Odd focal lengths for your format

[StrangleMeRandy]

I shoot 5x7. Lenses in the 135-150mm range that cover well are relatively scarce, especially considering the number of options in that range. I don't remember enough details about lens design to confidently explain why, but there's something about lens design that explains it, trust me There are a few, of course - I'm currently eyeing the original Fujinon 150/5.6, later versions of which lost about an inch of image circle. It's definitely a useful focal length, one I'm especially interested in given my fondness for 65mm on 6x8cm.

I only know about all this from spending entirely too much time reading about 5x7 gear, so I'm curious, are there similar coverage "gaps" among other formats? Apart from ultrawides, which become increasingly scarce as your film holders grow...

[Vaughan]

The original single-coated writing-on-front Fujinon W series has the most coverage of plasmat lenses from almost all other makers. If you cannot find one with enough movement then you'll need to go to a wide-angle design like the Nikkor SW 150mm (it easily covers 8x10) but be prepared for cost, size and weight.

A 90mm lens on 5x7 is the equivalent (actually just slightly wider) than a 65mm on 4x5 and the f5.6 Fujinon SWD 90mm f5.6 and equivalent Nikkor SW lenses cover 5x7 well with about 15mm rise. A 120/125mm lens is about equivalent to 90mm on 4x5, and wide angle versions offer about 40mm movement on 4x5 (almost covering 8x10). A 105mm wide angle might be useful too.

The widest lens I have used on 5x7 is the original writing-on-front Fujinon SWD 75mm f5.6 lens (unlike most other original Fujinon lenses it is multi-coated) which when well stopped down covers 5x7 with just a bit of vignetting in the extreme corners. That's equivalent to 16mm on 35mm.

IME a good combined 4x5 and 5x7 kit is a 90mm, 150mm, 210mm and 300mm. The Fujinon T 400mm covers 5x7 with about 20mm rise and is more useful for cameras with short bellows. Add a 65mm for 4x5 ultra-wide or a 75mm for both 4x5 and 5x7.

Rittreck View 5x7 with Fujinon SWD 75mm f5.6, 5x7 Shanghai GP3 100.

[Oren Grad]

I only know about all this from spending entirely too much time reading about 5x7 gear, so I'm curious, are there similar coverage "gaps" among other formats? Apart from ultrawides, which become increasingly scarce as your film holders grow...

The obvious example is 180mm for 8x10, given that 90mm is probably the most popular general-purpose wide angle focal length for 4x5. So far as I know there are no modern 180's that cover 8x10. I think a 7-inch Dagor should cover when stopped way down; our classic lens experts here might be able to think of others.

Not quite so scarce is 270mm for 8x10, given the popularity of 135mm as a semi-wide for 4x5. At least in this case there's the 270mm G-Claron, as well as other process lenses like the 270mm Computar, 270mm Graphic Kowa and 270 Apo-Gerogon. Unfortunately, the Computar is scarce and expensive, while I can' t recall seeing either the Kowa or Gerogon in 270 focal length offered in shutter, and my recollection is that in their typical barrel mountings they can be difficult to adapt.

[xkaes]

... are there similar coverage "gaps" among other formats? Apart from ultrawides, which become increasingly scarce as your film holders grow...

It seems like every format has these "gaps" to one extent or another -- where lens choices become fewer.

For 5x7, you might want to take a look at the Fujinon W 135mm f5.6. There are also the NW and CM-W versions in 135mm. None of them give you much wiggle room at infinity.

And you might also want to check out the NW and CM-W 125mm f5.6 models. Their image circles are almost as large.

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm

[Doremus Scudder]

The widest 135mm I know of is the Wide Field Ektar f/6.3. It should handle 5x7, I would thing.

Doremus

[David Lindquist]

The widest 135mm I know of is the Wide Field Ektar f/6.3. It should handle 5x7, I would thing.

Doremus

Yes, from Kodak publication O-18 "Camera Technique for Professional Photographers" (First 1965 printing). Recommended negative size ""without camera swings" is 5 x 7 for the 135 mm Wide Field Ektar (with camera swings it's 4 x 5). Further the "circle of good definition" at infinity at f/16 is 9 inches.

David

[Tin Can]

These advisors are all field photogs

Get inside a studio and shoot 120mm on 8X10

[Mark J]

Glad I bought a Super-Symmar HM 150/5.6 when they were affordable !

[Mark Sawyer]

Look through this chart for your options, paying attention to the coverage:

https://www.graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html

[Dan Fromm]

The widest 135mm I know of is the Wide Field Ektar f/6.3. It should handle 5x7, I would thing.

Doremus

Doremus, the WF Ektars are 80 degree lenses. So the 135 will cover 5x7 with a little wiggle room.

If you want a wider 135, look for a #3 bis Perigraphe Ser. VIa. 135/14, claimed coverage "at small apertures" is 106 degrees. 358 mm. Unobtainium.