Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: 14" Ektar

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    159

    14" Ektar

    Hi.

    Anybody know how close (in terms of view through lens) a 14" Ektar is to a 300mm lens? I am looking for a portrait lens that will get a bit closer than 300, but am worried that 14" might be t close. I live in Michigan, where
    almost nobody speaks large format, and am therefore at a disadvantage.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    344

    14" Ektar

    14 inches is 355.6 mm.

    Amund
    Amund
    _________________________________________
    Digital is nice but film is like having sex with light.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    159

    14" Ektar

    I am aware that 14 inches is 355mm. I don't know what it LOOKS like when looking through the lens, compared with the 300mm.

  4. #4
    Mark Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Stuck inside of Tucson with the Neverland Blues again...
    Posts
    6,268

    14" Ektar

    It's different, but not very much. In 35mm, its about like going from a 50mm lens to a 60mm lens. (Well, to a 59.2666mm. Somebody's gonna get picky...) If you have a mid-range zoom, you can play with it and get a general idea.
    "I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."

  5. #5
    Scott Davis
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    1,875

    14" Ektar

    as previously said, it is just a tad longer than a 300mm, in terms of field-of-view. As someone who has one, it is a GORGEOUS lens for portraiture.

  6. #6

    14" Ektar

    Percy,

    I have the lens in question and live in SE MIchigan (Pontiac area). If you'd like to take a look perhaps we can meet. Really though, an 18% increase is no big deal. Be like the rest of us and buy both the 14 and the 12!

    Cheers,

  7. #7
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    8,640

    14" Ektar

    It really depends how you see things. For me, a 300 renders with a very neutral spatial perspective, while a 355 or 360 is enough longer to look modestly but distinctly compressed.

    Remember that if you plan to be working close with a 360 you'll be wrestling with very shallow DOF and long bellows extensions.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,908

    14" Ektar

    The 14" is 18.3% longer than the 300 mm.

    It definitely gives a better persepctive for portraits. I have a couple of pre 1940 14" lenses which I use exclusively for portraits - one is a soft focus in barrrel mount.
    Use it - I think you will like it.

Similar Threads

  1. 12" Com Ektar f/6.3 vs f/4.5
    By Andy Eads in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 16-Apr-2012, 07:17
  2. Anyone here using a 12" Commercial Ektar?
    By Mark Minard in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 7-Feb-2001, 21:00
  3. Information about the Kodak Ektar 127mmm/4,7 and WF Ektar 80mm/6.3
    By Volker Schlichting in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 22-Nov-2000, 12:29
  4. filters for Ektar 127/4.7
    By Denis Turbide in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 19-Apr-2000, 23:09
  5. 127 mm Ektar
    By dileep prakash in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 26-Jul-1999, 01:21

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •