On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 12:14:22 -0700, Cheesehead wrote:

On Mar 14, 1:18Â*am, Stefan Patric wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 13:06:28 -0700, Cheesehead wrote:
On Mar 13, 3:16Â*pm, Stefan Patric wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 10:49:06 -0700, Cheesehead wrote:
If you were to pick a lens from 400 to 500mm, what would you
choose? 8x10 coverage with modest movement is adequate. I prefer
something in a shutter & synced.

What are you going to use the lens for? Â*General photography? Â*Table
top/ still life? Â*Portraits? Â*Flat art copy work? Â*Etc. Â*You want a
new one or will used do? Â*How modest the movements? Â*What's your
budget?

Stef

Well, I shoot portraits and landscapes. Â*No closeup/macro type
movement. For movements, a little rise or all seems to be all I ever
use. Budget -- let's keep it under $800

Of the "modern" lenses, I can think of two that might work for you:

Fujinon 420mm f8 L-series, #3 Copal shutter, 60 degree coverage, IIRC,
which gave it a decent range of movements. Â*It was a modern computer
design of the classic Tessar (4 elements in 3 groups). Â*AFAIK, no
longer made. Â*So, only available used. Â*Not all that popular because of
the 60 degree coverage when it was new 20 to 30 years ago. Â*So, you
should be able to get one for well less than your budget.

Nikon made a 450mm Apo-Tessar (f11??) around the same time, but it was
optimized for a 1:5 reproduction ratio (not infinity like general
purpose lenses). Â*It was best for table top, product and copy work, but
was fine at infinity if stopped down. Â*VERY sharp, probably too sharp
for portraits without a softening filter of some sort.

Stef

On the other hand, I recently picked up a big old Fujinon-W 300/5.6 in a
Copal 3.
So any lens cells that I can just plug into it will be a money saver.

Strange as it may sound, many times there is little cost differential
between just the cells, and cells with shutter. For my money, having a
couple extra shutters around just in case is a good thing.

Stef