210 claron on 8x10: Too dark?

gbenaim · Aug 2, 2008

How dark is the 210 g-claron on 8x10? Is the field of view significantly wider than the 240? Thanks.

Tom Perkins · Aug 2, 2008

I used this lens on 8x10 for about 3 years. It is a little dark indoors but fine outside. The thing I found difficult was the minimal movements, and, as I like to use front rise a fair amount, I had some vignetting or just ran out of room with it. Compared to the 250 it seemed significantly wider. If I were still using that format I would look for a lens with a little more coverage.

Terence · Aug 3, 2008

About the same as the 240mm, which makes sense as they're both f/9 lenses. A bit dark indoors, like Tom said, but fine outdoors. A good dark-cloth is the key. For weight/price/coverage, I haven't found its equal. I'd like a little more coverage too, but not at the expense of weight or cost. It's pretty wide by landscape standards, but not by indoor architectural standards. I'm not usually a wide-angle shooter. It's my widest 8x10 lens. Very sharp even in the corners.

minorzone · Aug 14, 2008

the 210 kowa graphic will equal the g claron in sharpness...and give just enough extra room for movements... of course the 210 computar/kyvytar will really get you there...it will cover 7x17 in a pinch...

Ole · Aug 14, 2008

I've about given up on the 210mm G-claron. Given up on getting one, that is - I have one which arrived with front cell only, and one which has the foggiest rear cell I've ever attempted to look through. So unless someone wants to swap a pristine front cell for a transparent rear cell, I've given up now.

Instead I have a 210mm f:5.6 Symmar which barely covers, a 240mm Symmar which covers well enough, and a 210mm f:6.8 Angulon when I need lots and lots of coverage. The Angulon is useable on 12x16" too, although it's only specified to cover 10x12".

Note that all of these are significantly brighter than the G-Claron - and although heavier, it's not as significant a difference as between a 360mm f:5.6 Symmar and a 355mm f:9 G-Claron.

Shawn Dougherty · Aug 14, 2008

I have the 210 G-Claron but have only used it on my 4x5. I just got the adapter board to use it on my 8x10 C1. I'll be sure to check in when I have some real shooting experience with it... and have made some final prints. All the best. Shawn

Nick Zentena · Aug 16, 2008

I have the 240mm. It's darker then I'd like but not overly dark. The 150mm I find overly dark.

OTOH the 210mm Fuji-W is often similar priced to the G-claron. Faster. Not that big. 58mm filters I think. #1 shutter. If you can find a first series I think it's a better choice.

Ian Grant · Aug 16, 2008

Changing the screen would make a huge difference, my first 10x8 an Agfa Ansco came with it's original screen fitted, but the seller had included a Beattie screen which he'd bought and never used.

With the Beattie screen I can easily view & focus with my Ross Protar 151mm f16 wide angle even with interior shots with normal room lighting, same goes for using my two Hexanon f9 150mm & 240mm lenses.

Ian

Ole · Aug 16, 2008

gregdavis said:
Ole, which Symmar do you use? Is it the Symmar-S, or the APO Symmar? And does it get very dark on the corners?

All my Symmars are "plain old unlettered" convertibles.

The light falloff is about the same for all lenses (except the 210mm Super Angulon which would strain both my finances and my back): cos^4. So the difference between center and corner brightness is pretty well constant for all 210mm lenses on 8x10" - at the same aperture.

The 210mm Symmar is "marginal" enough in coverage that I prefer using it on 18x24cm, but would swap to either the 240mm Symmar or the 210mm Angulon for 8x10".

JBrunner · Aug 16, 2008

If you have enough light to shoot at 100 ISO or so it is fine as far as what you can see in the GG. Not bright, but usable. Coverage is usable when stopped down, but not generous. There is a reason it is a cult lens with a fanatical following, and none of the drawbacks are the reason.

Ian Grant · Aug 16, 2008

JBrunner said:
If you have enough light to shoot at 100 ISO or so it is fine as far as what you can see in the GG. Not bright, but usable. Coverage is usable when stopped down, but not generous. There is a reason it is a cult lens with a fanatical following, and none of the drawbacks are the reason.

The Germans put it more clearly

Schneider don't actually recommend it as a camera lens, for Infinity use merely stating it can be used but needs stopping down to at least f22.

That's rather like the old convertible Symmars, they are just OK used split.

For some work a process lens may be fine but for critical work they aren't up to it. They are optimised for 1:1 to 1:5, and are also flat field lenses.

G-Claron's are very over Hyped. But they are Cult lenses because they are cheap, small and fine for 90%+ images most people want to make.

Ian

JBrunner · Aug 16, 2008

Ian Grant said:
The Germans put it more clearly

Schneider don't actually recommend it as a camera lens, for Infinity use merely stating it can be used but needs stopping down to at least f22.

That's rather like the old convertible Symmars, they are just OK used split.

For some work a process lens may be fine but for critical work they aren't up to it. They are optimised for 1:1 to 1:5, and are also flat field lenses.

G-Claron's are very over Hyped. But they are Cult lenses because they are cheap, small and fine for 90%+ images most people want to make.

Ian

Frikkin Germans, nothing ever changes.

Ian is right, and now that the cult status has driven up the price, one of the most compelling reasons to have a G-Claron (performance vs price) is fading.

Ian Grant · Aug 16, 2008

JBrunner said:
Frikkin Germans, nothing ever changes.

Ian is right, and now that the cult status has driven up the price, one of the most compelling reasons to have a G-Claron (performance vs price) is fading.

Hexanon's Jason, even better coverage but they don't fit shutters as easily

I have 3, I bought them tested them and stored them, only because I've moved continents and air flights restrict how much you can carry each trip.

The 150mm f9 Hexanon's cover 10x8 with just a touch of room for movements. The lenses vary they don't all cover).

Because of the over hype G-Clarons are sometimes selling for more than far better lenses like Symmars or Sironars.

Ian

gbenaim · Aug 17, 2008

Will either a symmar or sironar 210 cover 8x10?

Ian Grant · Aug 17, 2008

You might find this link useful Symmar and there's info on all their other lenses too.

G Claron - according to Schneider the 210 doesn't cover 10x8. In practice the just about cover but there's no chance of using any movements.

So not quite, the 240mm will.

Ian

210 claron on 8x10: Too dark?

gbenaim

Tom Perkins

Terence

minorzone

Ole

Moderator

Shawn Dougherty

Nick Zentena

Ian Grant

Ole

Moderator

JBrunner

Moderator

Attachments

Ian Grant

JBrunner

Moderator

Ian Grant

gbenaim

Ian Grant

210 claron on 8x10: Too dark?

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Attachments

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency