Nikkor-M 200mm lens - Any good?
Joshua L. Wein
I am a relatively new player in the world of large format photography. I own
an older calumet view camera and I acquired a very nice Nikkor-W 135mm lens
in a modern Copal 0 which I am very happy with. I originally thought I
wanted to add a 210 mm lens to my collection. Inquiring in my local have-it
store they showed me a used Nikkor-M 200 mm lens in a Copal 0 shutter in
very nice condition for $300. What is the difference between the M and W
designations. This lens seems to be smaller than the 210 W Nikkor - and a
bit slower - only f8. This might be good for me as I have limited carry
around space. Would I be better off getting the 210 W lens. And is $300 a
good price. Thanks in advance.
-Joshua Wein
Michael S. Briggs
>
> ..... Inquiring in my local have-it
> store they showed me a used Nikkor-M 200 mm lens in a Copal 0 shutter in
> very nice condition for $300. What is the difference between the M and W
The biggest difference in function is the coverage. One supposes that
"M" stands for Medium coverage and "W" for Wide coverage. The Nikkor-M
is a Tessar design with 4 elements in 3 groups. The 200 mm f8 Nikkor-M
covers a 210 mm diameter image circle at f22 and focused on infinity.
This gives a useful capability for movements when used with 4x5 film.
In comparison, the 210 mm f5.6 Nikkor-W projects an image circle of 295
mm diameter. It is quite unlikely that you would exceed this limit with
a 4x5 camera.
Both lenses should have excellent image quality. The Nikkor-M wins on
weight and price. The Nikkor-W wins on speed and coverage. The choice
depends on each photographer's needs/preferences, e.g., backpacking
would suggest the M, architectural work would suggest the W.
The Nikkor-W is a plasmat-type design, with 6 elements in 4 groups.
These have become the standard for normal/wide coverage applications and
are made by all of the big four manufacturers.
> And is $300 a good price.
If the condition is excellent, this is a super price. B&H lists it new
for about $600.
--Michael
Joshua L. Wein
-Josh
Michael S. Briggs <Michae...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:38EE71AE...@earthlink.net...
Alexander Kraus
it. It is a symmetric plasmat design (6 elements in 4 groups) and thus
better corrected than a Tessar lens like the Nikkor-M. Furthermore, the
coverage is significantly larger (70°!). I was thinking about getting a
210mm lens before, but I found it to be too close to my 150mm. Another
possibility would be a G-Claron (which is only single coated, though). Both
lenses screw directly into a Copal 1 shutter.
Alex
Joshua L. Wein <Jaye...@Home.com> wrote in message
news:2OsH4.35912$MZ2.4...@news1.wwck1.ri.home.com...
> Hello all,
>
> I am a relatively new player in the world of large format photography. I
own
> an older calumet view camera and I acquired a very nice Nikkor-W 135mm
lens
> in a modern Copal 0 which I am very happy with. I originally thought I
> wanted to add a 210 mm lens to my collection. Inquiring in my local
have-it
> store they showed me a used Nikkor-M 200 mm lens in a Copal 0 shutter in
> very nice condition for $300. What is the difference between the M and W
Ann Lee
Just to let you know, I bought my symmar 210/370 convertible for $350.00 in
Copal 1. It is a plasmat
so good coverage for 4x5 and 5x7 and little shy of 8x10. I don't know how it
compares
to the Nikkors, but it is the same price range. I have seen it gone for less
than $350. BTW it is sharp.
Good Luck,
Ann