Graflex.org

[essessem]

I've got a Crown Graphic with Ektar 203mm and Optar 135mm (coating pretty worn) that I want to shoot trannies of artwork with. Not sure about the optimal focal length for this type of work--largest typical subject could be, say, 8 x 10 feet. I know I need a coated lens, figuring a Schneider or Zeiss is best. Also, I'd need a lens with exceptional coverage. Any ideas anyone?

[ This Message was edited by: essessem on 2003-02-27 11:47 ]

[Nick]

[Les]

I've got a Schneider Componon S 150mm in a shutter. Normally you think of these as enlgarging lenses but when you think about it, emenem will have an 8x10 piece of paper on the table, and a 4x5 sheet of film above the lens. He's just switched which part of the equation is sensitive to light.

I paid $150 for mine on ebay a couple of years ago.

Les

[essessem]

Nick:
By 'coverage' I just meant clear focus/no vignetting over entire image. Also, I just saw that someone has an enlarging Ektar & would consider this over a Schneider. I have a 203 Ektar in an Kodak shutter that someone once told me was for photographing flat work, but I'm not sure how to tell if this is so.

Les:
For what it's worth, I'll be shooting artwork that's 8x10 FEET max, not inches (2x3 foot min.) Do you still think 150mm enlarger lens is best or do you agree with Nick about the 210mm?

Thanks to ya both

[ This Message was edited by: essessem on 2003-02-27 11:46 ]

[Les]

Dang, I either have to get better glasses or a better monitor!

I'd go with a 210 If i were shooting with a Crown. If I had a monorail (with a longer bellows) then I'd go longer-- in the 250-270 range. This gets me away from the object and allows the lights to work without getting flare in the camera. Use the longest lens shade possible. Remember the farther away the lights are the more even the light becomes, which is why when I worked in a studio we used 2000 watt lights hung on the 12 foot ceiling for copying 8x10 INCH work.

[Nick]

My reason for suggesting 210mm is that normal process lens tend to have narrow coverage. With a 210mm you'll get enough to cover a 4x5 and enough left over for some movements. Plus in the 210mm size they tend to be cheaper.

You could get a wide field process lens but these often are more money. They cost more since a 210mm wide process lens can often cover 8x10 with movements. They also tend to be built to a lower standard then the normal process lens. So unless you intend to use the lens on an 8x10 later then the normal process lens would be fine.

The only real issue is the shutter.

You should be able to find a similar lens to the one in the link without the shutter for 10% of the new price if you buy used and are patient.

http://www.rodenstockoptics.de/rodenstockoptics/standard_products/photo_optics/prof_phot_lenses/apo_ronar.htm

Just remember the ones in barrels won't have shutters. Plenty of process lens are floating around. They used to used in process cameras.

[clnfrd]

This may be a silly question...but why are these posts so wide I have to scroll horizontally to be able to read them? Fred.

[Nick]

I bet it's the link I posted. Sorry.

[clnfrd]

Thanks, Nick....I thought it may be this boat anchor AKA a Compaq Presario. Fred.

[Les]

maybe we all need to buy wide-field monitors.