Affordable 12x20 lenses

[MintTin]

One good choice would be a 355mm G-Claron in barrel. This will be sharp and covers 12x20 stopped down, but may not meet your desired price point as Garrett rightly points out. As it happens I just listed a one of these in shutter as part of my "Getting out of 7x17 sale - Part 2" post in the FS section. It doesn't meet your price objectives, sorry.

Yea this is the only one I have even found an ebay listing for, under 300 but still a little pricey. And I cant seem to find a fs section here, probably restricted im guessing.

[MintTin]

You and everyone else. Sorry for the glib reply, but this is the most common fallacy seen in photography forums. That you need to start wetplating with Ultra Large Format, and that you need the Mammoth lens "really cheap." You can't build a backyard race car and then ask for a cheap Ferrari engine to go in it either.

There are places you can buy a single mensicus lens which is pretty much a magnifying glass, fairly cheaply. Or one of the the original achromat (two lenses cemented together, behind an iris) meniscus landscape lenses. Stopped down to F11 or more, they are sharp. These lenses are the cheapest bet

Uuummm not just starting out but thanks for the assumption. Lol. But yes, a single mensicus lens is the key word im looking for. Dont need an actual camera lens, or photo specific gear, unless I want to add 0's to the budget. The camera is about $90 in materials for frame of reference.

[coisasdavida]

You could try Surplus Shed.

[Jim Galli]

I want a car that gets 140 miles per gallon, that has 600 hp and looks like a Ferrari for under $900 please.

Now that I got that out of my system, the ubiquitous Turner Reich if you can find the 15 - 24 - 35 inch one, the single groups are anastigmat's and would cover. I tried the Kodak lens on an 8X20 and found it sickeningly weak in the corners. Never picked up another Kodak again. YMMV

[MintTin]

I want a car that gets 140 miles per gallon, that has 600 hp and looks like a Ferrari for under $900 please.

Now that I got that out of my system, the ubiquitous Turner Reich if you can find the 15 - 24 - 35 inch one, the single groups are anastigmat's and would cover. I tried the Kodak lens on an 8X20 and found it sickeningly weak in the corners. Never picked up another Kodak again. YMMV

Man If you could only capture your sarcasm you would be world famous.

[Jim Galli]

Man If you could only capture your sarcasm you would be world famous.

I gave you useful information after the sarcasm. Got to admit, you sort of begged for it. The Kodak lens sucks. The TR might be a usable answer. There are no 12X20 lenses that fit in all of your categories. Garrett was just nicer about it than me. Pick any 2. Even 2 would be asking a lot. Pick one.

[Dan Fromm]

MintTin, you have to understand that you're not the first poster who wants to shoot very- or ultra- large format on a shoestring to ask about good inexpensive lenses with large coverage. We get perhaps six a year. They all have wonderful dreams that they're trying to make real but not all have the means to do it. Most vanish after a while and we never know what became of them. Every once in a while one finds a lens that realizing its dream requires at a great price and tells us about it. We rejoice for and with the lucky ones.

But on the whole the dreams are impossible and the dreamers who present them are very wearing.

[MintTin]

Wow the reason why I ask is because what I use for 11x14 cost me $55 shipped. Its not my first time around the block. Im not on here with 4k post because im busy shooting with the other people that came and left.

[Jim Galli]

Wow the reason why I ask is because what I use for 11x14 cost me $55 shipped. Its not my first time around the block. Im not on here with 4k post because im busy shooting with the other people that came and left.

Well, there ya go. Why would you waste time here. You got a sharp, fast, lens that covers 1114 for $55 bucks, then heck $100 should be overkill for the 1220. Maybe you can find 2! Oh, and I'm pretty prolific myself. And I still find time to try to offer free help here. See ya.

[William Whitaker]

Sorry if the reception committee seemed harsh. But then again, we might be forgiven for expecting something different from someone who's been "around the block". Pursuing old processes is demanding and expensive enough. So is ULF. Put them together and you have a very tall order. There are some very talented and knowledgeable people on this forum. And they've all had their dreams, too. You can learn a lot from them if you want.