APO-Ronar 480 for 8x10 Portrait

[Ben Diss]

What's everyone's opinion of this lens for portrait work? It's the 480mm, f9, single coated lens in Copal 1. I wish it were faster, particularly for the price. Any opinions?

-Ben

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Do you have this lens or are you considering buying one? AFAIK they are all single coated - no real need to multicoat a apochromatic process lens.

I have one in barrel mount (no shutter). It is a process lens which also works well at infinity - this attribute makes it a very useable lens for landscapes. I personally wouldn't use mine as a portrait lens but, if the effects please you - why not?

 

[Ben Diss]

I bought it, but I can return if I choose. I'm not familiar with process lenses. This is why I'm asking. I will not have an opportunity to test the lens for a few weeks.

In a Copal 1, would you think it would be a good portrait lens?

-Ben

 

[raucousimages]

I have this lens in copal 3, it is great for some close up portraits I shoot with a shallow dof.

 

[JG Motamedi]

I don't understand, how could this lens fit into a Copal 1 shutter? It is far too big.

 

[Ben Diss]

No, you're right. It's Copal 3. I typed too fast there.

 

[Ben Diss]

I wonder if I'd do better with a 450mm Nikkor-M f9?

 

[df cardwell]

I wonder if I'd do better with a 450mm Nikkor-M f9?

As far as the film is concerned, they are about the same.

The Artar/Ronar... etc. has the signature of being slightly low contrast ( this is not a bad thing ) with true colors and extremely high resolution. It has a narrow field of view: a 240 would not, for instance, cover 8x10. It has been a traditionally desirable lens for shooting 8x10, coupled with a 230 - 250 wide coverage lens like a dagor or wf ektar.

The M Nikkor is the most highly developed of the apo-tessar type lenses, and has a slightly higher contrast than the Ronar.

In use, either needs to be mastered for portraits. They can easily be too cruel until you learn to see as they do, and use gentle lighting and careful development.

In the old days, these lenses were avoided for portraiture because the lighting was usually too harsh and every little flaw was exaggerated. Today, with faster films, a general philosophy toward lower contrast negatives, and larger, softer light sources, it is commonplace to use these lenses for people.

One pleasant characteristic of the Artar/Ronar is that they are easy to use wide open: the image is clear enough to compose and focus, and even shoot. F/9 is fast for a 480 !

You have a perfect lens. The Nikkor needs a master's touch to control it, and even then, may tend to be too harsh. The Ronar will be splendid for you.

 

[JG Motamedi]

DF Cardwell's comments are excellent. One concern with using this lens for portraits is its length: Do you have enough bellows?

 

[Ben Diss]

I dunno. I bought a Deardorff, but it hasn't arrived yet.

 

[marko_trebusak]

Do you have this lens or are you considering buying one? AFAIK they are all single coated - no real need to multicoat a apochromatic process lens.

Tom, is your comment specific for 480 APO Ronar? I'm asking because I have 300 mm version, that clearly have "MC" engraved. And I love that lens, but I do agree with you too sharp for portrait IMO.

Marko

 

[df cardwell]

A 480 on a Deardorff ? Perfect. Tons of bellows extension.

You can soften the image by contact printing with a sheet of diffusion medium ( like white plastic ) over your glass.

Or, as needed, use the old 'piece of black silk stocking' over the lens. Etc., etc.

 

[Ben Diss]

Still, I keep thinking about the Nikkor-M 450mm...

If you could only have one long lens--either the Nikkor-M 450mm or the Apo-Ronar 480mm--which would you prefer?

For portaiture?

For landscape, still life, etc.?

-Ben

 

[df cardwell]

Welcome to Metaphysical Doubt.

The two lenses are similar in purpose, so they will be similar in results.

Until you've shot one with masterful technique and refined vision, you won't know how to compare them. Then you'll see that if you want a different signature, you'll choose a VERY different lens to get it. Stop fretting. We've all become too occupied with getting the One Right Answer. Photography, 35mm or 8x10, isn't like that. There are LOTS OF RIGHT ANSWERS.... and it is all up to you.

The Apo Ronar is a superb choice.

 

[JG Motamedi]

... If you could only have one long lens ... which would you prefer? ...

The one I already have.

 

[Ben Diss]

Argh. It is so painful. Thank you though. I do appreciate your thoughts.

I spent the day shooting 4x5 at the Bronx Botanical Gardens. I wish I had just a bitty bit more rail for close-ups with the 300mm. I wish I had a bag bellows so I could use my new 80mm to it's fullest. I wish I had better luck getting that darned butterfly to hold still until the wind died down. Strangely enough, the lens most used today was my trusty 150mm cheapie Nikkor. Damn fine lens.

Wish I had a good backpack.

Metaphysical Doubt? Yep, that's me.

-Ben

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Wish I had a good backpack.

-Ben

Try the Kelty Redwing 3100. That's what I use to carry my 8x10, lenses, film holders, BlackJacket, etc. It has an excellent suspension system and internal frame - weighs about 3 1/2 pounds empty.

 

[Ben Diss]

Tom, that pack was suggested and I sought it out and bought one. It turns out my torso is just too tall for that bag and I had to return it. My kit currently lives in a Lightware MF1217. The insert fits perfectly into the Kelty so I'm double-bummed about having to return it.

Thanks anyway.

-Ben