What are the 8x10 all-stars?

[olwick]

Hi,

Considering moving up to 8x10. What are the superstar lenses for an 8x10 system? (ones that are still readily available, not unobtainable exotics, please). Wide, normal, slightly longer than portrait telephoto.

Thanks,

Mark

[cdholden]

This looks like another "what lens do I buy?" thread.
Plenty of lenses have plenty of documentation. Go do some basic reading, then you'll have a better knowledge base to ask specific questions later.

[olwick]

Thank you for such a kind and helpful response. The insight I was seeking was around things not documented. You can only learn so much from MTF charts, etc.

[evan clarke]

Go to the lf homepage and check the lens charts for 8x10.. The list includes only modern lenses and there are really no terrible lenses. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF8x10in.html

[goamules]

Thank you for such a kind and helpful response. The insight I was seeking was around things not documented. You can only learn so much from MTF charts, etc.

He answered in a short and helpful way to a vague question. So, you want a list? It's out there. And you're still being vague; "...things not documented."

Didn't we ask for more specific questions a year ago?
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?75264

[Frank Petronio]

The latest Rodenstock Sironar-S and Schneider APO-Symmar-L lenses are the best all-arounders. Buy new or mint, if you are super critical buy three of the same and test, return the two worst. Not the cheapest way but it leaves no doubts.

On a budget, pick up a 14" Kodak Commercial Ektar in a large No. 5 Acme shutter or 1980s-era 360/6.8 Schneider Symmar-S in a Copal 3 (more speeds, newer). Also get a 240/5.6 Schneider Symmar-S or APO or L or a later 90s Rodenstock Sironar-N.

Don't pay more than $500 for either lens in excellent condition.

Then later, you can dick around with old brass lenses and all the portrait/soft focus BS people can be enamored of. Or tiny "backpacking" lenses, whatever....

[adam satushek]

The latest Rodenstock Sironar-S and Schneider APO-Symmar-L lenses are the best all-arounders.

....I would own only these for 8x10, especially Sironar-S's, if money was no object. Have a Sironar-S 150mm and Apo-Symmar (non L) 210mm for 4x5 and they are excellent, probably may most used and favorite lenses for 4x5. Its my understanding that the longer versions (that cover 8x10) are scaled up versions.....which I take to mean they are also excellent. Otherwise, I have been very happy Nikkors, the 450 M is great for 8x10 in my opinion.

[Bill_1856]

I think the best compromise between reasonable price and stunning performance are the Schneider Symmar-S (Multicoated). The later Symmar lenses aren't really any better, just redesigned to allow manufacture with enviromental restrictions (no lead in the glass, etc).
Another great (less expensive) option are the Kodak Commercial Ektars, which are basically Tessar designs with only 6 air/glass interfaces, so multicoating isn't really important.

[adam satushek]

I think the best compromise between reasonable price and stunning performance are the Schneider Symmar-S (Multicoated). The later Symmar lenses aren't really any better, just redesigned to allow manufacture with enviromental restrictions (no lead in the glass, etc).
Another great (less expensive) option are the Kodak Commercial Ektars, which are basically Tessar designs with only 6 air/glass interfaces, so multicoating isn't really important.

That's interesting about Symmar-S's verses more modern versions Bill. My only concern with older Schneiders is the dreaded 'schneideritis,' but i do know this is a fairly silly concern. I just don't like looking at a lens with it. But I guess you are supposed to look through lenses....not at them. Currently my most used 8x10 lens is a 300mm Caltar-S II, which i believe is a Symmar-S, it has very bad 'schneiderits' but is sharp and I cannot complain about image quality (i think it might even be only single coated). And who knows....maybe even the new Apo-Symmar L's will all be full of 'schneiderits' in like 20 years...

[John Kasaian]

Generally lens names that end in "ar"s and "or"s :)

These are "my" rockstar lenses:
19" Apo or Red Dot Artar for long-ish
10" Wide Field Ektar for wide-ish

In between are Commercial Ektars, Dagors, Symmars, G-Clarons etc...
FWIW one of my most used lenses is a 240mm G Claron---it's sharp, lightwieght and inexpensive (or at least they were!)

The double convertible Symmars and the triple convertible Wollensak 1a are fine choices too, offering a lot of flexibility. The 12" Wollensak Velostigmat and the 375mm/15" Ilex should also deserve celebrity status IMHO

I think many notable early photographers would likely have been tickled pink to have any of these lenses in their kit.

[TheDeardorffGuy]

How well I remember the pre internet days when you walked into a camera shop and told the clerk what you were doing and they pulled a few lenses out of the case and you played with them. You bought one and put it on your camera and shot with it till you moved up to your first new lens. Not that I'm complaining but it sure is different now a days. I still have my first two lenses. A 1935 9.5in Dagor and a 1948 12in 4.5 Ektar. They are still first line lenses for me.

[mandoman7]

Only a few of us dinosaurs seem to remember those days fondly, Ken. When I got my first 4x5 (a friend's father had passed away) Ansel's were the only books in the library that even mentioned large format, and there was limited info about lenses. Jim at Midwest Camera was an important source for me in those days ('85).

[TheDeardorffGuy]

Only a few of us dinosaurs seem to remember those days fondly, Ken. When I got my first 4x5 (a friend's father had passed away) Ansel's were the only books in the library that even mentioned large format, and there was limited info about lenses. Jim at Midwest Camera was an important source for me in those days ('85).

I think that what bothers me most is that they are not learning by doing. They are learning by asking. Yes asking s fine but nothing beats developing a sheet of film and looking at the results.

[John Kasaian]

It wasn't that long ago I got my 8x10 and selecting a first lens was a daunting task and a substantial investment for a guy on a budget who just antied up for a really big camera. Any of the lenses mentioned thus far would be good choices for the OP, depending on condition, of course. When a Pro and close friend of the family in my town heard I'd gotten an 8x10, he suggested a 12" or 14" Commercial Ektar. I think I bought my 14"er from Jim and MPX. This was my only lens for many years and I still use it a lot:)

[jnantz]

i use a wollensak 1a triple convertible ( 13 20 28 i think )
and a darlot lever stop hemispherical ... not new rock stars
but they work OK for what i do ...

john

[mdm]

Depends what sport you are playing.

[Ari]

When I had an 8x10 the only lens I owned at the time that would cover the format was the older-style Fuji 210mm, IC of about 350mm.
It's a bit short for 8x10, but gives a pleasing perspective, nonetheless; it's pretty small, usually in a Copal 1 or Seiko 1 shutter, and good copies sell in the $300 range.

I later added the Fuji 250mm f6.7, also a great lens in a small shutter that sold for a very reasonable price.

[John Kasaian]

jnanian makes wonderful photograhs with those old rock stars! :)
As I've said, all the suggestions thus far would make good lenses for the OP to consider. Choose one in good condition that you can afford and then go out and see what you can do with it.

[Brian C. Miller]

Considering moving up to 8x10. What are the superstar lenses for an 8x10 system? ...


Here's the obvious flip side: bring one lens, and use it well.
...
Asking what lens to bring is like asking what film to bring. Make a choice. Go for it!

ALL 8x10 lenses are good. Even the "cruddy" ones. Buy a new 300mm lens, and don't look back! The photographs are in front of the lens, not behind it!


If only the forum software could sense the dreaded thread when it appears, automatically make this the first reply, then lock the thread for all time.

[Brian Vuillemenot]

My most used on 8X10 are an Apo-Sironar-S 300 and a Fujinon-C 450. I actually use the 450 Fuji for about 75% of the 8X10 (and 4X10 with half darkslide) that I shoot...

[Lachlan 717]

Assuming that I had a camera (and wallet) that could handle these, here's my choices:

*Nikkor 120mm SW;
*Schneider 210mm SSXL;
*Fujinon-C 300mm;
*Nikkor-M 450mm; and
*Fujinon-C 600mm

And a mule...

[Corran]

I just got a Nikkor 120mm SW. I use a Nikkor-M 300mm, which is fantastic. The Nikkor 450mm is likely equally as fantastic (I'm still looking for one at a good price...shoulda bought the one I saw somewhat cheap when I had the chance...). If only they made a nice 210 or 180 that covered well I'd be 100% Nikkor for 8x10. But alas, I'm using a Symmar-S. Anyway, I think all of the Nikkor 8x10 lenses are top-notch "all-star" lenses.

[Mark J]

Super-Symmar HM 210mm, first type ( the big one ) .
Certainly the best performance on paper for a medium-wide for 8 x 10 .
They pop up occasionally on s/h lists .

Here's one :
http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/used-equipment/large-format/used-schneider-210mm-f5-6-super-symmar-hm-lens-in-compur-shutter.html

:o)

[John Kasaian]

Mulling this over, it occurred to me that I've been considering the sort of lenses which I use, or at least I could afford and that doesn't answer the OP's question.
He wants 8x10 All-Stars.
Well, here you go:
Cooke triple convertible (just like Ansel's)
Goerz Dagor (extra star points for the f/7.7!)

[DrTang]

14" commerical Ektar and forgetaboutit - you'd be done looking for a long time

I frankenstein bolted a sinar shutter to the front of my beast..so I'm messing with a 300 and now a 360 Heliar.. but you cannot go wrong with a nice 14" commercial ektar

[Bob Salomon]

First and foremost. How much are you willing to pay?
Second, how much weight are you willing to carry?

Lastly, where are you located?

There are still stores with a pretty good stock of lenses that you can see and handle and test.

[Ole Tjugen]

My personal choises are 240, 300 and 360mm Shcneiser Symmar, and a 210mm Schneider Angulon which is so old it's uncoated.
There are sharper lenses than these though - like the 270mm f:7.7 Meyer Aristoplanat which beats any modern lens in the center.

"Slightly longer than portrait telephoto" is a vague specification. I would say a 360mm is pretty close to a good portrait length for 8x10", since portraits on that format are in the macro range.
Also - do you mean "long focal length lens", or "telephoto lens"? In the latter case there are some good 500mm-600mm telephoto lenses. But whether or not you NEED that construction depends more on the possible bellows length of your camera.

[erie patsellis]

Oddly enough, my 8x10 lens lineup pretty much mirrors Ole's, but with the addition of a 120 f8 Fujinon SW, a 19" RD Artar and a 21 1/4" Kodak Anastigmat.

After digging through a few years of negatives lately, the one lens I wish I had never sold was a T-R 12" convertible. Not the prettiest to look at, but the images were amazing.

[E. von Hoegh]

Something to keep in mind, unless you are enlarging the 8x10 negatives, you are going to have a very difficult time distinguishing between a 100 year old Dagor and the newest bestest 14 kilo lens made with unobtanium glass. The bigger the format, the better your technique must be to take full advantage of it.

Get most any 240mm - 360mm lens and get out and use it. When you get to the point that the only limitations on your photographs are those from the lens, you are ready to get a "better" lens, which should be a multicoated 14" gold dot Dagor. There is no other like it.

[John Kasaian]

My current line up:
19" Artar(my favorite for the grand vistas)
14" Commercial Ektar(fast & acres of wiggle room)
12" Dagor('cause, well...its a Dagor!)
10" Wide Field Ektar(good for architecture 'cause its fast & has acres of wiggle room)
240mm G Claron(extremely sharp and good for hiking 'cause its small & light)
Any one of these lenses should work fine for you.
I also had a 159mm Wide Angle Velostigmat & 14" Artar in my 8x10 kit, but these seem to be happier aboard the 5x7 Agfa-Ansco, and a 300mm Nikkor M which lives aboard an 8x10 aerial camera)

[dh003i]

Hi,

Considering moving up to 8x10. What are the superstar lenses for an 8x10 system? (ones that are still readily available, not unobtainable exotics, please). Wide, normal, slightly longer than portrait telephoto.

Thanks,

Mark

Note that a weak spot in 8x10 is the 180mm range (equivalent to 90mm on 4x5, which is a very commonly used focal length). There are some older reasonably priced 190mm lenses, some fairly modernish 200-210mm lenses -- and even here, the 210/9 Kowa and Computars are wallet-openers (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?82825-Kowa-210-9-vs-Computar-210-9), and some very expensive modern 200-210mm lenses that are heavy. I was looking into that focal length, but decided to forgo it for now and stick with what I have, explore some different points of view.


Ultra Wide

90/4.5 Nikkor-SW -- not an 8x10 lens, but like all lenses it covers more the closer you focus. Even focusing less than 4 feet away, it didn't quite cover the corners, and using it was a PITA because I had to aim the camera down and tilt the lens and rear standard back, to avoid getting the camera bed in the view. I will sell this.

110/9 Goerz Dagor -- Barely covers 8x10 stopped down.

120/8 Nikkor-SW -- an excellent lens. Just covers 8x10 at f/22.

I live in the Rochester area, and for my eye, there aren't many shots that mandate these ultra-wide views. I will experiment with the 120/8 and 110/9, but am not sure if I'll keep them.


Moderately Wide

240/9 Fuji A -- light, sharp, and converts to ~480/18 by removing the front element. Bruce Wehman highly recommends this lens. With a Wehman 8x10, the lensboard it is on can be reversed and it can be stored with the camera folded up. This will become a new standard for me.

Long

610/9 APO-Nikkor -- very very sharp lens

600/9, 800/12, 1200/18 Nikkor-T convertible set -- the rear elements can be swapped out to change the focal lengths. This is a great set, even the 1200mm lens is very sharp from my first shot with it.

I will compare the 610/9 vs. the Nikkor-T set some day and post results.

[Andrew O'Neill]

If only they made a nice 210 or 180 that covered well I'd be 100% Nikkor for 8x10.

Corran, my Nikkor 210W covers 8x10. Not enough to cover movements, mind you. I've used this lens extensively on 8x10.

[Corran]

Thanks for that info...I didn't know that. Sounds like it has about the same coverage as my Symmar-S. Unfortunately I love the 210mm FL and want some movements so I'm still searching for a Graphic Kowa or Computar 210mm...

[jeroldharter]

The Nikkor m 300 is nice but has minimal coverage for 8x10. For this range I use a Schneider G-Claron 305. I would not mind getting an Apo-Sironar S 300 but have never found one at the right time.

The Rodenstock Apo-Sironar W 210 is one of my favorites.

Fujinon C 450

Fujinon C 600

[Corran]

Stopped down to f/45 and beyond occasionally, I've not run out of coverage using the Nikkor-M 300mm. I haven't tried to do architecture but I think for most applications it would be more than sufficient. And of course you can't beat the size/weight, if that's a consideration.

[dh003i]

Note that a weak spot in 8x10 is the 180mm range (equivalent to 90mm on 4x5, which is a very commonly used focal length). There are some older reasonably priced 190mm lenses, some fairly modernish 200-210mm lenses -- and even here, the 210/9 Kowa and Computars are wallet-openers (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?82825-Kowa-210-9-vs-Computar-210-9), and some very expensive modern 200-210mm lenses that are heavy. I was looking into that focal length, but decided to forgo it for now and stick with what I have, explore some different points of view.


Ultra Wide

90/4.5 Nikkor-SW -- not an 8x10 lens, but like all lenses it covers more the closer you focus. Even focusing less than 4 feet away, it didn't quite cover the corners, and using it was a PITA because I had to aim the camera down and tilt the lens and rear standard back, to avoid getting the camera bed in the view. I will sell this.

110/9 Goerz Dagor -- Barely covers 8x10 stopped down.

120/8 Nikkor-SW -- an excellent lens. Just covers 8x10 at f/22.

I live in the Rochester area, and for my eye, there aren't many shots that mandate these ultra-wide views. I will experiment with the 120/8 and 110/9, but am not sure if I'll keep them.


Moderately Wide

240/9 Fuji A -- light, sharp, and converts to ~480/18 by removing the front element. Bruce Wehman highly recommends this lens. With a Wehman 8x10, the lensboard it is on can be reversed and it can be stored with the camera folded up. This will become a new standard for me.

Long

[quote]610/9 APO-Nikkor -- very very sharp lens

fyi, this lens requires mounting by SK Grimes into an Ilex #5 shutter. The lens can be had brand new for around $300 (I bought mine at that price). The $1k offers on eBay are sellers looking for suckers. It is a great lens, but mounting it into an Ilex #5 is a project that will put the total cost at around $1k, so you shouldn't spend more than a few hundred on it.

[Peter De Smidt]

Do you really need a shutter with a 600mm lens on 8x10? Given the miniscule depth of field, and the resulting use of small apertures, won't the exposure time usually be more than 1 second?

[cosmicexplosion]

14" dagor F7.7
19" dagor f7.7

These are the lenses I usually use for some reason.

I have a Schneider g clarion 270 which I was told was a golden dagor copy?
I use some times but I would like a nice wide. I have a 90 mm f4.5 I use on 4x5 I would like to hunt down one of the mentioned 180mm or 120 mm I cant see my self needing wider

I like the 14" the most for landscape as it has a generous and easy view. It also folds into my Kodak 2d and is light

I like the 19" for portraits

So far In my experience the 14 would be my 'one lens'

[Ole Tjugen]

For really wide, I use a 165mm f:6.8 Angulon (late model) and a 121mm f:8 Super Angulon for the really really wide.
On the other hand, I have managed to run out of image circle with the 210mm Angulon, which was said to cover 500mm IC...

[jb7]

If you're reading from Nikon's specifications, you might think the Nikkor M-300 has a limited image circle- hardly large enough to cover 8x10. If you actually use the lens, for contact printing in particular, then it's difficult to run out of coverage- in fact, some people use it for 7x17.

I'm not sure if the single coated Fujinon 210mm has been mentioned, but it's a good performer, with plenty of image circle.

Add a Nikkor M-450mm and you have my basic three lens set...
At least, the set of modern lenses in shutters...

[8x10 user]

For sharp images and big budgets I'd look at the following kit:

150mm Super Symmar XL
210mm Apo-Sironar-w
300mm Apo-Sironar-s
360mm Apo-Sironar-s
480mm Apo-Sironar N or Apo Symmar
600mm Apo Ronar MC

[dh003i]

Do you really need a shutter with a 600mm lens on 8x10? Given the miniscule depth of field, and the resulting use of small apertures, won't the exposure time usually be more than 1 second?

Even for those long exposures, it is still convenient to have and means you don't have to worry about weird methods to start and stop exposure.

[John Kasaian]

This begs the question, what do you mean by Superstar? Do you want a Justin Bieber lens? Or a Phil Collins lens?:rolleyes: