacy
Kerry L. Thalmann
Joe,
There are two versions of the 6x9 Galvin, One has a one piece 9" rail,
the other has a two piece 14" rail (one 5" and one 9" section). Which
you get will determine the maximum focal length non-telephoto lens
usable.
In the 55 - 60mm range there are currently only two new options - the
55mm APO Grandagon and the 58mm Super Angulon XL. Both are highly
regarded - take your pick.
In the 90 - 105mm range, all the "Big Four" (Nikon, Fujinon, Schneider
and Rodenstock) make 100 - 105mm standard lenses. These are probably
all about equally excellent. The Fujinon CM-W is the "newest" design in
this focal length, followed by the APO Symmar. These are all small,
compact reasonably priced lenses. Unfortunately, Rodenstock does not
offer an APO Sironar-S in this focal length range. They offer plenty of
coverage for 6x9, but only the 105mm Fujinon CM-W covers 4x5 (and not
with much to spare). If you think you might ever want to move up to
4x5, you might consider the 110mm Super Symmar XL. It's more expensive,
bigger and heavier than the others, and the coverage is overkill for
6x9, but it is an amazing lens - one of the best I've ever used in any
format - plus if you ever move up to 4x5, you've already got yourself a
killer wide angle.
In the long lenses, assuming you have enough bellows extension, the "Big
Four" all make 210mm f5.6 lenses that would be suitable to the task.
Coverage is way more than you need for 6x9 (and even 4x5), but they are
all outstanding. All of the currrent 240mm f5.6 lenses are in big,
heavy, expensive Copal No. 3 shutters - for this reason, I personally
avoid them for 4x5 field use (can't imagine using one of these beasts on
6x9). Fuji makes a 250mm f6.3 CM-W lens that comes in the more
reasonably sized (and priced) Copal #1 shutter. However, since you
don't need the coverage of any of these lenses, you might consider
something smaller. There are a couple compact options - that also cover
4x5. The little 200mm f8 Nikkor M and 240mm Fujinon A both come to
mind. See:
http://largeformat.terrashare.com/mid-rang.htm
for more details. That link takes you to my lightweight lens
recommendations for backpacking with a 4x5, but you might also find the
info suitable to your application.
As far as the Galvin lensboards go, for such a small camera, they are
huge (5"x5"), Just about any lens you'd care to put on your Galvin (and
would be willing to carry) will fit on these lensboards - so that should
not be a concern. WRT to maximum extension, I suspect you'll also want
to be able to focus closer than inifinity - and will therefore require
more extension. If you have the one piece 9" rail, about the longest
non-telephoto lens you could use would be the 200mm Nikkor - and then
not for true close-ups. So, that might impact your decision in a longer
focal length lens. Nikon and Fuji both make small (relatively speaking)
telephotos that would work with a short rail version of the Galvin. The
Nikkor is a 270mm and the Fujinon is a 300mm. If you have the Galvin
with the longer two piece rail, any standard lens in the 200 - 250mm
range will work just fine - no need for a telephoto design.
Kerry
--
Kerry's Large Format Homepage
http://largeformat.terrashare.com
Your online source for totally biased and opinionated
large format equipment reviews and recommendations
John Hicks
>I plan on purchasing a Galvin
Beware using really short lenses; you'll of course need a recessed
board, the more the better, but that recessed board is going to make
it difficult to get to shutter controls and that may limit the size
shutter you could effectively use. A #0 is ok but I don't think a #1
would make it on a recessed board.
The reason is that although the flat boards are huge for such a
little camera, the inside of the camera is quite a bit smaller and the
recessed block of the board has to fit inside that.
Also, if the camera you're buying comes with the stock groundglass,
I think you'll want to replace it with something better; I'd recommend
a groundglass from Bill Maxwell. The stock groundglass is awfully dim.
You might start thinking about adapting some sort of 2x3 loupe (the
new Schneider maybe) or other direct magnifying chimney-type
viewfinder accessory; that can make a big difference in usability as
long as it isn't huge and ungainly. You'll have to have the camera
first to work on that; many chimney finders need parts cut out and/or
other diopters to fit on the Galvin.
Beware ordinary Graflex rollfilm backs; they can give horrible
flatness. A clean used Horseman rollfilm back is a worthwhile
investment.
I use only a 105 f3.5 Schneider Xenar, since I'm purposely limiting
the amount of stuff I carry around; at usual working apertures of
f16-f22 it has plenty of coverage and is as good as anything else.
---
John Hicks
Ilja Friedel
> something smaller. There are a couple compact options - that also cover
> 4x5. The little 200mm f8 Nikkor M and 240mm Fujinon A both come to
> mind. See:
Kerry, you have a wonderful website with loads of information (even that
it is currently a bit tricky to navigate). I'm looking for a 200-240mm
lens. You seem to love your Fujinon A a lot. (Is it the one offered by
badger graphic?) It is supposed to be a lens for close-up work, but you
use it successfully for landscapes. I'm interested in it for the same
application. But I don't understand how you made the resolution (lpm)
tests? The numbers are surely not made with a target placed at infinity! ;-)
You don't write a lot about the G-Claron 240mm. It seems to be much more
affordable. Do you know where I could find tests of this lens at infinity?
Schneider at least claims that "The G-Claron may also be used for
distances up to infinity by stopping down to f/22 or less."
Thanks,
Ilja.
Ilja Friedel
> You don't write a lot about the G-Claron 240mm. It seems to be much more
> affordable. Do you know where I could find tests of this lens at infinity?
I found discussions on greenspun.com But I'm still curious of how you
performed the lpm test and if you believe that this result is
representative.
Ilja.
Kerry L. Thalmann
> Kerry, you have a wonderful website with loads of information (even that
> it is currently a bit tricky to navigate). I'm looking for a 200-240mm
> lens. You seem to love your Fujinon A a lot. (Is it the one offered by
> badger graphic?) It is supposed to be a lens for close-up work, but you
> use it successfully for landscapes. I'm interested in it for the same
> application. But I don't understand how you made the resolution (lpm)
> tests? The numbers are surely not made with a target placed at infinity! ;-)
Hi Ilja,
Yes, the 240mm Fujinon A is the same one sold new by Badger Graphic
(that's where I bought mine). Yes, it is an APO process type lenses
optimized for close-up work. But, like the G Clarons, APO Ronars and
Red Dot Artars. It also makes a great, compact, light weight lens for
general purpose landscape work.
No, we did not test at infinity (my hyper drive was broken that day and
I had to be home in time for dinner). We've done all our lens testing
at 20:1 - a fairly standard number for testing lenses for general
purpose use. I have also used this lens quite a bit for distant
subjects and it is indeed outstanding at all distances.
> You don't write a lot about the G-Claron 240mm. It seems to be much more
> affordable. Do you know where I could find tests of this lens at infinity?
> Schneider at least claims that "The G-Claron may also be used for
> distances up to infinity by stopping down to f/22 or less."
I haven't written about it because I haven't used it (I try to limit my
biased opinions to first hand knowledge). My friend, Chris Perez, uses
a 305mm G Claron and is quite pleased with the results. The test
results for that lens can be viewed at Chris' site at:
http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html
Also, in the past I've used a 150mm G Claron (test results also at the
same link). As Schneider recommends, these lenses perform quite well at
f22 for distant subjects. My preference for the Fujinon A in the 240mm
focal length is based on a couple issues. The first is that it's
multicoated and the G Claron isn't. Second, it's in a Copal #0 shutter,
the G Claron is in a Copal #1. This makes the Fuji smaller and lighter
(245g vs. 330g). In both respects, the APO Ronar would probably be my
second choice for 4x5 landscape work in this focal length (it's also
multicoated, and while in a Copal #1 shutter, it's only slightly bigger
and heavier (260g) than the Fujinon A. Of course, the big advantage to
the G Claron is the price (it's currently less than $450 + shipping and
duty from Robert White). As you know, the 240mm Fujinon A is $750 from
Badger and the 240mm APO Ronar is in the same ballpark (either from
Badger or from Robert White by the time you include shipping and duty).
So, the 240mm G Claorn is bigger and heavier than the other two, and
lacks multicoating, but is about $250 cheaper. Your call.
Kerry L. Thalmann
Hi Ilja,
As I sated in my other reply, we did all our lens tests at 20:1.
Are our results representative? Only for the exact lenses we tested.
We have tested two 240mm Fujinon As and they were both outstanding at
20:1 for normal working apertures (f16 and f22). Does that mean ALL
240mm Fujinons As will test as well? I have no way of knowing with 100%
certainty, but these are modern lenses and Fuji has world class quality
control. I recommend you use our test results as guidelines only and
perform your own tests on your own lenses - that way you'll know exactly
how YOUR lenses (not ours) perform.
Ilja Friedel
Kerry L. Thalmann <large...@thalmann.com> wrote:
> As I sated in my other reply, we did all our lens tests at 20:1.
> Are our results representative? Only for the exact lenses we tested.
You are a cautious person. ;-)
> I have no way of knowing with 100% certainty, but these are modern
> lenses and Fuji has world class quality control.
This is what I hoped to hear.
> I recommend you use our test results as guidelines only and perform
> your own tests on your own lenses - that way you'll know exactly how
> YOUR lenses (not ours) perform.
But neighter Fuji, Schneider nor Badger Graphic will waranty me a minimum
lpm on my pictures. If a car doesn't drive well, I can ask for a repair.
But a lens? I feel as if I'm purchasing juwellery. Luxury items with
mystical qualities.
I'm going ahead with getting the Shen Hao. Until then I will have quite
some time to make up my mind. Until then I hope that Badger Graphics will
still have a few of them left. I will also follow eBay, and end of August
I will be in Germany. (The Dollar is quite strong now.)
Thanks,
Ilja.
C & R McBride
Galvin. The front opening on the camera body is quite small for such a
relatively large lens board. To mount a 58 SA XL I had to make my own out
of stock aluminum. It's not the best looking but works fine. I could still
use about a 1/4" more all around the lens. I would like to find out if
people have ever had the front opening enlarged. If I ever need a new
bellows, I think I'll look into this.
I have attached a metric reference scale to the rail. This can be found at:
www.profhdwr.com/stickarl.htm?clkd=iwm. This can be used as a focusing and
exposure compensation aid.
Another accessory that I don't have but have seen is a folding focusing
hood. These can be purchased at: www.hoodmanusa.com.
It is a really nice small 6x9 full featured camera. A complete three lens
outfit can be carried in a medium sized camera bag. If you want info about
the lens pouches, ground glass protector, or the compendium lens shade
adapter that I have made, email me and I'll try to help.
RM
"John Hicks" <j...@magicnet.net> wrote in message
news:3b2969b0...@fl.news.verio.net...
Ted Harris
You will find complete technical details on the G-Claron lenses on the
Schneider website at:
http://www.schneideroptics.com/large/g-claron/claron.htm
I note they do not list the 240 mm there but do list those on either side of
it. you can use that for a starting point for comparison purposes. If you
haven't already you should rate the three characteristics of price, weight and
performance. The G-Claron probablycomes out on top int erms of price and
weight but would be somewhat behind the APO Symmar and a few others if
performance were the primary consideration. If you can shoot them side by side
before makign any choice. finally, IF weight is not a considerationt hen you
might want to consider a used APO SYmmar or comperable Fujinon or Rodenstock
lens used v. a G-Claron new. Several years ago I did a side-by-side
comparisonof the Symmar-S multicoated 240 mm v. the G-Claron 240 mm shooting
Astia and liked the Symmar better BUT it is way heavier!
Cheers,
Ted
Ted Harris
Resource Strategy
Henniker, New Hampshire
John
Just a note from my personal experiences. I have the 150/5.6 APO-Symmar
and the 240/9 G-Claron and when focusing at around 30' I can't tell the
difference between them. IMO the differences are only at infinity where the
APO-Symmar is sharper, and in the high magnification usage where the G-Claron is
better for copy work and such.
Still, I have a coated 203/7.7 and I love that lens for everything. It's
as sharp as the other 2 under most conditions, a lot lighter than either and
particularly for the $125 it cost me at a trade show.
Regards,
John S. Douglas Photographer
http://www.photographers-darkroom.com
===============================