Coverage of 165mm Super Angulon?

[Gene McCluney]

The 165mm Super Angulon...will it cover 8x10?

[Ole Tjugen]

Yes.

[Gene McCluney]

Yes.

Is there any wiggle-room for movements?

[tim atherton]

Is there any wiggle-room for movements?

stacks

http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/super-angulon/data/8-165mm.html

about 3" rise/fall I think

(you know it's not a small lens though, don't you?)

[Gene McCluney]

stacks

http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/super-angulon/data/8-165mm.html

about 3" rise/fall I think

(you know it's not a small lens though, don't you?)

Yes, I know it is a big lens. 8x10 is a big format. Not concerned about the size, my 8x10 has 7" square lensboards.

[tim atherton]

it's the 3 1/2lbs as well... I have one, but I only tend to take it out when I really know I will need it. Otherwise the 6.5" Dagor goes in the bag

[Lachlan 717]

Old thread, I know.

Anyway, I'm interested to know if these will cover ULF, namely 11x14 and 7x17".

Some conflicting information out there…

Thanks in advance!

[Len Middleton]

Lachlan,

You might find this current thread of interest as it deals with published image circle versus usable on ULF: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?101573-Curious-Minds-%96-Image-Circle-Circle-of-Illumination-ULF-and-Contact-Prints

Hope that helps,

Len

[Lachlan 717]

Thanks, Len.

Actually, reading that thread is what made me ask.

Its contention is fine: many lenses cover more than specified.

In addition, threads like this one (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?14330-7x17-lenses) give specifics.

The trouble comes when someone claims a given lens will cover format X and there is no information/linking to substantiate the claim.

This is the case with the 165mm SA. I have read a claim that it does cover 11x14, so was hoping for an anecdotal confirmation or dismissal.

[Len Middleton]

Lachlan,

I share some of the same concerns, in that there is a lot of claims being made, and as Dan noted in the other thread often by those selling lenses.

The Internet contains a great many opinions and some facts, understanding what is opinion and what is fact can difficult, beyond what those who make the lenses and are prepared to put their claims in writing on data / spec sheets.

The result is we either test or go on hearsay. I have little time or surplus money available to photograph as-is, without investing in testing as well. Like many others I expect I will follow hearsay, but pay close attention as to who is talking.

Good luck,

Len

[E. von Hoegh]

Len, http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/super-angulon/data/8-165mm.html

[Oren Grad]

Lachlan - I have a 165 SA that I intend to try on 11x14. I have put it on the camera and from the GG it looks as though it will just cover when stopped down, but I haven't exposed any film yet.

EDIT: An afterthought - I'm sure the falloff will be substantial, and I'm not sure how comfortable I'll be with that. I recently got a center filter for my 120 SA for use on 8x10, because the falloff bothered me enough when pushing that lens to the limit. Alas, the CF for the 165 is frightfully expensive, so with that lens I'll either live with the falloff or retreat to something a bit longer.

[Lachlan 717]

Lachlan - I have a 165 SA that I intend to try on 11x14. I have put it on the camera and from the GG it looks as though it will just cover when stopped down, but I haven't exposed any film yet.

EDIT: An afterthought - I'm sure the falloff will be substantial, and I'm not sure how comfortable I'll be with that. I recently got a center filter for my 120 SA for use on 8x10, because the falloff bothered me enough when pushing that lens to the limit. Alas, the CF for the 165 is frightfully expensive, so with that lens I'll either live with the falloff or retreat to something a bit longer.

Thanks, Oren. I'll defer to your findings!

(By the way, as you're currently on post #3,999, congratulations on the impending 4,000th post!!)

[Len Middleton]

Len, http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/super-angulon/data/8-165mm.html

EvH,

Actually it is Lachlan who would be looking for that information.

I have the non-SA version (165mm / f6.8) for my 8x10, but even if the 165 SA would cover 8x20 is much too wide for my vision on 8x20. The 355mm is close to the wide end of my vision there.

Thanks for your efforts to help,

Len

[Oren Grad]

(By the way, as you're currently on post #3,999, congratulations on the impending 4,000th post!!)

:eek:

Makes me feel as old and decrepit as some of my cameras!

[Lachlan 717]

Old thread, resurrected.

In the period since I posted this,has anyone had cause to use the 165mm on either 11x1 or 7x17”?

I’m looking for a WA for my 8x10” and would love it if this killed two birds with one stone.

(Sorry to bri g this up again, Oren. You’re double plus 4000 ow)

[John Layton]

...very curious to hear (and possibly see!) results of the above (165 w/11x14 - 7x17). Even a bit of vignetting/edge softness could look really interesting and work well for certain subjects.

[neil poulsen]

Image circle of the 165mm SA is 395 at f22. The diagonal of an 11x14 image is 452mm. The diagonal of 7x17 is 466.

Maybe . . . at very small apertures, this lens might cover???

[MAubrey]

Image circle of the 165mm SA is 395 at f22. The diagonal of an 11x14 image is 452mm. The diagonal of 7x17 is 466.

Maybe . . . at very small apertures, this lens might cover???
The 120mm SA is well known for covering 8x10 despite official specs otherwise, I believe the hope is that the same is true for the 165.

[Mark Sampson]

I occasionally used one on the job in the 80s-90s. It did throw a huge image circle on 8x10, and it was quite sharp, but we didn't use any larger formats. If it will cover any of those, it will be an extremely wide view.

[Lachlan 717]

Thanks, Mark.

I don’t have access to one at the moment, otherwise I would do the obvious and throw it on the 7x17.

It would probably replace the 210mm, so I could crop somewhat, but I do love ultra wide!

[rawitz]

Thanks, Mark.

I don’t have access to one at the moment, otherwise I would do the obvious and throw it on the 7x17.

It would probably replace the 210mm, so I could crop somewhat, but I do love ultra wide!

I use a SA165MC on my 9x15`ULF - and it covers easily the 425mm or 17` IC with very good sharpness in the corners at f22. I even can shift up for 25mm/1`for illumination. So for your 7x17 ULF maybe you have minimal dark corners.
The SA165 MC is a widely underrated lens. I prefer it to the SS150XL.

regards
Rainer

[Greg]

Consider a 15.5cm or 18cm Jos. Schneider & Co Kreuznach Weitwinkel Anastigmat Dasykar f:12.5 lens. They are very small optics and quite sharp when stopped down. Never owned the 15.5cm optic, but did own the 13cm and 18cm optics. Stopped down the 18cm covered 11x14. Another rarely seen optic is a 5.9" No. 5 Gray Periscope. Stopped down it covers 11x14 with a little bit of movement possible. Several times I used the 5.9" Gray on my 8x10 for architectural shots that required front rise. Acquired this optic in a barrel mount and had SK Grimes mount it into a Copal shutter, which was quite a challenge in my opinion.

[Daniel Unkefer]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51824658184_1acf26cc42_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mXyVko)Sinar Norma 8x10 Overhead Reflex Rig (https://flic.kr/p/2mXyVko) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

I've been using this area as a work table and catch-all. Today it is cleaned off and ready to start using for photography. My 8x10 Reflex Sinar Norma 165mm F8 Norma Super Angulon Norma Shutter Norma Copy Stand. FOBA Combitubes to the right. I put two pieces of wood together makes a super steady base. Camera is solid and I have Norma 5x7 and Norma 4x5 Reducing backs for this camera. An ideal basis for an overhead shooting table. I can even attach the camera upside down to a ceiling rafter for really wide shooting. This is going to be fun. FOBA DIMIL sweep table to the far left, I need to get some thick flexible white plex then I can underlight with it. So I'm shooting closeups with the 165mm F8 Super Angulon, I believe this covers 11x14 according to the original specs which I have. Have never run out of image circle with this; I have even used it for 4x5 and it is outstandiing