300mm f9 Hexanon GR II f9

[Ian Grant]

What's the coverage of these lenses ?

Just acuired 3 Hexanon GR 11's via the auction site and the 300mm is surplus to my requirements. However it does have far greater coverage than my other 3 LF 300mm/12" lenses.

A Google search on Hexanon GR 11's gives valuable information regarding the 150mm f9's, luckily mine does cover 10"x8" with a little room for slight movements, but I can find nothing about the 210mm or 300mm versions.

Before I post it for sale, here in the classified section, I'd appreciate honest opinions of its potential coverage for ULF.

Ian

 

[Dave Wooten]

is it the same design as the computar and the kowa etc...if so it will cover 7 x 17 and 11 x 14?

 

[df cardwell]

is it the same design as the computar and the kowa etc...if so it will cover 7 x 17 and 11 x 14?

It is...it does.

 

[scootermm]

I also have one, has ample coverage for 7x17 when stopped down. nice 300mm lens for the price.

 

[Dan Fromm]

It is...it does.

Are you sure about the design?

I ask because although the 150/9 GRII I used to have is a 6/4 plasmat, the 210/9 GRII I'm still using is a 6/6 sort of double Gauss. So if you have a 300/9 GRII, what is it?

 

[ReallyBigCameras]

is it the same design as the computar and the kowa etc...if so it will cover 7 x 17 and 11 x 14?

Actually, not even all the Computars and Graphic-Kowas are the same design. My 150mm Computar and Grahic-Kowa are both 6/4 designs. However, my 210mm Computar is a 6/4, but my 210mm Graphic-Kowa is a 6/6 design with less coverage.

This change from the original 6/4 design to the later 6/6 construction seems to have taken place gradually and may not have affected all focal lengths in the series (for example, every 150mm Computar/APO Kyvytar/Graphic-Kowa I have seen is of 6/4 construction). This seesm to be the reason for vast differences concerning the reported usable coverage of these lenses. They all look pretty much the same, but some cover less than others.

Not sure on the 300mm Konica GRII, but the 210mm is reported to be a 6/6 design. So yes, it is likely the same design and offers similar coverage to some Computars and Graphic-Kowas, the question is, which ones?

Kerry

 

[jimgalli]

I'll add to the confusion. I have a 310mm GRII (yes it clearly states 310mm) that covers my 8X20 and is tack sharp corner to corner.

 

[eric]

You guys are going to start driving the prices up on these. SchwinParamount told me he can get these bad boys for under a sawbuck up in Seattle.

 

[Paolo Frunzio]

I'll add to the confusion. I have a 310mm GRII (yes it clearly states 310mm) that covers my 8X20 and is tack sharp corner to corner.

Hi Jimgalli,
I'm going to buy a 310mm GRII..
basicaly it would be for my 16"x20" (40x50cm.)
my question is: which image circle you have with your Konica Hexanon GR II lens, 310mm f9 ?
thankyou,
Paolo

 

[Dan Fromm]

Paolo, 40 x 50's diagonal is 640 mm. A 310 mm lens that covers 640 mm at infinity has to cover 92 degrees. I doubt any modern process lens will do what you want.

 

[Ian Grant]

Paolo, 40 x 50's diagonal is 640 mm. A 310 mm lens that covers 640 mm at infinity has to cover 92 degrees. I doubt any modern process lens will do what you want.

While 150mm f9 Hexanon GRII covers 10x8 the image diagonal of the 300mm is only about 36cm diagonal at Infinity so I think your right Dan that the 310 may not have much more coverage unless it's a slightly different design..

Ian

 

[jimgalli]

Paolo, 40 x 50's diagonal is 640 mm. A 310 mm lens that covers 640 mm at infinity has to cover 92 degrees. I doubt any modern process lens will do what you want.

Dan's right Paolo. You're dreaming. It was a stretch on 8X20 but did barely cover. 1620 is a different animal.