11x14 affordable lenses

[sedboyscotty]

Hi all,

I'm new to this forum and looking forward to building my first ULF camera. I have been talked down from 16x20 to now 11x14. This is mainly for expense of the film. $8 or $30 per shoot? I'll take the $8 option so I can shoot 3x as much for the same outlay.

I'll be buying the single lens lenses from this site. They are good, not perfect, but I should be able to have some fun with them.
http://www.re-inventedphotoequip.com/ULF%20Lens.html

Down the track, I'll be buying some more lenses (3 I'm guessing. Wide, standard and a tele). What are good/ affordable lenses that can be found on eBay with the 11x14 image circle coverage.

Thanks in advance, I look forward to becoming a regular on this forum for years to come.

Chris

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Also remember that shooting 11x14 X-ray film will reduce your costs further.I have that lens and have used it on my 14x17. Reinholdt does a very good job on his lenses. It will get you started. Have fun.

[Jim Galli]

If you want a large presence contact print, you should investigate 14X17 X-ray film. Buy a box on ebay and cut to fit 4X5 or whatever you have so you can experiment and see what you can and cannot get with it. That way you can shoot all day for a few bucks a sheet.

Lots of old lenses can cover. Single elements from old convertibles will be cheapest. An 8X10 Turner Reich for $150 bucks or so will supply a 19" and a 25" or 28" anastigmat quite nice on contact prints. 355 G-Claron is the old favorite for wide field. 450 Nikkor is also very affordable and also superb at the price. I'm talking 14X17 so they will both cover 1114 easily. An '11X14 Turner Reich is a little more scarce but they have a 24" and a 35" lens components.

[jbenedict]

The 375/6.8 Ilex-Caltar is a good lens which covers 11x14 easily and is usually of reasonable cost. I have seen many of them under $400 and as low as $300. In an Ilex #5.

[goamules]

I'll make a quick observation. A large print is often appreciated for how good it looks. A photograph's look is due largely to the lens. Why do people want to make ULF prints, but want an "affordable" lens? The cameras, photo print paper, chemicals, stands, developing trays, etc. are not affordable. Why should a lens be?

Do as Jim says, or get a quality 4x5 rig and enlarge slightly. You're results will be better and your cost cheaper. People enlarge tiny postage stamp 35mm negatives 10 times. A 4x5 can handle it. Unless the point is to shoot ULF, not in the results?

[Phil Hudson]

The 305mm G-Claron also covers, albeit without as much room as the 355mm.......

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

If you don't mind the weight, the 360mm f/5.6 Symmar (the older single-coated convertible in the Compound 4 shutter) is really great for 11x14. Bright, sharp, lots of coverage, and usually quite cheap. However, be careful when buying, as many of them have haze between the elements.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I will expand a bit on what Jim said. I built an 11x14 and 14x17. I shoot them both. I have shot x-ray film in both. If I had to pick one over the other it would be the 14x17. The presence of a 14x17 carbon print for me at least is something to see.

Now going from my 11x14 to 14x17 is a huge difference in weight. Longer set up. Many good lenses to cover the format and I've found many great inexpensive ones.

Just my .02 nothing more.

[rjmeyer314]

I use a 12"/21"/28" Turner-Reich triple convertible on my 11x14 Seneca. All three combinations will cover.

[William Whitaker]

My first lens for 11x14 was a Kodak 21" anastigmat. Bought it in barrel from Stephen Shuart. But that was back around 1983. Perfectly capable lens which covered 11x14 effortlessly. I still like it for 8x10.