Izu kenru lens

[fujinonA]

This famous jap. photographer use a Deardorff 14x20 camera(probably the only one ever made on this format).
I could see on a mag time ago a pic of hime with his equipment , he use an old Kodak lens (maybe) .In some pictures it's seems that the lens is covering the format and in another pictures not (vignetting ) as you can see on his very nice web-site:

http://www.kenroizu.com/html/G_portfolio_sp14.html

I'm just curious to know what kind of lens he uses (I don't wnat to bother him asking directly...I'm tooo shy..eh!eh!)

 

[jd callow]

I can't help you with the lens, but the vignetting appeared to be caused by applying too much rise.

 

[Mateo]

I was going to guess the same thing but then there's an image with the subject closer than infinity and the vignetting appears in the lower corners as well. So...my guess is that A: he uses more than one kind of lens or B: he adds a little kick to the corners in printing. I doubt it's B.

 

[Donald Miller]

It appears that the problem is vignetting when he uses a wide angle lens on the 14X20 format. Then the other lens seems to be more normal for the format. I wonder if the 355 G Claron will cover 14X20. I know that it does cover 12X20. Not too much lens selection when you cover that much real estate. The air becomes pretty rarified.

 

[Michael Mutmansky]

Donald,

I don't think it will. It has about 1 to 1-1/2" of rist available when stopped way down, so I think it is not likely that it will give a full image on 14x20. But it will come close.

The 450 Nikkor will cover I think, as will the 600 Fuji, and the rest that will cover are probably older lenses for days gone by.

At less than infinity, there will be a whole host of lenses that willl cover, depending on how close you are talking about.

---Michael

 

[John Koehrer]

if a lens covers a 20" horizontal dimension. why wouldn't it cover a 14" vertical?

 

[Jorge]

if a lens covers a 20" horizontal dimension. why wouldn't it cover a 14" vertical?

because what is important is the diagonal coverage. If the diameter of the circle is 20 inches, then half of that would be 10 inches and it wont cover. It is simple geometry. If you make sure the lens convers the diagonal then it will cover both the horizontal and vertical dimensions.

The Nikkor 450 wont cover 14x20, it covers 12x20 with about an inch an a half of movement up or down, 2 inches and you start seeing vignette, I have plenty of negs that have this.

IMO I would rather mask the vignete than show a print with vignetted corners, I think that is sloppy printing, but to each its own.

 

[jd callow]

IMO I would rather mask the vignete than show a print with vignetted corners, I think that is sloppy printing, but to each its own.

It is really annoying when you see 'professional architectural photographs' with vignetting. It is somewhat understandable if not undesirable when the poor hobbiest (sp) or artist does it, but pro's charge big bucks and have no excuses.

 

[fujinonA]

..."It is really annoying when you see 'professional architectural photographs' with vignetting. ...."

This is not considereted a mistake, just a way of another language (maybe a sort of emulation of Atget 's pictures).
I remember that the Japanese photographer used a 50 years old lens and he was not concerned on the sharpeness of his prints .Using a modern lens with a 8x10 format enlarged to a 14x20 is much sharper than it's prints , he said...