Wide Angle Lenses For Up to 8x10

[SLVRGLTN]

I am thinking for the future I would like to get a wide angle lens to shoot landscapes in particular something that would capture El Capitan and it's reflection on a sheet of 5x7 (also 4x5 & 8x10) for the future as eventually, I'm thinking 8x10 would be the biggest I would want to capture landscapes on. So any recommendations would greatly appreciated! I don't need a expensive lens but something that will last many years with proper care! Thanks I appreciate the info.

Brian

P.S probably something that I can use on my Kodak 5x7 2D

[Len Middleton]

Brian,

You know of course if it is wide on 8x10 (e.g. 165mm), then it will be semi-wide on 5x7 and a normal lens on 4x5. I hope this is not a blinding flash of the obvious.

On 4x5 I use a 90mm f8 S-A, which with a quoted image circle of 216mm should cover your 5x7, although not certain of the diagonal on 5x7

See: https://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/super-angulon/data/8-90mm.html ). These are fairly common and should be available relatively inexpensively.

for something a little less expensive yet, there is the 120mm 6.8 Angulon rated at 211mm image circle.

See: https://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/angulon/data/6,8-120mm.html

Not familiar with the 120mm version of the Angulon, but owned and used a 90mm version for 4x5 and have a 165mm one for 8x10. Camera better be square, as there is not room for movement.

Quick hint, the wider you go and the bigger the format, the more $$$ required.

Hope that helps in getting you thinking about options,

Len

[John Kasaian]

Try a 159mm Wollensak WA Velostigmat. An economical, small and lightweight alternative that works just fine on a 5x7 and also on 8x10.

[Michael Graves]

Try a 159mm Wollensak WA Velostigmat. An economical, small and lightweight alternative that works just fine on a 5x7 and also on 8x10.

I'll second the Wollensak. I've had one of these for several years. The image circle is large enough to give slight movements on 8x10. And the image drops off rapidly, so if you are paying attention to your corners, you'll know when you're pushing the limit. Nice lens on 8x10, and a great lens on 5x7.

[SLVRGLTN]

Thanks I appreciate the info it's actually funny I didn't think about the Wollensak but I have the Wollensak Velostigmat 7 1/4" (210mm)? Focus Series IV in a Betax No. 2 Shutter came with the camera! I found a 159 for $275 but it's on Igor camera website but I sent a message to see if its still available but I may have to hold off my sons cell phone was stolen right out of his pocket on his way home from school, so I need to get him another phone more than I need a lens at the moment! The phone company only offered me a discount on a new phone instead of a free phone!

If I sold my UV unit than I might be able to get both!

[Jim Andrada]

+1 on the 159mm Wollensak for 8 x 10 - great lens.

[winterclock]

For that kind of money you may be able to get a 120mm super angulon through an E-Bay auction. I got one for about $250 not too long ago, it's superb on 5x7 and probably covers 8x10 with little movement.

[Brian C. Miller]

Um, how wide is wide for you? Try your current Wollensak first before popping for the 6-1/4". My 6-1/4" (mfg 1935-ish?) is freakin' sharp in the center, but it does lose sharpness on the edges. I was goofing around with it, and at f/45 I could count every blade of grass in the lawn across the street. My avatar comes from a 2mm x 2mm crop from it.

[Leigh]

Two good WA choices for 8x10 are
Nikkor SW 150/8, IC = 400mm, way more than you would ever need for 8x10
Rodenstock Apo-Sironar (W) 210/5.6 with an IC of 352mm. I have this lens and it's wonderful.

For reference, the film diagonals are:
4x5 = 163mm
5x7 = 218mm
8x10 = 325mm
Note these are the film diagonals, corner to corner, which are larger than the image diagonals.

- Leigh

[John O'Connell]

The 159mm Wolly comes in a fast version that just hits the corners on 8x10, and a slow version that gives you some movement. It's not terribly wide as far as I'm concerned, and you'd have to try it to see if it's actually wide enough for you.

There are no real options in 8x10 that allow for significant movements once you get wider than 150mm (except maybe the uncoated Protars). And, because it's been mentioned above, previous forum wisdom was that the 121mm SA barely covers 8x10, while the 120mm does not.

A good old thread:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?14644-8x10-Wide-Angle-Lenses

[Alan Gales]

I own a 121mm SA. It is super wide on 8x10 and like John says, it just barely covers. The lens doubles for me as a slightly wider than normal lens when shooting 4x5. I don't shoot 5x7 but I think it would make a great wide angle for that format.

I paid less than $200.00 including shipping for my copy off ebay. For the price you could easily own both the 121 SA and the 159mm Wolly and not be out that much money.

Like mentioned earlier, wide angles with plenty of coverage for 8x10 can cost a small fortune.

[Cor]

I once owned the 159mm Wolly, which was uncoated (I guess that is true for most of them). I was unpleasantly surprised how sensitive it was to flare, luckily I could swap it for a 165 mm Angulon which was much better, it is pre war but it has been (later?) coated . Another problem with the 159mm in my set up: the bottom of my Toyo Field 810M came in the picture when using the Wolly vertical.

best,

Cor

[SLVRGLTN]

Well I got a great deal on a Wollensak EX WA 12.5 6 1/4" and even a better deal for a Betax No. 3 (which was already a 12.5)shutter which the lens cells very easily screwed directly into the shutter!

I might pick up the same Wolly but with the 9.5 version and do some comparison shots of the same image!

I do like the lightness of the Wolly it be easy for me to backpack with it in the future!

Thanks for all the suggestions and I will post in the future once I do my tests!

Brian

[Jim Andrada]

I happily use a 115mm Grandagon on 8 x 10, but then again I don't compose right to the edges and generally don't obsess about the extreme corners. If the sky and clouds and bushes are a bit softer in the corner it doesn't exactly get my bowels in an uproar, so to speak, as long as the real meat of the composition is crisp (enough).