Lenses for 8x10 (again)

[ditkoofseppala]

Thanks, everyone! This gives me a good, broad survey of what people ARE using, and a whole lot to think about. I'll look into some of the options mentioned!

[Rory_5244]

Gosh, all I have is a Fujinon 240 F9 that I use for 4x5 and 8x10. Movements on 8x10 are restricted to a few degrees of tilt and swing and you can forget about shifts. But it workin' for me!!

[Ken Lee]

Your problem is that you are trying to find the ideal lens (for you) in advance.

If you are like many people, you will buy and trade and sell and experiment, and the process will be fun and frustrating at the same time. It's a bit like musical chairs. Whatever sticks around when the bell rings, is the one you like best.

Here's a nice example: Equipment Bought, Used, then Sold by Christopher Perez, one of our esteemed forum members. His page may need some updating, since he's always..."exploring".

And here's another recommendation for Jim at Midwest. In the long run, the lack of anxiety you get by dealing with him, is well worth any pennies you might save on eBay.

[Herb Cunningham]

The magic bullet won't be there in lenses. The size of the shutter and its condition are what you will run into with ebay. I am about to list here on the LF classifieds at least 3 lenses, maybe 5. All with very generous coverage on 8x10, one I think will cover 11x14 or larger. I also have a monster 600mm process lens that will cover half of Georgia and most of hell.

If you buy from anybody, make sure you can return it in 30 days or more if you don't like it.

All the reputable dealers will do that, and most of the guys on apug and here will also.

you can develop 8x10 in trays in the bathtub. tape up the door with gaffer's tape and go for it. I started that way, doing contact prints.

good luck

[MIke Sherck]

My original choice for 8x10 was a 240mm Caltar-IIN (Rodenstock) and a 360mm RD Artar. Both lovely lenses but the 240mm wasn't quite wide enough too much of the time, and the 360mm was almost perfect for me as a "normal" lens but I sold it. I also tried a 12" Ilex Paragon at one time; it isn't a focal length that I used very much. Now, my set is a 420mm Fujinin L and a 210mm Fuji. The 210 was my most-used 4x5 lens and just happens to cover 8x10 at infinity. The 420 is my all-time favorite large format lens. A friend has promised to send me a 19" to try out for a longer lens; we'll see, and I still have the hots for another 360mm RD Artar but can't logically convince myself that it's something I "need". Maybe when I become rich and money isn't an issue...

Mike

[archivue]

i've spend a lot of time to find a 305 g claron in black copal... then i realise that i much prefer the 240 in 8x10... so i've found a nice and expensive 240.
I've bought an apo sironar N in 360 focal lenght ( a monster )...
240 and 305 are too close to carry both in the field... so, i will probably sell my 305 sometimes.
finding the best lense for your needs, depends on plenty of stuff... subject, backpaking or not, the camera, colour or black and white, big enlargements of contact prints... and the others lens in your arsenal !

for me 240 and 360 is a good choice, but 210 and 300 make sense, while 210 and 360 or 240 and 300 are not working !

[Geert]

210 and 360 or 240 and 300 are not working !

I think you are about right.

I mostly skip the 300mm and use the 240mm and 360mm in the field. All classic Symmar lenses.
A 600mm Apo Ronar goes along but didn't see any use for it in the last 5 months.

Focal lenghts are much closer together when you go up on negative size.

The brassies stay at home for portraits.

Greetings,
G

[Brian C. Miller]

I don't know if I really deserved that, or not, Brian! Perhaps I did. Yes, of course, the end in view is to get an optic of some sort on the front end, with a view to getting out and exposing some film.

The reason that I said what I said is due to how I started. Camera, lens, figure out what fits. I started with a P&S, then went to a Pentax 6x7 w/90mm LS and spotmeter. With just one lens, I worked to find the best in a scene that fit with what equipment I had. My Super Graphic came with its original Wollensak 135mm. Same thing, work to find the image that fits the best. Is that such a bad thing?

That's why I recommend just getting A lens. Its going to have to be a really bad lens to not give any sort of decent performance. Midwest Photo has a really good selection. Find something in your budget, buy it, and work with it. Expose at least 500 sheets through it before selling it.

Me, I'm saving up for a Cooke convertible. $3000 new, and I get three lenses in one.

[Vaughn]

Just to throw in my 2 cents.

If I only had one lens, I would stick with my first lens I got for 8x10 -- a Fuji W f5.6 300mm.

Biggest reason: I shoot under the redwoods -- relatively low light, and I greatly appreciate the f5.6. I am always surprised how bright even my f11 lens is out in the sunlight.

Second reason, I find it a nice general focal length, not too short, not too long.

Its got more movent than I need for landscape work. Copol 3 shutter that is a workhorse. And weight is not that big of a factor, considering the weight of everything else I carry.

[ditkoofseppala]

The 8x10 lens saga continues -- progress report.

Myself when young did eagerly frequent
Doctor and saint, and heard great argument
About it and about, but evermore
Came out the same door where in I went.

(Fitzgerald, The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam)

Myself when old is having similar experiences. I've listened to quite a variety of opinions here, some of them with a good deal of apparent experience and wisdom behind them. Some light is emerging through the murky gloom, but it still is NOT easy. Of course, there is no "magic bullet" -- I don't recall asking for one. All I'm trying to do is to make moderately intelligent decisions at the outset, realising that time and many boxes of exposed sheetfilm may well modify those decisions -- or could even confirm them, if I'm exceptionally lucky! And some things fit in with intuitive logic, like the observation that 210 and 360 isn't working, neither 240 and 300, but 210 and 300 or 240 and 360 will both work fairly well.

At this point, though, questions like dollar prices and sheer availability weigh heavily. With all due respect to Hizzoner the moderator, do I detect a note of hostility to eBay? Like any busy marketplace, it has its pitfalls and its drawbacks, but for somebody stuck in an out-of-the-way location (as I have been for most of my life), it may actually be the most practical choice, if not the only game in town. And caveat emptor!

Immediately upon being advised to check out Midwest Photo Exchange by two responsible people, I hustled butt to Google the name, and promptly got their website with its Inventory List. At this moment, under the heading of Lenses - 8x10 and larger, I find:

150/8 Nikkor-SW (used, for $1,295)
210/5.6 Super Symmar XL (new for $2,995)
240/5.6 Nikkor W (qty. 3, used, $469-689)
240/9 Apo-Ronar (used, $589)
240/5.6 Apo-Sironar-S (new, $1,789)
240/5.6 Symmar-S (used, $449)
250/5.6 Fuji-Soft Focus (qty. 2, used, $469-495)
300/5.6 Nikkor-W (qty. 2, used $695-795)
305/9 Apo-Artar (used, $695)
450/12.5 Fujinon-C (new, $895)
480/9 Goerz Apo-Artar ctd. (condition unspecified, $695)
600/11.5 Fuji-C (new, $1,425)
600/9 Nikkor Tele ED (used, $1,595)
1100/22 Schneider Fine Art XXL (new for a modest $4,499)

Much to my disappointment, only one of the listings actually specified the presence of a shutter, and all the rest could well have been barrel mounted as far as anyone could tell. Perhaps one is expected to know this by instinct, but given the presence of so many process lenses I don't think shutters can quite be taken for granted in all of these listings.

Only two 300 mm. lenses, and one of the two a process lens. NO 360's whatsoever! I don't mind saying that I was underwhelmed by the above list, not to say disappointed. Leaving aside everything priced <$1000 (as I absolutely must), there were one dozen lenses to choose from, seven of which were 240/250 focal length.

I won't wear out my fingers and test the patience of this forum by making an exhaustive list of all the lenses usable for 8x10 that presently appear in a thorough eBay search of active listings. But I will say that there is a great deal more variety and depth of offerings. Price, of course, can only be judged roughly by those offerings graced with a "Buy It Now" option; otherwise you don't know the price till the auction's over. But based on a week of close watching, I would say that there are many more budget-priced opportunities on eBay. Midwest didn't offer a single lens under $449 in price.

Having nothing else to do on Sunday afternoon, I sat down at the computer, called up my laboriously-assembled watch list, and did a little cautious bidding. I didn't win anything, but the results were interesting and educational:

I bid &#163;280 ($560 roughly) on a 360/6.8 Symmar-S that sold at &#163;320 ($640).
I bid $235 on a Wollensak 12" Velostigmat in 'studio shutter' that sold at $271.
I bid &#163;275 ($550) on a Super Angulon 165/8 that finally sold at &#163;510 ($1020).
I bid $360 on a B&L Protar 165/18 bbl. mt. that sold at $365.
I bid up to $623 on a Nikkor-W 360/6.3 (B.I.N. $669) - and didn't meet the reserve!
I didn't bid on a Kodak Comm. Ektar 254/6.3 started at $298; nobody bid on it.

My bidding may appear eccentric, but I had my reasons. The Symmar 360 could have been a good buy, but it IS a huge beast of a lens to lug around; I was ambivalent about it. I think that had I kept bidding it would have sold at a higher price, anyway. At the moment I'm operating on the principle that I would like to buy a GOOD normal lens for less than $600, and by normal I mean a 300 or 360. And a secondary principle is that I would not be willing to spend more than $300 on a vintage lens or a barrel mount unless it was something terribly special.

I made an exception for the 165mm Protar because it DOES cover 8x10 just as well as a Super-Angulon without all that size and weight, and has an awfully good reputation; but had I kept bidding, it would have gone MUCH higher, as the other main bidder was obviously quite determined to have it. Probably I should have bought the Commercial Ektar that went begging, but the 254 just covers 8x10 decently and I really wanted the 14" version, so I let it pass. I might live to regret that.

I think I could have any number of 300's, though, both vintage and modern; several are upcoming in the next day or two. And I think some of them could be had for $400-500, though not all. Lenses in shutters, I'm talking about, not process lenses.

I'll freely admit that there would be much less risk in buying from a trusted dealer such as Jim at Midwest Photo. But I would suspect you pay for that in drastically limited choice and generally higher prices. So, despite the additional risk factor, from where I sit it looks like eBay is where I'll probably find my 8x10 lenses. If I get one I don't like, I can always put it back on eBay, can't I! And from some of the listings I've seen, there are quite a few EXCITING offerings there. Like the Protar and the Commercial Ektar. I don't see those on Midwest's list.

Time was when people in my position either went without, or took their chances with Wall Street Camera Exchange. Now there's eBay. Riskier? Doubtless. But if you don't have money and mobility, the only way to compensate is by accepting risk. Sour deals in used photo equipment happened regularly long before PCs and eBay appeared on the scene. The overwhelming majority of buyers on eBay must be satisfied with their purchases, or they wouldn't keep buying that way. I guess if I'm wrong about that, I'll appear on the forum here in a month or two, dressed in sackcloth and ashes.