Lenses for 11x14" that aren't going to lead to bankruptcy...

Hi all,

I'm new to this forum but a long time LF user (4x5" mainly) and view camera user, with digital Mamiya Leaf back and Linhof Techno. I have found myself with a strong hankering for 11x14" and have been told that finding good lenses for the format is perhaps harder than finding a camera.

My dream is to make good contact prints in the darkroom and very occasionally drum scan the negatives for enlargement – no more than 40x50", more likely 30x40". If one were looking for a relatively competent lens that's modest money for the format in equivalent of 250mm on 8x10", what would people recommend?

I love to shoot wider and more normal, too, but I've got to start somewhere... What about 180mm equivalent on 8x10" / 90mm on 4x5" format?

Thanks,

Tim

Seems like you want a ~270mm lens up to a ~360mm lens.

What is your actual budget? A very nice Computar 270mm sold on eBay just last week for $800. That was a pretty good price. I was looking at it wondering if it might just cover 8x20. You don't need that much coverage (unless you want a lot of movements) so you could also look for a Graphic Kowa or G-Claron lens. Not sure about the absolute coverage on those but should be okay. I see a 270mm G-Claron sold last month for $255 - a great price!

As for 360mm lenses, the first thing that comes to mind is a 360mm Symmar or Symmar-S. That will be a much bigger lens. I paid $200 for my 360mm f/5.6 Symmar but that was a really good deal...on eBay I see sales on the older Symmar coming in at $300-500, with the newer Symmar-S hitting $400-$900.

So there's a few options. I don't shoot 11x14 but if one fell in my lap I would be raring to go with my 305mm G-Claron I use on my 8x20. Good luck!

Speaking from experience using both the 270 and 305 G-Clarons on 11x14: the 270 is borderline for coverage even if you stop way down (f/45), the 305 is a more comfortable fit (also stopped down) and will also be closer in field of view to the 250-on-8x10 that you mentioned. Both of these come in #1 shutter and are far smaller and lighter than the big 360mm Sironar/Symmar/Nikkor W plasmats in #3 shutter.

Bryan, 11 x 14's diagonal, also the normal focal length for the format, is around 450 mm. Your suggestions seem a little short.

Tim, Bryan's right to encourage you but you should think hard about lenses, perhaps even shop, before you commit yourself to a camera. For my budget, the prices of lenses that cover ~ 450 mm is very bad news. You may have more to spend that I do.

Your 250 mm equivalent comes to around 375 mm. Not a common focal length. A 90 on 4x5/180 on 8x10 covers around 80 degrees with no movements. The equivalent FL for 11 x 14 is 270 degrees.

You might want to look at the catalogs behind http://www.largeformatphotography.in...mainly)-lenses

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oren Grad

Speaking from experience using both the 270 and 305 G-Clarons on 11x14: the 270 is borderline for coverage even if you stop way down (f/45), the 305 is a more comfortable fit (also stopped down) and will also be closer in field of view to the 250-on-8x10 that you mentioned. Both of these come in #1 shutter and are far smaller and lighter than the big 360mm Sironar/Symmar/Nikkor W plasmats in #3 shutter.

---

Oren, I assume you have the Plasmat versions? My 305 GC Dagor-type covers 8x20, so extrapolating a 270mm Dagor-type it should have at least 500mm of IC...but admittedly extrapolation is not experience! The Dagor types are also larger than the Plasmats.

Dan, I was extrapolating from the OP's focal lengths. Sounds like he wants a "wide normal" and a "wide." Instead of a 375mm I shuffled down to 360mm as a more common focal length.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corran

Oren, I assume you have the Plasmat versions? My 305 GC Dagor-type covers 8x20, so extrapolating a 270mm Dagor-type it should have at least 500mm of IC...but admittedly extrapolation is not experience! The Dagor types are also larger than the Plasmats.

---

That's important, thanks for asking. Yes, mine are late-production plasmat types.

A Schneider Angulon 210 f/6.8 will cover, but they don't appear often and usually for more than $500, but sufficient patience can get you one for ~$250. I bagged mine for $220. That's a 75mm equivalent for 4x5, though, a good bit wider than 90mm.

Thanks all for your replies. It seems there are options, but things are a little bit specialist to say the least when things get this big...

In terms of budget, I'm used to staring down the barrel of big money when it comes to lenses; Rodenstock Digaron HR W series lenses are crazy, and that's what I have needed for my digital back. It's good to know something in the ball park of what I need will be approximately 1/4 of that kind of money.

I tend to do a lot a front rise with my images, shooting a lot of city scape type imagery where I want to give a sense of the imposing nature of the built environment. When I used my Technika regularly, I was often going out to 20 - 25mm of rise. I'm starting to think it is unrealistic to expect equivalent movements for 11x14"? Then again, I'm happy to work within some limitations. Sometimes that helps force new ways of seeing and finding strange workarounds / fighting technical battles can open new doors.

Truth be told, I'm probably most comfortable with the 90mm of 4x5", so something closer to that in 11x14" would suit me fine.

Just got to start researching cameras, too. It's an expensive addiction!

7x17 requires a similar image circle to 11x14–466mm vs 450mm. Here’s an old thread on 7x17 lenses that will give you lots of possibilities:

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...30-7x17-lenses

Of course, finding some of these lenses and then paying for them is a different challenge.

The really obvious option is the 355mm G-Claron if you want wide like 90mm on 4x5. Happily this is relatively easy to find and not super expensive at least compared to other options. It even can be found in a shutter. Move on to a 480mm process lens. Then the next obvious lens would be a 24” Artar which can also be had for peanuts in a barrel. Then you are on to expensive and long process lenses over 1000mm for a long lens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro