Will Nikkor Q 300mm f 9 cover 8x10

[Gaston 012]

I have found a bit of info on this lens but I am not yet 100% convinced it covers 8x10.
I do not need movements so anything over 300 will do.
The coating problem is also a non issue for me.
The Q is lighter than the M and cheaper hence my interest.
Any info will be appreciated.
Thanks

 

[BradS]

Yes. It will cover 8x10 but only barely. It is a four element lens but there is some uncertainty around whether it is four air spaced elements, like a dialyte or Artar, or if it is four elements in three groups like a Tessar / Xenar. There's also some uncertainty around whether it is single or multi-coated.

It should be an excellent lens if you keep the coverage in mind.

 

[Dan Fromm]

There's no uncertainty. It is a tessar type. Look at the catalog.

 

[BradS]

@Dan Fromm Thanks Dan. I don't have the catalog...thus, the uncertainty.
I've always thought that the 300mm f/9 Nikkor-Q was an earlier version of the 300mm f/9 Nikkor-M - which is very certainly a Tessar/Xenar - but never owned the -Q version..so, I fudged.

Anyway, I preferred the Schneider 300mm Xenar.

 

[Gaston 012]

Very good guys, I will try to get one and use f 22 at a minimum and check the corners.
I guess if I get it a good price I can always get most of the $'s back.
What catalog are you talking about Dan, I have 3 and none mentions the Q.Can you send me the link?
Thans a lot to you both and a happy season to all

 

[Dan Fromm]

@Dan Fromm Thanks Dan. I don't have the catalog...thus, the uncertainty.
I've always thought that the 300mm f/9 Nikkor-Q was an earlier version of the 300mm f/9 Nikkor-M - which is very certainly a Tessar/Xenar - but never owned the -Q version..so, I fudged.

Anyway, I preferred the Schneider 300mm Xenar.

Since you're on APUG, sorry, Photrio, you may not be aware of LFPF's resources. One that you need is "the list." The first post in this
https://www.largeformatphotography....to-look-for-information-on-LF-(mainly)-lenses discussion has a link to it. It is a list of links to sources of information on LF lenses and other gear.

 

[BradS]

Since you're on APUG, sorry, Photrio, you may not be aware of LFPF's resources. One that you need is "the list." The first post in this
https://www.largeformatphotography....to-look-for-information-on-LF-(mainly)-lenses discussion has a link to it. It is a list of links to sources of information on LF lenses and other gear.

Dan, I participated on the LFPF for many years. I no longer do however.

 

[Gaston 012]

Actually I did find that link before and went to the Nikon section and downloaded 3 catalogs but never found the Q.I obviously did not do a very good job.
I will try latter today, now cooking early dinner for relatives.
Xmas sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[138S]

Any info

It should deliver sharp corners for 4x5 even if well open. For 5x7 and 8x10" the 300mm won't yield optimal corners until you stop f/22. Still all depends on print size.

Those Q and M tessars sport some field curvature for the focus "plane". This may be noticed in arquitecture shots when wide open, but as DOF is extended from stopping the lens it should be way less noticed. Bokeh in the rear Out Of Focus is a bit in the hard side.

From the low count groups/elements a Tessar has limited choices to correct all well, here the designer's choice has been allowing certain field curvature to allow better corrections for the rest, which is a classic hack for Tessar designs. This resulted in a sound field lens, lightweight and probably well cheaper to manufacture than 300mm plasmats, retail price was the half.

The lack of multicoating won't be much a problem as only 3 groups are there, but illumination circle can be well larger than image circle, potentially generating some flare from internal reflexions, specially if bellows are too compressed or too extended, if the case a compendium shade should be considered.

 

[Gaston 012]

Thank you 138.
Your location "Pyrenees" is a bit large!
I went skiing, my one and only experience at it, in those mountains back in 64, north east of Pamplona, then hiking in the Catalan Pyrenees in 2000.
Between these 2 points there are not many large towns.
Specially towns that are home to speakers of English, with nice vocabularies, ike you.
Thanks a lot for your info, it is well appreciated.
Feliz Navidad

 

[mshchem]

It's so small, takes 52mm filters. I can grab it and a couple holders a light tripod, my 'ol Reliable, Deardorff V8. And get out there. It seems like it resides in a lot of kits from when pros used film.

 

[138S]

then hiking in the Catalan Pyrenees in 2000.

yeah, I've also hiked all that, of course !!!

I'm happy to see you were there !! Aneto ? Bessiberri ? Encantats ? Sant Maurici ? Do you remember one of those ?

 

[DREW WILEY]

It's the single-coated predecessor to the 300M, which will indeed cover 8x10, but with quite limited wiggle room for movements if you expect corner to corner serious sharpness, which this lens series will otherwise deliver. For this reason, plan to use back tilt more than front tilt, and not much rise at all, and of course, you'll need small f-stops to get the most image circle. It would be more suitable for smaller 5X7 and 4x5 format. But I've also used the M version for 6x9 roll film backs due to its superb sharpness in that application. If you need a 300 that small, the Fuji 300 C should give you a little more wiggle room. The 300 Fuji A will give you a lot more, but is scarcer.

 

[Gaston 012]

Thanks Drew, I agree with what your recommendations are but it boils down to price and convenience.
I can get the Q for half the cost of the C and a third of the cost of an A.
I hardly ever use movements in 8x10 since my thing is almost pictorials at infinity.
I have a SUper Symmar XL 110 that does not completely cover but gives tremendously interesting results in 8x10 as a super wide angle, the corner drop off is minor an acceptable.
So, I will go with the Q.

 

[DREW WILEY]

You can still do limited movements with it. It isn't that cramped. It should perform fine for the usage you described.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I used to have the Q, and it does cover 8x10. It eventually was stolen, and was replaced by the M as my broker couldn't find a Q. I wasn't happy at the time, but after using the M, I quickly forgot about the Q. I can use the M on my 14x17. Anyways, you'll be happy with the Q.

 

[Gaston 012]

Thanks that is nice to know.

 

[DREW WILEY]

You have to keep that 14X17 talk in relation to circle of illumination versus circle of acceptable definition at a reasonable f-stop. Contact printers get away with all kinds of things that might be objectionable in even a modest enlargement. For all practical purposes where enlargement is potentially involved, 8X10 format is the size limit of the lens in question.

 

[Gaston 012]

Thanks to all, I bought the Q from Mr. Kumar and its on the way.
These threads stay on the internet forever and, if anyone in the future is successful in finding reliable information on the Q series from Nikon, I would be grateful if it will be posted here.
So far, I have not been able to find any Nikon literature that mentions these lenses.
There are old threads that partially discusses them but the info appears to be "opinions"
In one of these threads the person says he has contacted Nikon and was told that:
1-all Nikon lenses were multicoated after a while
2-The 300 Q is identical to the M but lighter by 2 onz.
3-It has the same coverage than the M
If coated, with at least 300mm circle at f 22 and lighter than the M, then there is no reason to buy the more expensive versions (Fuji c, Nikon M, Fuji A, etc) of the light, f 9 300's.
I will receive the lens in a while and test for coverage on the 8x10 at infinity and report, also will check to see if multi coated or single coated and report here.
Gaston

 

[DREW WILEY]

An educated hunch, yes, but I think Q's were strictly single-coated tessars, just like Fuji L's of the same era. Multi-coating came with M's. There might be shutter differences too in cases. Shouldn't make much difference. With only six air / glass interfaces, you're still going to have excellent micro-contrast and hue rendition. I presume you shade lenses facing the sun, regardless. And yes, please report back; but I think you'll be very pleased with your purchase. Kumar is a good guy.

 

[Gaston 012]

Yes, Kumar is honest, fast and no bull.
I will report but it aint gonna be quick!

 

[md_photo]

You will like it, I have the 300 Q Nikkor and have used it successfully with a Gibellini Bellatrix 810. The lens is indeed very light. The image comes out pretty bright on the 810 ground glass. I have used some rise (few cm maybe, but not sure exactly how much), and haven't critically evaluated edge sharpness.

 

[Gaston 012]

Thank Md, that is reassuring, I have not yet received mine.

 

[Neil Poulsen]

At some point, I'd like to have a 300mm that will cover 8x10. I'll be looking at a Fuji lens that has about a 420mm image circle. The nice thing (for me) about a Fuji 300mm, is that it has a 70mm filter thread.

 

[Gaston 012]

Neil: I know of no Fuji with a 70mm filter in 300mm size, Which one are you referring to?