ReallyBigCameras
Advertiser
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2004
- Messages
- 808
- Format
- 4x5 Format
I posted this over on the large format forum, but haven't received any responses. Since I know there are a number of ULF shooters here, I thought I'd seek the collective wisdom of the APUG community.
Gentlemen,
Does anyone know if these are the same lenses with different names, but equal coverage?
260mm f10 Nikkor Q
260mm f10 Process Nikkor
I have heard they are the same lens, but am looking for confirmation. Based on photos, the 260mm Nikkor Q appears to be older ("inside" lettering) than the 260mm Process Nikkor (lettering around the "outside" of the front barrel). Other than that, they look very similar in the photos. However, photos tell me nothing about lens design/construction or performance.
I'm not so concerned about the age as I am the performance and coverage. I've read several times that the 260mm Process Nikkor will cover 7x17 and am hoping the 260mm Nikkor Q will as well.
Thanks,
Kerry
I am almost positive they are the same design, and I think you are right in that the Process Nikkor is the newer specimen. I have held both in my hands, but only tested the Process Nikkor. It covered 7X17, but not by a lot.
There is also a 270mm G-Claron wide-angle process lens that will cover 7X17, though not with lot of movement. The 240mm version will also, but just barely. The 210mm G-Claron wide angle will not cover 7X17.
From the looks of these lenses I think they are all based closely on the old Topogon/Metrogon design, similar to Biogon. Good lenses but the angle of coverage is no more than about 90 degrees. You can figure coverage for any focal length from that.
Because of their size and problems in mounting in modern shutters these are not the best choices for ULF work, IMHO.
Sandy King
Sandy,
Thanks for the response. I just picked up a like new, unused, in-the-box 260mm Nikkor Q (well, I just bought it, but I don't have it in my hands yet, probably late next week). I plan to give it a try on 7x17. If it covers 90 degress, that would be a 520mm image circle at infinity and I can live with that for what this lens is costing me. Even if it only covers 85 degrees it will hit the corners of 7x17, but won't leave much for movements.
As far as the shutter goes, I plan on using a fair number of barrel mounted lenses on my ULF cameras. So, I rigged up a Sinar shutter for the front standard. It's a lot more economical that looking for lenses already in shutters and cost far less than the cost of having a single barrel lens mounted in a Copal No. 3 shutter. Unless the 260mm Nikkor Q has a huge rear element (which it might - I do believe it's rather bulbous - which is OK as long as it isn't too big around), I should be able to use it with the Sinar shutter set-up.
Kerry
Hi Kerry,
So far just 4 x 5 and 8 x 10. Very sharp but minimum aperature of f32. So far I have only played with it a little. I have a bad case of hardware aquisition syndrome and not enough time. I am building a packard shutter into the front of my Cambo which will allow me to mount a lens board on the front.
I just double checked my lens sn#509931 and there is no slot. All the rest of my Apo Nikkors have them. Interesting and a disappointment.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?