260mm Nikkor Q same as 260mm Process Nikkor?

Discussion in 'Ultra Large Format Cameras and Accessories' started by ReallyBigCameras, Mar 16, 2007.

  1. ReallyBigCameras

    ReallyBigCameras Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    539
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I posted this over on the large format forum, but haven't received any responses. Since I know there are a number of ULF shooters here, I thought I'd seek the collective wisdom of the APUG community.

    Gentlemen,

    Does anyone know if these are the same lenses with different names, but equal coverage?

    260mm f10 Nikkor Q
    260mm f10 Process Nikkor

    I have heard they are the same lens, but am looking for confirmation. Based on photos, the 260mm Nikkor Q appears to be older ("inside" lettering) than the 260mm Process Nikkor (lettering around the "outside" of the front barrel). Other than that, they look very similar in the photos. However, photos tell me nothing about lens design/construction or performance.

    I'm not so concerned about the age as I am the performance and coverage. I've read several times that the 260mm Process Nikkor will cover 7x17 and am hoping the 260mm Nikkor Q will as well.

    Thanks,
    Kerry
     
  2. sanking

    sanking Member

    Messages:
    4,813
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2003
    Location:
    Greenville,
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I am almost positive they are the same design, and I think you are right in that the Process Nikkor is the newer specimen. I have held both in my hands, but only tested the Process Nikkor. It covered 7X17, but not by a lot.

    There is also a 270mm G-Claron wide-angle process lens that will cover 7X17, though not with lot of movement. The 240mm version will also, but just barely. The 210mm G-Claron wide angle will not cover 7X17.

    From the looks of these lenses I think they are all based closely on the old Topogon/Metrogon design, similar to Biogon. Good lenses but the angle of coverage is no more than about 90 degrees. You can figure coverage for any focal length from that.

    Because of their size and problems in mounting in modern shutters these are not the best choices for ULF work, IMHO.

    Sandy King
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 16, 2007
  3. ReallyBigCameras

    ReallyBigCameras Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    539
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Sandy,

    Thanks for the response. I just picked up a like new, unused, in-the-box 260mm Nikkor Q (well, I just bought it, but I don't have it in my hands yet, probably late next week). I plan to give it a try on 7x17. If it covers 90 degress, that would be a 520mm image circle at infinity and I can live with that for what this lens is costing me. Even if it only covers 85 degrees it will hit the corners of 7x17, but won't leave much for movements.

    As far as the shutter goes, I plan on using a fair number of barrel mounted lenses on my ULF cameras. So, I rigged up a Sinar shutter for the front standard. It's a lot more economical that looking for lenses already in shutters and cost far less than the cost of having a single barrel lens mounted in a Copal No. 3 shutter. Unless the 260mm Nikkor Q has a huge rear element (which it might - I do believe it's rather bulbous - which is OK as long as it isn't too big around), I should be able to use it with the Sinar shutter set-up.

    Kerry
     
  4. sanking

    sanking Member

    Messages:
    4,813
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2003
    Location:
    Greenville,
    Shooter:
    Large Format

    Kerry,

    Both the front and rear elements of this lens are fairly large, and quite bulbous. Same with the G-Claron wide angle lenses. You really have to be careful with them because the lens on the back sticks out so far that if you place it down there is nothing to protect it since the glass extends well beyond the metal in which it rests. And scratches will be in the very worst place, i.e. right in the center of the lens.



    Sandy
     
  5. ReallyBigCameras

    ReallyBigCameras Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    539
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Sandy,

    The one I'm getting comes with both original caps and teh original wooden box. Hopefully that caps will be adaquate to protect the front and rear glass.

    I found some more info online at:

    260mm f 10 Procces Nikkor

    260mm f10 Nikkor-Q

    If you scroll about half way down this page, you will see a photo of a 260mm f10 Nikkor-Q that looks identical to the one I'll be getting

    Also from this page: "This lens is the first model of Process Nikkor series."

    So, I remain hopeful that the design/construction and coverage are identical to the 260mm f10 Process Nikkor. From reading multiple threads here on APUG, if it is the same design, it should cover 7x17, but not much more.

    Kerry
     
  6. ReallyBigCameras

    ReallyBigCameras Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    539
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Just a little side note on my interest in this lens. I shoot quite a bit of 4x10 and my two favorite focal lengths are 150mm and 210mm on that format. On 7x17, a 260mm focal length is the closest approximation to the 150mm I prefer on 4x10. Other than the 240mm and 270mm Computars, there aren't a lot of other choices in this focal length range capable of covering 7x17

    Getting a 7x17 equivalent of the 210mm on 4x10 is much easier. There are plenty of 355/360mm lenses suitable for the task.

    Kerry
     
  7. richard ide

    richard ide Member

    Messages:
    1,224
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Location:
    Wellington C
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have one of the newer ones. The caps are aluminum and about 3/4" deep as both front and rear elements protrude about 8mm from the housing. I made a dedicated lens board for my Cambo which needs a 1/2" spacer behind the mounting flange so the lens is flush with the back of the board.
     
  8. ReallyBigCameras

    ReallyBigCameras Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    539
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Richard,

    What formats do you shoot with yours? How do you like the performance?

    Thanks,
    Kerry
     
  9. richard ide

    richard ide Member

    Messages:
    1,224
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Location:
    Wellington C
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi Kerry,

    So far just 4 x 5 and 8 x 10. Very sharp but minimum aperature of f32. So far I have only played with it a little. I have a bad case of hardware aquisition syndrome and not enough time. I am building a packard shutter into the front of my Cambo which will allow me to mount a lens board on the front.
     
  10. pelerin

    pelerin Member

    Messages:
    343
    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The barrel has a slot so the minimum aperture could be reduced by using waterhouse stops. (e.g.: http://www.skgrimes.com/thisweek/9-14-05/index.htm & http://www.skgrimes.com/thisweek/2-27-04/index.htm) I assume the relatively large minimum aperture must represent a design consideration, (limiting diffraction?) which may be less critical when the lens is re-purposed.
    Celac
     
  11. Emile de Leon

    Emile de Leon Member

    Messages:
    95
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2003
    Location:
    Middletown c
    Hi Kerry,
    I have the Nikon 260mm f10, actually 2 of them, make sure to use the metal lens hood that comes with it as the elements are quite vulerable like Sandy said. The lens is amazingly sharp corner to corner on 7x17 even wide open. Better than any lens I've ever had in this regard. The only problem is f32 is the smallest f stop you can go. I sent one of these lenses to be mounted in shutter by SK Grimes but they couldn't pull it off even though on their website they indicate they can. On some they can do this but sometimes the elements can't be removed like on mine. I really like the aperture control, very quick and easy to use and smooth as butter. I use a hat as a shutter. These lenses are really, really sharp. Emile/www.deleon-ulf.com.
     
  12. richard ide

    richard ide Member

    Messages:
    1,224
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Location:
    Wellington C
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I just double checked my lens sn#509931 and there is no slot. All the rest of my Apo Nikkors have them. Interesting and a disappointment.
     
  13. Harrigan

    Harrigan Member

    Messages:
    342
    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Location:
    Shenadoah Va
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I have owned both of these lenses at one time. I would make a guess that they are the same lens but since I dont have either of them now its hard to say. If I remember correctly both were good for 11x14 coverage but only just barely.
     
  14. pelerin

    pelerin Member

    Messages:
    343
    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hmm.
    I'm not surprised that the Process Nikkor barrel is different from that of the Apo Nikkor as the lenses are quite different. It would seem from your predicament (and from Emile's post) that perhaps they come in more than one style of barrel. I have a motley collection of process lenses ranging from about 4" to about 30". The tinyest artar has no slot but other otherwise it seems that the ones salvaged from horizontal cameras have the slot and the ones from vertical cameras do not. I have a 210 and have seen several 260's. All (to memory) have had the slot for inserting discs at the nodal point. However, it is my understanding that they were intended to be used in a vertical camera application. (Hence the wide coverage at short focal lengths) I will have to re-examine the samples I have access to.
    Celac