240mm 8x10 lens: which is best?

[Kevin Crisp]

Him I believe on this.

[valdormar]

You've picked a tough row to hoe. None of the lenses discussed here will come close to covering 8x10 wide open.

Image circles are normally spec'd at f/16 or f/22, where the angle of coverage is significantly larger than at full aperture.

- Leigh

Camera: Deardorff 8x10
Film: Arista EDU Ultra 100 ISO
Lens: Rodenstock Apo Sironar-N 240mm F/5.6 MC
Shutter: Copal NO.3 at 125/sec
_
Shot wide open @ 5.6
4 foot soft box over head with Einstein™ E640
silver tri grip front - low

[vinny]

I like that shot, but covering and illuminating are two different things.
Infinity a d portrait distance are two different things when speaking of coverage.

[Jim Galli]

A lovely picture, Valdormar. I take it since you're arguing coverage with leigh that you were focused at infinity when you took it? Or maybe you shot yourself in the foot. I'm guessing your 240mm lens had a bellows draw that effectively made it a 360 + mm lens ;~'))

[Sal Santamaura]

...I take it since you're arguing coverage with leigh...

Any such "argument" is probably futile. Leigh's profile shows this:

Last Activity: 24-Jul-2014 04:18

[Jim Galli]

Any such "argument" is probably futile. Leigh's profile shows this:

Last Activity: 24-Jul-2014 04:18

Ha ha ha, the joke is on me. Time to "unsubscribe" from this thread I guess. Silly discussion 12 years ago. Not improved by age.

[valdormar]

I like that shot, but covering and illuminating are two different things.
Infinity a d portrait distance are two different things when speaking of coverage.

This I know, Lens tested for close portrait and infinity landscape. You only have a little movement. Both wide open and closed down. It covers the 8x10 just fine. I scanned this test image first so up it went.

[valdormar]

A lovely picture, Valdormar. I take it since you're arguing coverage with leigh that you were focused at infinity when you took it? Or maybe you shot yourself in the foot. I'm guessing your 240mm lens had a bellows draw that effectively made it a 360 + mm lens ;~'))

Lens tested for close portrait and infinity landscape. You only have a little movement. Both wide open and closed down. It covers the 8x10 just fine. I scanned this test image first so up it went.

[valdormar]

Any such "argument" is probably futile. Leigh's profile shows this:

Last Activity: 24-Jul-2014 04:18

Oh, I have no argument with Leigh, is't just he made a statement in regards to this lens that could lead someone astray. I myself was looking up some info on the Rodenstock Apo Sironar-N 240mm F/5.6 MC and his comment showed up in my search. As we all know the Sironar-S 240mm covers 8x10 with adequate movements, but this Sironar-N seems to be up in the air. So I got the lens in hand and find that it works with the 8x10 just fine, both close up at all stops and at infinity at all stops. Not a lot of movement but enough to make something great.

[Paddy McKay]

While this isn't one of the lenses that was originally asked about, I have to agree with Jim. I picked one of these up from Kerry, back when he originally offered them. As Arne Cröll points out "At f/16, the 240mm Germinar-W was decidedly better than the G-Claron, slightly better than the Apo-Ronar, and on par with the Fujinon (fig. 9). At f/22, the differences were small. Thus the Germinar W series is a worthy contender for the Fujinon-A line. Germinar W lenses have the additional advantage that they cover up to 80° when stopped down to small apertures, whereas the image quality of the Fujinon breaks down fast past the 70° mark even at small apertures." Image circle of Germinar W 240mm at 1:1 - 672mm.