Optimum Aperture for 150mm G-Claron?????

What would be the optimally sharp aperture for a 150mm
G-Claron? Shooting 30" paintings?


S.

I own this lens, and would recommend shooting it at f/22. I have no
scienfitic data to support this recommendation.

George

"George Stewart" wrote in message
om...
I own this lens, and would recommend shooting it at f/22. I have no
scienfitic data to support this recommendation.

This may support you:
http://www.schneideroptics.com/photo...ron_90_150.pdf

Guillermo

"f/256" wrote in message . cable.rogers.com...
"George Stewart" wrote in message
om...
I own this lens, and would recommend shooting it at f/22. I have no
scienfitic data to support this recommendation.

This may support you:
http://www.schneideroptics.com/photo...ron_90_150.pdf

Guillermo


How does this file say that the sharpest aperture is f22?

I rented this lens and shutter, and took pics at f16, they turned
out terribly fuzzy. So if f22 is the optimum, i find it hard to
believe that one f-stop away could look so bad. Someone at K and S
said that you have to stop way down to f45 with this lens. Maybe so?


Slick

(Dr. Slick) wrote in message . com...
What would be the optimally sharp aperture for a 150mm
G-Claron? Shooting 30" paintings?


S.

Depends on the magnification. At 1:1 probably f11, at infinity focus
it really does not get sharp until f22 and f32, by f64 it gets fuzzy
again due to diffusion of the small f stop (takes a microscope to see
it). The thing is designed as a close up lens between 4:1 and 1:4
magnification ratios. Large (30 inch) paintings will fall outside
that range on 4X5 film. You could of course use it on a 8 X 10 and
get into the range for pictures up close. Don't forget the bellows
factor in determining the exposure. Your other problem will be to get
the film plane parallel with the painting (not a trivial problem).

Good luck. Kirk

There must have been a defect in your rental lens. Mine is tack sharp at all
apertures I've ever used it at, probably F16 and smaller. I doubt that I've
ever used it wide open and maybe haven't used it at F11. I use it as a
general purpose lens, I seldom do real close-ups. I thought about getting
rid of it when I acquired a 135mm lens but the G Claron is so tiny and light
that carrying it around is no problem and I still find a use for it every
now and then.

The design of G Clarons is such that coverage continues to increase as it's
stopped down and with some focal lengths on some formats (e.g. the 210 on
8x10) it's necessary to stop down a couple stops to cover the format. I
don't think that's true of the 150 on 4x5 but I don't offhand remember the
coverage specs. I also don't see anything in the link here that says it's at
its best at F22 but maybe I missed something.

"Dr. Slick" wrote in message
om...
"f/256" wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...
"George Stewart" wrote in message
om...
I own this lens, and would recommend shooting it at f/22. I have no
scienfitic data to support this recommendation.

This may support you:

http://www.schneideroptics.com/photo...ron_90_150.pdf

Guillermo


How does this file say that the sharpest aperture is f22?

I rented this lens and shutter, and took pics at f16, they turned
out terribly fuzzy. So if f22 is the optimum, i find it hard to
believe that one f-stop away could look so bad. Someone at K and S
said that you have to stop way down to f45 with this lens. Maybe so?


Slick

(Kirk Fry) wrote in message . com...
(Dr. Slick) wrote in message . com...
What would be the optimally sharp aperture for a 150mm
G-Claron? Shooting 30" paintings?


S.

Depends on the magnification. At 1:1 probably f11, at infinity focus
it really does not get sharp until f22 and f32, by f64 it gets fuzzy
again due to diffusion of the small f stop (takes a microscope to see
it). The thing is designed as a close up lens between 4:1 and 1:4
magnification ratios. Large (30 inch) paintings will fall outside
that range on 4X5 film.


I told the people at KS that my art was from 8.5"x11" up to
3'x4'.

They and many here have recommended a G-Claron 150mm for this
size work, so i don't think this was it.

I might rent it out again, and do a more thorough analysis.

S.

(Dr. Slick) wrote in message om...
(Kirk Fry) wrote in message . com...
(Dr. Slick) wrote in message . com...
What would be the optimally sharp aperture for a 150mm
G-Claron? Shooting 30" paintings?


S.

Depends on the magnification. At 1:1 probably f11, at infinity focus
it really does not get sharp until f22 and f32, by f64 it gets fuzzy
again due to diffusion of the small f stop (takes a microscope to see
it). The thing is designed as a close up lens between 4:1 and 1:4
magnification ratios. Large (30 inch) paintings will fall outside
that range on 4X5 film.


I told the people at KS that my art was from 8.5"x11" up to
3'x4'.

They and many here have recommended a G-Claron 150mm for this
size work, so i don't think this was it.

I might rent it out again, and do a more thorough analysis.

S.

Dr. S,

My answer may have sounded too negative. If I were doing the job for
the paintings that is the lens I would choose (unless you have
infinite $ and can afford a large format macro-copy lens.) This lens
design is pretty forgiving of being slightly outside the design range.
I have several G-clarons and they are superb lenses. You just have
to stop them down to f22 at infinity focus (landscapes outside), you
will not be at infinity for the paintings. Go ahead and try one.
There are lots of process lenses out there too that would work but
they don't have shutters.

Kirk

I use my 150G on both 4x5 and 5x7. Great lens, lightweight with a
goodly amount of coverage. I generally use this lens at f22 and more
than pleased with the results.

- Mike


On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:00:23 GMT, "BCampbell"
wrote:

There must have been a defect in your rental lens. Mine is tack sharp at all
apertures I've ever used it at, probably F16 and smaller. I doubt that I've
ever used it wide open and maybe haven't used it at F11. I use it as a
general purpose lens, I seldom do real close-ups. I thought about getting
rid of it when I acquired a 135mm lens but the G Claron is so tiny and light
that carrying it around is no problem and I still find a use for it every
now and then.

The design of G Clarons is such that coverage continues to increase as it's
stopped down and with some focal lengths on some formats (e.g. the 210 on
8x10) it's necessary to stop down a couple stops to cover the format. I
don't think that's true of the 150 on 4x5 but I don't offhand remember the
coverage specs. I also don't see anything in the link here that says it's at
its best at F22 but maybe I missed something.

"Dr. Slick" wrote in message
. com...
"f/256" wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
"George Stewart" wrote in message
om...
I own this lens, and would recommend shooting it at f/22. I have no
scienfitic data to support this recommendation.

This may support you:

http://www.schneideroptics.com/photo...ron_90_150.pdf

Guillermo


How does this file say that the sharpest aperture is f22?

I rented this lens and shutter, and took pics at f16, they turned
out terribly fuzzy. So if f22 is the optimum, i find it hard to
believe that one f-stop away could look so bad. Someone at K and S
said that you have to stop way down to f45 with this lens. Maybe so?


Slick

(Kirk Fry) wrote in message m...

Dr. S,

My answer may have sounded too negative. If I were doing the job for
the paintings that is the lens I would choose (unless you have
infinite $ and can afford a large format macro-copy lens.)


Just out of curiousity, what sort of large format macro-copy
lenses could you or anyone else recommend?



This lens
design is pretty forgiving of being slightly outside the design range.
I have several G-clarons and they are superb lenses. You just have
to stop them down to f22 at infinity focus (landscapes outside), you
will not be at infinity for the paintings. Go ahead and try one.
There are lots of process lenses out there too that would work but
they don't have shutters.

Kirk

Like i said, if f22 is the sweet spot up close, i find it hard
to believe that my f16 pics turned out so blurry.


S.